Customer Reviews

Complete History of Jack the Ripper

5 star:		(63)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Having read several books on Jack the Ripper, I can enthusiastically declare Sugden's volume the best of the lot, for a number of reasons. First and foremost, this book is not about "Jack the Ripper" per se, but rather it is about the series of murders in Whitechapel and the ensuing investigation. It is the author's stated goal to present the facts as clearly as can be gleaned from extant police files and press reports of the time (albeit, in the latter case, cautiously and only when information is not available in official form). As other reviewers point out, Sugden is not trying to convince us that his own pet suspect is the Ripper. Whereas most Ripper books begin with a conclusion and are written with the arbitary purpose of convincing us that the author has identified the Ripper, this book actually saves the conclusion to the end. Even that conclusion, however, is not definitive. The author does, in the end, tell us why a certain suspect seems to fit the facts better than other named suspects, but he clearly states that there is no definitive proof as to whether or not that suspect was Jack, and he by no means accuses the man of the crimes. In the same vein, Sugden does not attack other writers in the field. That being said, he does point out flaws and outright mistakes in others' thinking. Even this, it must be said, is done in a noble fashion. Sugden is very determined to dispel a number of myths that have wrongly influenced Ripperology for many years, and his contribution toward this end is the most important contribution he makes. He goes to great lengths to not only point out false "facts" (such as the supposed pregnancy of Mary Kelly, for example, an idea that even Donald Rumbelow accepted when he wrote his Casebook) but to explain where these myths came from and why they were accepted by other writers.

Another wonderful thing about this book is Sugden's treatment of the victims. I must admit that I have always viewed the victims with some detachment--this is surely a personal shortcoming on my part, but it is one that many people may share, especially given that the victims were prostitutes in Victorian London over a century ago. In the pages of this book, though, these poor women actually become real and "human." I feel as if I knew them now, to at least a small degree, and, besides feeling pity and compassion for them, I have discovered that I actually liked a couple of them (especially Annie Camp). These women were not just poor "prostitutes." Other writers have done a good job of explaining the wretched conditions in Whitechapel, but no one else has made that world and its occupants really come alive and real to me before. Sugden deserves much praise for putting so much effort into researching, learning, and telling the true story of these women as comprehensively as possible.

In this book, you will find the most complete, objective story that can be told of the Whitechapel murders. "Facts" you have assumed were true will be brought to light and revealed to be myths. New information, particularly in regard to the victims, will be presented. You will not be shown Jack the Ripper, however. What do the facts tell us about Jack the Ripper? That is the question Sugden poses. He has some ideas, which he shares, but any "answers" to this mystery are ultimately left with the reader.

This book should be required reading for any person even remotely interested in Jack the Ripper. Sugden has written the sacred tome of Ripperology, in my opinion.

As an amatuer "Ripperologist" I have read most of the books published on this subject. About a half dozen works stand above the rest thanks to thorough research and a sound investigative approach. Until now, only Donald Rumbelow's CASEBOOK had been so thorough, but new theories and evidence have come to light in the many years since that book was written. This book was way overdue! Sugden has done an amazingly thorough and readable job of seperating fact from fiction, identifying myths that far too many authors have carelessly passed off as truth. Sugden's no-nonsense assessment of the various suspects, witnesses and resources is as refreshing as it is informative. From the waxwork dioramas of the 1880's to the phony diaries of today, unscrupulous people have made many fortunes by co-opting Jack the Ripper's infamy. Here we have the best book yet written to dispell the hype and tell us what is really known about history's most famous serial killer. You could read a handful of other recent Ripper books and not get what you do right here -- I only hope there will be new editions as new issues come to light.

This is an unusual Ripper book, one that does not have an axe (or knife in this case) to grind, nor does it have a favorite theory to advance. Following in the steps of Donald Rumbelow's "The Complete Jack the Ripper," Philip Sugden decided to go back to the original source material, plus the packet of material taken from the London police that was mailed back to them in 1987, and recount the history of the case. This he does well, going over the material, the press reports and other writers' theories with a skeptical eye and a fearless passion for the truth. He finds, not surprisingly, that the press reports are extremely inaccurate, that most of the memoirs written by police officials decades after the fact were not to be believed, and that many Ripperologists were either criminally negligent or, at best, unable to see deeply into the evidence and render accurate judgments.

