Was Kelly's killer a gypsy

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
A thought I had recently after Going over Hutchinson's statement, was that the handkerchief may have had a symbolic meaning.
I believe that the coloured handkerchief was given by a gipsy to a girl of his choice, who will not wear it until she says Yes to marriage.
I am not certain if this applies in modern times, but it would have done so around the time of the murders.
I also believe that infidelity amongst women was punished by cutting off a ear , or nose, and to scar the cheeks.
Obviously only Eddowes , and Kelly had facial damage, the former had those two v shaped marks on her cheeks, and she had recently returned to London from her fruitless hop picking trip to Kent, which I believe was a frequent trip made by east end gypsies.
Did she observe someone during that period, and that lent her to comment, I have come back to claim the reward money, I know who he is''?, the man seen with her was wearing a handkerchief.
Pure speculation, but I thought it was worth commenting on.
Regards Richard.

[Errata]

Hi,
A thought I had recently after Going over Hutchinson's statement, was that the handkerchief may have had a symbolic meaning.
I believe that the coloured handkerchief was given by a gipsy to a girl of his choice, who will not wear it until she says Yes to marriage.
I am not certain if this applies in modern times, but it would have done so around the time of the murders.
I also believe that infidelity amongst women was punished by cutting off a ear , or nose, and to scar the cheeks.
Obviously only Eddowes , and Kelly had facial damage, the former had those two v shaped marks on her cheeks, and she had recently returned to London from her fruitless hop picking trip to Kent, which I believe was a frequent trip made by east end gypsies.
Did she observe someone during that period, and that lent her to comment, I have come back to claim the reward money, I know who he is''?, the man seen with her was wearing a handkerchief.
Pure speculation, but I thought it was worth commenting on.
Regards Richard.

Yikes. Could it have been a gypsy? At this point it really could have been anyone in the city limits, so yeah. But it gets super complicated from there. And that's because there really isn't such a thing as "Gypsies" in that sense. There a hundreds if not thousands of Gypsy clans. And only clans in certain geographical areas have similar customs. Russian Romani have nothing in common with American Romani. Central Europe is the largest concentration and as best as we can tell (I'm on the phone with a Romani historian, who is now terribly interested in this idea) there are absolutely five separate and distinct cultures, and a bunch of subcultures from daughter groups of larger clans. And Great Britain has the Travelers, which are gypsies in the peripatetic sense, but have no tie whatsoever to the Romani.

Greg hasn't heard of the handkerchief custom specifically, but there is typically a token given to a girl by the man who she has been promised to. Of course, arranged marriages really were the norm until recently across the board. The punishment for adultery was and sometimes still is death. Assuming the man doesn't kill her, she is thrown out. Sometimes stripped. But she is thrown out of every clan. She can't go back to her parents, she can't take shelter with another clan. She has to make her life with the gadjo, who usually wouldn't take her because she was a gypsy. Greg also hasn't heard of specific mutilation for adultery (it exists for other crimes, but nothing particularly apt to Kelly's murder) but he says that many Romani women have scars on their cheeks because physical abuse if very common, and men wear rings that will cut a woman's face if he backhands her. It's actually a really interesting culture that is a lot like ancient Judaism. Not surprising given their origin.

The real question is, were there Romani in London at that point? England was very careful about not letting gypsies in for a very long time. Those that did make it in came into immediate competition with Travelers. Greg says there are almost no gypsies there now, but those that are there came from Spain by way of France, and so is a completely different ethnic group entirely. I think that it is very likely that the only "gypsies" in London were Eastern European women setting up shop as spiritualists and fortune tellers. Which is a good gig if you can get it. Otherwise we are talking about Travelers, who are Irish in origin. And obviously there are dark Irish people, but I can't see that they would be mistaken as Semitic at all.

