Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

News Flash!! . . . VINCENT VAN GOGH WAS JACK THE RIPPER!!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hi Phil

    I believe Nero tried on a number of occasions to kill his mother, he supposedly beat his wife to death, and dressed as a commoner to kill citizens at random

    With those in mind, I would put money on him personally killing a large number of people

    His last words were "Qualis artifex pereo!" ("What an artist is now about to perish!")

    Comment


    • But he DID NOT kill Agrippina personally, though he ordered and planned her death. Poppaea Sabina's death appears to have been accidental - he kicked her in the belly while she was pregnant during a marital row.

      I see no evidence he killed multiple people and his vivits to the Subura in disguise were to mug people, not kill them.

      If you differ from me on any of these points, please cite your sources.

      I agree (broadly) on his last words, though my preferred transaltion is, "What a great artist dies in me!" Whether he deserved his own rating, is another matter.

      Phil

      Comment


      • Who the fk do you think you are talking to you fkin tosser

        You expect a reply when talking to people with an attitude like that

        Fk u and your sources

        I don't give a fk what you think the translation is or what your interpretation of history is thank you very much

        Comment


        • It's always a pleasure to see a member engaging in scholarly discussion and displaying good manners, on Casebook, nemo.

          My post to you was polite and specific. I differ from you in my interpretation of Nero's reign it seems. But, I invited you to tell me if I was wrong. I take it I am not.

          Cordially,

          Phil

          Comment


          • Oh give over you conceited prat

            My original post was obviously a passing remark about Nero

            Possibly I misread the tone of your reply, but I don't think so

            You were not entering into scholarly debate, you were deriding and dismissing my post in favour of your personal interpretation of history

            Kicking a pregnant woman in the stomach so that she and her baby dies - you consider that accidental?

            Stabbing people and casting them into the sewers - you consider that a mugging do you?

            You know every minute of his life do you?

            You trying to appear intelligent are you?

            Your knowledge is so all encompassing that anyone who differs in opinion should cite their sources?

            Well fu

            I'm not interested in your opinion in the slightest

            Jovially

            Nemo

            Comment


            • Thank you, nemo, for that display of erudition and charm. I appreciated it greatly. I am sure everyone else did too.

              Yes, you did misread the tone of my original post on Nero. My sincere apologies if I offended - I was simply expressing a contrary view. But, yes, I have studied his life.

              To be serious, I think writers (especially the ancient ones like Suetonius and Tacitus) deliberately distorted Nero's character and reputation. (the same may also be true of Gaius "Caligula" - Nero's uncle.) Certainly Trajan, often regarded as one of the best Roman emperors (and himself no saint), is reported as saying that he wished his rule matched up to the first five years of Nero's reign.

              It is quite possible that Nero was a weak, artistic man with sadistic tendencies. He was deposed which suggests his rule was not entirely successful. On the other hand, had he not panicked, he might have held on and reigned longer.

              Serious questions have been raised about his persecution of the Christians after 64AD, on the good grounds that it is difficult to believe that the alleged numbers of Christians were in Rome by that date. Peter and paul may have died but that is hardly a persecution. What we may be seeing is Domitian's actions reflected back on his predecessor.

              So far as the murder of Poppaea is concerned, the French have always made space in their law for the "crime of passion/crime passionelle" - in the days of the death penalty, I believe it was exempted as a deed done in a sort of momentary frenzy or madness. I would categorise Nero's action against Poppaea as possibly in that light, though that is simply my opinion.

              More widely, I believe that Nero and Caligula were possibly engaged in experiments to Hellenise the principiate - by which I mean they planned what Constatntine did 250 odd years later, in moving the capital east to where the wealth grain supply and many of the empire's problsm were located.

              Caligula and Nero were both direct descendents of Mark Antony (through his daughter Antonia) and just as Antony toyed with the idea of a divine kingship in the east, so may Caligula and Nero. It might explain both men's adoption of a much more regal style than that practiced by Augustus, Tiberius or Claudius and such experiments as Nero's Golden House. In their eyes it would have been practical modernisation not tyranny or insanity.

              My apologies for high-jacking the thread, but I did want to explain where my views on Nero come from and to indicate that they are neither frivilous nor ill-based, just somewhat iconoclastic and perhaps to some, new.

              Phil

              Comment


              • No problem Phil

                Since it appears that I misunderstood the tone of your post, I sincerely apologise for referring to you as a tosser and a conceited prat

                My opinion of the extremely debauched Nero hasn't changed one iota though

                Nothing personal Phil - anyone who talks to me in a derisory fashion should expect some choice words in response - that's all

                Regards

                Nemo

                Comment


                • Am I the only one considering the purchase of Who's Who 1888 just to see if there are any celebrities of the era yet to be "conclusively" proven to be Jack?
                  There Will Be Trouble! http://www.amazon.co.uk/A-Little-Tro...s=T.+E.+Hodden

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by TomTomKent View Post
                    Am I the only one considering the purchase of Who's Who 1888 just to see if there are any celebrities of the era yet to be "conclusively" proven to be Jack?
                    I'm at a complete loss as to why it needs to be someone in/famous...well, besides promoting the possibility that JTR was actually one William Smith* (purveyor of the finest jellied eels in the East End) wouldn't sell as many books.

                    * If there does one day turn out to be a William Smith who was a jellied eel salesman and misogynistic psychopath, I'd be happy to accept 10% of whatever book sales eventually materialise. Thanks.

                    Comment


                    • You know... I come away from this thread for 5 minutes and miss all the drama!

                      I missed the return of Dale, but he didn't answer any questions. All he did was latch on to the Hitler debate.

                      Dale, we have asked you many questions about the evidence you hold. You have made claims and we have asked you to back them up. I asked you the following:

                      On your website, you claim that VVG killed his brothers girlfriend, and that she was one of the victims of the Torso Murders. Do you have any evidence for this whatsoever besides pure speculation? Where is your evidence that Theo's girlfriend was murdered at all? Do you have evidence he ever HAD a girlfriend other than Johanna Bonger (who he married in 1889)?
                      Can we expect a response to ANY of our questions any time soon?

                      Comment


                      • Has anyone known Dale to post in, or contribute to any thread other than this one?

                        Has he discussed aspects of the case in any other thread?

                        It just makes me wonder how deep or rounded his knowledge of JtR really is. He may "lurk" of course and read but not contribute - but his avoidance of checking out his arguments, or exploring aspects of or issues surrounding the case strikes me as odd.

                        In this day and age research in a vacuum is somewhat unusual Even academic authorities will usually expose their ideas in seminars, conference papers, discussions with students etc.

                        Just a thought,

                        Phil

                        Comment


                        • He has made 74 posts. All of them have been in this thread.

                          Comment


                          • Telling, isn't it?

                            Comment


                            • Hi

                              Well I have just read all of this thread and its now destroyed my theories. I now see JTR as a commuter who carries his paintbrushes and murder weapons all in one bag and not only is he looking for his next victim but also some dogs and doorknockers. I see it clearly now and poor Vincent must have been exhausted with all the travelling, murdering, evading capture, painting, catching dogs, sorting out his next doorknocker, I mean its too much to take in. Come on now, I don't mind spending my money on the next book but it would have to be a lot more conceivable.
                              Thanks
                              Nic

                              Comment


                              • And it's just SO fortunate that Jack didn't pull the wrong thing out of his bag at the wrong time - paint Polly and Annie, and knife a canvas to bits.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X