There is some new material here, however, particularly Sugden's researches into the three suspects Sir Melville Macnaghten thought were prime Ripper candidates. At the time of the killings, Macnaghten was assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in charge of CID, but that rank did not spare him from Sugden's dissection of his claims that the Ripper was M.J. Druitt, Kosminski, or Michael Ostrog. By checking out Macnaghten's other claims in his statements, it becomes plain that the old boy had no evidence to back up his charges.

Sugden traces other claims and counterclaims like this, and while he was unable to unmask the Ripper, he does offer a candidate more suitable that Macnaghten's three, and with the help of criminal profiling, suggests a line of investigation that may throw more light on this century-old mystery. If you're unable to plow through the 800-page Ripper book coming up in December, this is the one book to get!

Not being a "ripperologist" myself and only having a passing interest in the case I found this book to be an eye-opener. I had always assumed that there were the five murders that are accepted as being the work of the ripper and that was it. I now find that there may have been six, seven, or eight. Maybe even more. There may have even been a ripper murder in America.

With this work the reader gets a case by case, witness by witness, and suspect by suspect review of the facts. The research that went into this book and the details covered show an amazing dedication on the part of Mr. Sugden. He does not fall into what has apparently been a trap for ripper writers for years by accepting secondary sources at face value. Instead he looks to primary material where possible and by doing so exposes myths that have survived in some cases for over one hundred years. As an added bonus he does not start out like many other writers on this subject with a theory to prove, bending and ignoring evidence to fit his preconceived notion.

I only had two very small problems with this book. First, Mr. Sugden is a little too open in his contempt for some other ripper writers. Sometimes he seems to go out of his way to point out their mistakes. Considering that these mistakes have have often been accepted as fact by later writers and are the basis for many myths I guess that this tactic may be necessary. Still I often found that it bothered me. Second, he uses several words which I am sure are in common use in England but cause the American reader to pause and wonder just what Sugden is talking about. My complaints are small indeed.

Sugden does end the book with the most likely suspect but admits that the case against this man still is full of holes. Will the case ever be solved? Sugden seems to think so. After reading his extraordinary book I agree.

Philip Sugden is a trained historian who tracks his prey with a keen historical research oriented mind. He demolishes many myths about JtR that have been previously accepted as "facts." Sugden does a masterful job of telling the story (using primary sources) of the Whitechapel Murders of 1888 -91 (obviously Jack did not commit all 9 of those murders). He makes a pretty convincing case of JtR having murdered Martha Tabram three weeks before the first canonical murder (that of Mary Ann Nichols). He also thinks that it is possible that JtR did not cease his "career" with the Mary Kelly murder in Nov. 1888 but may have just possibly murdered Alice McKenzie in 1889 and Frances Coles in 1891. I also love the way he demolished the "Aaron Kosminski" theorey as a serious Ripper suspect and showed that Sir Robert Anderson was a senile delusional old fool when he wrote his memoirs and mentioned Kosminski. He also does not even bother with ludicrous theories about Royals and Freemasons and shows us that Sir Melville Macnaughton had no real reason to list Montague Druitt, Michael Ostrog and Kosminski as the prime suspects. Sugden favors George Chapman as a more likely suspect but rightfully claims a verdict of "not proven" for him. The book can be a bit tedious at times since he covers a lot of territory but is well worth the read for any student of the case or for that matter anyone interested in the London of Sherlock Holmes, Oscar Wilde and the dichotomy of West End and East End of the late 1880's. Sugden has promised that in an upgraded edition that he will deal with the Littlechild letter regarding Francis Tumblety (the Irish-American) as a suspect. Through it all the book rightfully comes to the conclusion that Jack the Ripper was that sort of most elusive predator "a Murderer of Strangers."

As an aside I recommend for readers who are interested in the subject that when they go to London to take a Jack the Ripper Walk (there are several companies that offer it, you can find them on the web) and if they want to go on the London Walks JtR walk not to do so on a weekend as it gets far too crowded and you miss some of the atmosphere when you are being herded around the East End with 250 other walkers. Unfortuantely the walk has gotten too popular for its own good. It used to be given once a week, now it is everyday. The first time I did the walk (in 1986 on a Wednesday night) there was 25 of us and the second time I did it (in 1987) on a Thursday night there were 18 of us and the whole group both times bonded very well. Better to try it on a Monday or Tuesday.

