|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 754
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 6:35 pm: | 
|
Mike,
Not the same language, but Welsh, Cornish and Breton are all members of the Brythonic branch of the Celtic language as opposed to the Goidelic branch: Irish, Gaelic and Manx.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Baron von Zipper
Detective Sergeant
Username: Baron
Post Number: 94
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 7:45 pm: |
|
Don,
Right I know all that. It;s just that Welsh and Breton are very close and in the middle half of the 20th century Breton fishermen were still going to Wales to sell their wares and their language was understood. My point was that a Breton speaker and a Welsh speaker in the 19th century would have had enough similar words that they could communicate, and with a little time and effort, could probably communicate quite well.
Cheers
Mike the Mauler
|
Baron von Zipper
Detective Sergeant
Username: Baron
Post Number: 95
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 7:47 pm: |
|
Don,
Oops. They were the same language in the 5th-6th centuries. Just as Gaelic and Irish were the same language with certain dialectic differences. Of course there were some differences, but esentially they were the same.
Cheers
Mike the Mauler
|
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 755
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 8:26 pm: |
|
Mike,
I guess we differ on what "essentially" means. Certainly, the Brythonic languages were derived from a common language, but then the Brythonic and Goidelic had a common source as well. A fascinating subject, but what was your intended point in making a connection between Welsh and Breton?
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 932
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 1:44 am: |
|
Robert, you wrote:
I have a feeling that fish may have been at the bottom of the rent arrears, but I'll never be able to prove it, and so it must remain surmise.
This is a new one on me - would you elaborate please?
Phil
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5059
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 3:53 am: |
|
Hi Phil
Well, McCarthy ran a chandler's shop but also, I believe, did meals. Barnett worked at Billingsgate but for some reason was sacked. What if this was because he was caught stealing fish for McCarthy - either for cash or as part payment for the rent? McCarthy might have been prepared to wait a while, to see if Barnett could establish himself in some other activity that had pilfering opportunities, e.g. fruit.
Robert |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2138
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 6:11 am: |
|
Hi All,
Trouble is, practically everything we are discussing here could be based on false information from one source or another.
McCarthy may have seen some correspondence from Ireland (or supposedly from Ireland), but if he only understood it to be from Mary's mother, it could in reality have been from almost anyone. A letter from her mother could have been wishful thinking on Mary's part, or incorrect assumption on McCarthy's, for all we know.
Richard wrote:
Also Barnett told Abberline that Mary had a brother named henry who served in the scots guards, he also added that henry had visited her although he never met him personally.
As with the sender of the correspondence, we have to trust Mary's word (as reported by Joe this time) for the visit from her brother. Joe never actually got to meet him. And McCarthy never got to see 'Mother' on one of Mary's letters.
And if McCarthy didn't have to show the police a rent book, confirming Mary's arrears, who can say, hand on heart, that he wasn't making them up, or exaggerating the amount, in order to generate some sympathy, or perhaps even a handout of some sort?
Mary wouldn't have been in arrears at all, if the practice was to collect a very regular cut of her immoral earnings. And it wouldn't have been beyond McCarthy to make sure she coughed up each time.
The French stuff and the McCarthy alias could even have been put on by Mary to get off on the right foot with her new landlord. Everything we think we know about her could have been adopted as needed.
Nothing may be as it seems, or everything may be just as it has been reported.
But without the real Mary Kelly showing up in the records somewhere, we can only guess.
Love,
Caz
X |
Baron von Zipper
Detective Sergeant
Username: Baron
Post Number: 97
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 10:55 am: |
|
Don,
I'm not sure I had a point...er, maybe that McCarthy could have been a Breton speaker. It was really irrelevant except as support to someone's thought about Welsh and French being confused with each other. It is very unimportant. I just get a bit excited about things Celtic. Let's go get a beer and discuss it.
Cheers
Mike the Mauler
|
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 756
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 11:42 am: |
|
Mike,
I just get a bit excited about things Celtic.
As do I. We'll have that beer when your in the neighborhood.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 934
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 3:53 pm: |
|
FISH
...McCarthy ran a chandler's shop but also, I believe, did meals. Barnett worked at Billingsgate but for some reason was sacked. What if this was because he was caught stealing fish for McCarthy - either for cash or as part payment for the rent? McCarthy might have been prepared to wait a while, to see if Barnett could establish himself in some other activity that had pilfering opportunities, e.g. fruit.
And you are prepared to even think about basing a theory on THAT??!!!
Where is any grounding on anything but supposition and belief??
Phil
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5064
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 3:58 pm: |
|
Phil, have I mentioned the word "theory"? I mentioned the word "surmise."