BUT. The reason Greg is up on this now is because of one of the things I always thought very peculiar about Hutch's description, the gold horseshoe. It's not a Jewish symbol. I had thought it was a Beduin charm, thus the man was Middle Eastern. But apparently it is a Romani charm. And carnelian has special significance to some gypsy clans. It signifies rank and power within a clan. It was usually a ring, sometimes a necklace the Head of the clan wore, and was buried with. So Greg thinks it's entirely possible that the man Hutch is describing is a gypsy. But he says that Gypsy men don't pay for Gadjo whores. Sleeping with out clan was considered akin to sleeping with livestock. Rapes were not uncommon, but not relationships of any regularity. Unless he was going to rip her off, but all things being equal he probably would have chosen a wealthier target. So even if it was a gypsy, that doesn't really clear up any confusion.

Ok. That might have been very confused, but I was typing what I was hearing. Greg says he'll get back to me on Romani populations in the late 1800s and see if he can formulate some kind of concrete ish answer.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Errata,
Fascinating post, and extremely knowledgeable .
I had the idea about the coloured handkerchief being a symbol, rather then a need for some act by Kelly, such as wiping a eye, blowing a nose, or even a form of intercourse protection.
Hutchinson states she remarked''Oh I have lost my handkerchief'', and the man produced a red one, and gave it to her.
Hutchinson does not comment further.
There is no exact inventory of Kelly's room, and no handkerchief is therefore known to be found, but if it was, that surely would have sealed Hutchinson's statement as valid. so did her killer take it back from her?
The coloured Handkerchief did exist, I have seen it written , along with the rituals of cruelty , which included removal of ears, slicing of nose, and scaring of face, along with flogging and general nasties.
But it is not that I was intending to point out , so much as the man seen with Kelly being possibly a gypsy , and even if this person did not kill her , he could have represented Hutchinson's man.
You make a excellent point about the Horseshoe.
The Romani charm aspect is fascinating , and most certainly never been considered before.
You are certainly correct in saying ,hat Gypsy men did not pay for Gadjo whores, and if this suspect was indeed a Gypsy, it had to have been a form of courtship[ did not Kelly state she was fond of another man?] and we may have been too keen to pinpoint Joseph Fleming, who may have been simply an ex..
This avenue of research is original , and who knows...
Regards Richard.

[Errata]

Hi Errata,
Fascinating post, and extremely knowledgeable .
I had the idea about the coloured handkerchief being a symbol, rather then a need for some act by Kelly, such as wiping a eye, blowing a nose, or even a form of intercourse protection.
Hutchinson states she remarked''Oh I have lost my handkerchief'', and the man produced a red one, and gave it to her.
Hutchinson does not comment further.
There is no exact inventory of Kelly's room, and no handkerchief is therefore known to be found, but if it was, that surely would have sealed Hutchinson's statement as valid. so did her killer take it back from her?
The coloured Handkerchief did exist, I have seen it written , along with the rituals of cruelty , which included removal of ears, slicing of nose, and scaring of face, along with flogging and general nasties.
But it is not that I was intending to point out , so much as the man seen with Kelly being possibly a gypsy , and even if this person did not kill her , he could have represented Hutchinson's man.
You make a excellent point about the Horseshoe.
The Romani charm aspect is fascinating , and most certainly never been considered before.
You are certainly correct in saying ,hat Gypsy men did not pay for Gadjo whores, and if this suspect was indeed a Gypsy, it had to have been a form of courtship[ did not Kelly state she was fond of another man?] and we may have been too keen to pinpoint Joseph Fleming, who may have been simply an ex..
This avenue of research is original , and who knows...
Regards Richard.

I have always suspected that Hutch plugged in the details of the man he saw from some guy he saw earlier. Mostly because his recall of the details was far too good for such a brief encounter he had no idea would be significant. And I'm not saying he did it purpose. We do that sometimes because memory can be an odd thing.

Do you know where the cruelty rituals you spoke of came from? Greg told me some, but they all applied to men. It's certainly possible they were adapted to women by some, but it seems more likely that it would happen in one of different ethnic gypsies, like Iberian or the Travelers. So if you read about it and it was taking place in Britain, it would be Travelers. Spain and France have their own, Norway has it's own... that kind of thing.

[Bridewell]

I believe horseshoe tie-pins were quite popular in the 19th century. They come up regularly for sale on ebay:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_nkw=horseshoe+tie+pin&_sacat=12595&_odkw=tie+pins&_osacat=12595