|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Poorhoney
Sergeant
Username: Poorhoney
Post Number: 11
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 - 5:52 pm: | 
|
Hi All!
I was reading a National Geographic and it had an article about an ancient South American culture that would perform executions (probably the wrong word) where the victims would have their throats slit and their blood would be caught in a cup and then consumed. Naturally, I thought of Jack.
Now, I do not believe that JtR did such a thing but cannot discount it entirely and was wondering what thoughts my fellow posters had on such an idea. Please be gentle in you replies, as I am just asking out of curiosity.
Poorhoney
Punxsutawney Phil is a groundhog!
|
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 593
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - 5:13 am: |
|
Hi Poorhoney,
Well... I suppose it's possible. It would have made the killings even more complicated to pull off than they already were, but not terribly so. I guess then we'd have to ask how he carried a cup around and hid it after it was bloodied. If it weren;t all that large it wouldn't be that difficult to hide, I suppose. And it does paint an interesting scenario for the Blotchy-Faced Man with the red moustache and carrying a pail who was reported seen with Mary Jane Kelly by a witness.
OF course, regarding the title you chose for this thread, Vlad (I assume you mean Vlad the Impaler) didn't actually drink blood, from a cup or otherwise. But then part of his name was used for the fictional character Dracula, who did drink blood, so yeah.
Drinking blood is actually a fairly widespread theme, so a South or Central American culture wouldn't be the likely source of inspiration if it happened. If Jack did do this it was probably either cannibal-related, vampire-themed or based upon some religious blood-drinking motif, like in holy communion.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 283
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - 8:59 am: |
|
I am frankly unconvinced, even as a theory.
First, I would have thought that seeking to catch blood in a receptacle (cup, vial, flask, whatever - presumably covered in some way) would interfere with the natural flow of the blood - splashes would happen, spills, maybe even bloody fingerprints, as the murderer stood a greater chance of getting his hands blooded.
The time taken to do this in (say) Mitre Square would have detracted from his time to complete the obviously important (to him) mutilations.
I see no indication of it in the scenes as known at Buck's Row, Hanbury St, Mitre Square or Miller's Court.
This is pure baseless speculation, which may for its originator deepen the potential horror of the crimes (as if that is necessary) but is unsupported by evidence from the scenes or contemporary thought.
Sorry poorhoney, full marks for originality, but IMHO this is baseless and worthless.
Phil |
Poorhoney
Sergeant
Username: Poorhoney
Post Number: 12
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - 6:40 pm: |
|
Phil,
No more "baseless and worthless" than other theories and threads (which shall remain nameless) that appear on the boards.
Dan,
I didn't think JtR was inspired by such a tribe(I actually don't think he did it), just "hmmm, I wonder if he could have..." As for cannibalism, etc., I believe any such act on the killer's part would have been done because of a primal need to do it.
Poorhoney
Punxsutawney Phil is a groundhog!
|
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 285
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 12:45 am: |
|
Poorhoney - there are some pretty weird theories about (Barnardo, Caroll) butat least the former was seen in a lodging house at the time!!
Where is even the most basic or indeed ANY support for your theory plucked from the air?
There has been discussion on this site recently about making Ripper studies vaguely respectable. I can assure you I will be as frank with others, as I have been with yours, and where the idea in question neither advances our knowledge nor increases insight into the case.
Phil
Phil |
Poorhoney
Sergeant
Username: Poorhoney
Post Number: 13
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 6:03 pm: |
|
Phil,
This is not a "theory" of mine. I do not think that JtR caught blood in a chalice and drank it. I merely read an article and tossed an idea out there.
That being said, the idea of JtR drinking blood isn't entirely without merit. After all, he did remove internal organs and I personally do not believe he did that for reasons of commerce. I would bet even money that he ate them and for that reason do not find it too far-fetched that he tasted their blood as well, even if only by licking his hand(s). And yes I do think his hands were bloodied (literally and figuratively) because I do not believe he would have been concerned about stains or fingerprints (which weren't even known about). JtR's potential cannibalism is one of the lesser covered aspects of the case. I would be curious if anyone could name a serial killer that took body parts that did not consume at least part of them. (They may very will be out there I just don't know who they are.)
As far as making Ripper studies more respectable, what does that mean? Respectable how? and to who? No disrepect to you or others that feel similarly, but I personally could care less what others think of my interest in this case. **sigh** In the future when I present an idea that is even slightly off the beaten path I will clearly label it "hare-brained theory" in all caps and many exclamation points so as to not sully the more serious threads.
Poorhoney
Punxsutawney Phil is a groundhog!
|
Mephisto
Sergeant
Username: Mephisto
Post Number: 20
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 11:45 pm: |
|
Hello Poorhoney,
As Axle Rose would say, "Welcome to the Jungle".
Although Central and South American civilizations are not my field of expertise, I have worked closely with archaeologist Dr. Stanley Walling, who has excavated at Chawak But’o’ob, Belize for the past fifteen years, and thus have some familiarity with the subject you're asking about.
The Aztecs originated the blood cult ritual described in the National Geographic article to which you are referring. Later Incan and Mayan cultures, to some extent, continued the custom. Let's examine a few of the issues which are associated with the possibility that ancient Aztec cult rituals might have motivated a 19th century serial murderer.
The Aztecs believed they were living during the final cycle of the universe, a period they called the The Fifth Sun. At the end of this cycle, the sun would darken and all life on Earth would end. The Aztecs felt they could delay this inevitability by keeping the sun strong with the source of human life, i.e., blood. For this reason, they sacrificed captive warriors, and dedicated their blood to the sun god. But, how would the killer come by this information?
To answer this question, let's assume for a moment that the Whitechapel murderer was either British or some other European ethnicity. In order for him to have information about Aztec cultural practices and appreciate their purpose, he would have to have been a highly educated man, or at least, a very well read man; this would also suggest that he was from the Middle or Upper class. Unfortunately, there is no hard evidence in the historical record that we can point to that indicates, one way or another, the level of the killer's education. On the other hand, it's also possible that the murderer was a native of Central or South America, and had learned about ancient Aztec rituals through local oral traditions. This scenario would eliminate the necessity of advanced education and hence, class distinction as the source and means of knowledge acquisition, however, it would not reconcile the conflict between the speculation that he was a cult ritual murder, and the evidence that indicate that the crimes were committed by a lust murderer.
In sum, there is no evidence in the historical record that points to anything other than sex/lust as the main motivating factor behind the Whitechapel murders, with the possible exception that Elizabeth Stride's death might have been motivated by domestic issues.
I hope you found my explanation useful.
Best regards,
Mephisto
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