Robert |
Belinda Pearce
Sergeant
Username: Belinda
Post Number: 47
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 - 12:03 am: |
|
If a member of the family attended I don't think they would have gone right up to the graveside.People would have questioned who they were.
I love the Celtic languages too I have studied Welsh and to a greater extent Irish from an Irishman who spoke all the Celtic languages and esperanto |
Mr Poster
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 4:42 am: |
|
Howdy
Im willing to agree with C Lowes very reasonable statement on the vagaries of how, in this case, contentious histroy is viewed and leave it at that.
I glanced at Sugden last night and noted that there was reference to MJK's surname being Kelley as this was the name given by her father at some point in Wales. I assume however that this has returned no useful information either.
I know that people (possible even myself) have suggested MJK was illiterate, but given (from above) that she spoke either Welsh or French, English and could at least sing in Irish, had served in a rather well to do house at some point, was receiving written correspondence (and there is no sign that JMcC was reading it for her) then she could very well have been literate. Maybe barnett only read out the newspapers to her while she was brushing her (very long) hair or something. The image in my mind is from Merchant Ivory movies where someone in the "drawing room" is reading to everyone else even though they can obviously read themselves. Reading to people seemed to much more common then than it is now as a form of entertainment.
JMcC seemed to be running a chandlers shop (is this correct?). Were chandlers at the time concerned with seafarers supplies or were they just general grocers?
Apparently one of his back windows looked out onto the door of MJK's room (Sugden ?). If this is true it again reinforces the concept that he just wasnt that concerned about getting his money or he would not have needed to send someone around to see if she was in as he would have been hovering at his back window to make sure he caught her.
If we assume that her brother was her closest relative in regular contact and him being a soldier, that might explain why no one was at the funeral from her family (he being away with the army or whatever).
I have heard that it had been tried to trace the brother through his regiment or whatever but was it not fairly common at the time for men to enlist under different names and use the army as a sort of French Foreign Legion at the time? "two wives are allowed in the army, but ones too many for me" and all that.
As to languages, Welsh if fairly incomprehensible to Gaelic speakers as well so if she could speak Welsh then she was either there from an early age for a few years or was very quick at picking up languages.
I have read the dissertation that documents efforts to link the carthy woman and John McCarthy (with no apparent success). has there been any further research in that vein?
Mr P.
|
Steve Swift
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 1:58 pm: |
|
If true that her brother served with the British Army[Begg thinks it likely] then his role, like those in the rest of the 2nd Battalion of the Scots Guards, would have been seen by those opposed to British Rule such as "The Irish Republican Brotherhood" and/or the "Fenians" as an"Occupying Force".
On that subject Nat.... I believe that soon after(or at the time) Kelly was killed the 2nd Battalion of the Scots Guards were in Dublin.Now I'm not sure of when this began, but it was British Army policy not to enlist Irish soldiers in British regiments that served in Ireland.
The other thing is that in the 1800's the main reason for Irish Catholics to enlist in the British Army was starvation - that does not really fit with the Kellys as they are already in England.
Now a theory (ewwww THEORY!) Something has been bothering me about Kelly for a long time and its this...
the fact that only Joe Barnett reffered to her as Marie Jeanette & I cannot quite swallow that 'pet' name theory.
Now considering that most everything we know about Mary Kelly comes from Joe Barnett this tells me that when he met her she went by the name Marie Jeanette....it follows that she CHANGED to using Mary Kelly at some point AFTER they got together.
Ok bear with me  Now from some accounts it would appear that she was a 'cut above' the average eastender,bearing this in mind does'nt her background sound odd, contrived even? She had been in London for only around four years at the time of her death and Barnett had know her for about two of those years.
Suppose she 'borrowed' her identity just to 'fit in'?Taking bits of stories from other girls here & there, what if Marie Jeanette really WAS Marie Jeanette and NOT Mary Jane? What if she'd been born in France as Marie-Jeanne?
John McCarthy does'nt sound French does it,but he was born in Dieppe.McCarthy is an Irish name,just like Kelly.How many women,if you only count the victims,used Mary as an alias?
Just a thought
|
Mr Poster
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 2:43 am: |
|
Hello
This post is probably going to appear befor emy other ones even tjhough it was written after if you follow...
Anyway, in my copy of the mammoth JTR book, Andy and Sue Parlour state that Mccarthy was MJK's uncle, MJK was born in Castletown Limerick with a year, her fathers name, mothers name (maiden = McCarthy), the place MJK started whoring and a host of other bits n pieces.
So where did they get all this stuff if there are at least 3 active threads on this forum wondering about all this?
MR P |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page