Pros: Brilliantly researched and written, approaches from an objective standpoint.
Cons: His painstaking research may put off those not prepared for detail.
The Bottom Line: A solid historical work, an objective view of a tangled subject, and proof that truth is more gripping than fiction.
Recommended: Yes

I picked up this book because I have always been interested in the case (yes... even before the film "From Hell") but I was put off by the mountain of titles covering the subject. I read that Philip Sugden's book "The Complete History of Jack the Ripper" was THE book to read on this case.

What's new and useful is the author's approach to the subject. While others often write a book on this case trying to prove a pet theory, Sugden remains firm in his objective appraisal of the first hand evidence. This leads to a surprising amount of revision as many errors, often repeated by other authors, are uncovered. He spends a few pages to discuss and analyze the most popular or highly regarded theories and dispenses with most of them. Also of value is the analysis of modern psychological profiling and other techniques that shed some light on the case.

It was widely believed by the police in 1888, for example, that the killer was likely to have either been incarcerated, or committed suicide. Their reasoning was that it appeared the ferocity of the attacks escalated until an ecstasy of carnage against Mary Kelly at Miller's Court. They assumed the killer must have had to break down following such madness and kill himself or be turned into an asylum by his family. We now know from over a century of experience with serial killers that they rarely take their own lives. Also, if one were to include the murder of Martha Tabrum, (a killing that closely matched the other murders attributed to Jack the Ripper) the idea that the ferocity of the attacks increased in scale falls apart. It appears from the evidence the ferocity of the attacks was in measure to the amount of time the killer had with the victim. When Sugen applies modern FBI psychological profiling, the known facts about the Ripper fit him closely with the known traits of modern serial killers: a white male, aged 28 - 45, killing women in a small area (Whitechapel where all the murders were less than a mile apart), seemingly to experiment with technique until the killer arrived at a proven and deadly skill, and that he would never stop.

Following an exacting review of the known evidence Sudgen covers the three most celebrated suspects: Montague John Druitt, Aaron Kosminski, and Michael Ostog, yet concludes with his own analysis of known serial killer and possibly the Ripper himself, George Chapman.

Of interest in this work is the history of East London and English society of the late 18th century, the history of the police of London and their attempts to catch the Ripper, and also of the first documented serial killer and how the case has evolved since 1888. If you have a taste for non-fiction, true crime, mystery and intrigue, this is a no put down read. Any serious student of this case needs to read this book.

The Whitechapel murders have seen no more than several hundred books written about the case but very few can hold the same standing as "The Complete History of Jack the Ripper by Philip Sugden" because it is the most meticulously researched and venerated work on the case to date. Sugden, tired of fictionist accounts of Jack the Ripper (most notably his mistrust of works like The Diary of Jack the Ripper by Shirley Harrison and Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution by Stephen Knight that are spruced up to support a bunk Mason/Royal theory or to point the finger in the direction of what is probably an innocent suspect in order to sell copies by truckload) has delivered on the most comprehensive and historical factual account of the Ripper murders by examining and reporting on the case from the ground up. Leaving no stone unturned, Sugden delves into the initial murders at Whitechapel, before the canonical first ripper victim - Polly Ann Nichols, and beyond the final canonical ripper victim - Mary Kelly, to include no less than nine possible ripper victims that must be taken into account when reviewing the Whitechapel murders in their entirety.

Nearly every available important newspaper story, witness testimony, court hearing, autopsy testimony, letter, investigation memoir and police report relating to the case are used to piece the history of the Whitechapel murders together. Unprecedented attention is paid to the victims, the circumstances of their death, their martial status, boyfriends, education, children, parents, work and place of dwelling before their death. All makes for an exceptional record of the Whitechapel murders which is as unsparingly in detail as you will likely find in any book of its kind. It is not until page 164 that the night of the double murder is dealt with. Make no mistakes about it, this IS the reference manual to which all other works will likely be derived from and compared too.

Sugden unearths some fascinating suspects that most of us knew nothing about. Lunatics that where unaccounted for, having absconded from the eyes of the law and their asylums, where at the forefront of the investigation and a lot of these characters are explored in the book. Characters that where seen with blood stained hands at the time of murders are tracked down and revealed for first time.

Surprisingly, the book doesn't really ever get off the ground like other ripper books. When dealing with probably the most infamous serial killers of all time you would expect much more electrifying passages and comments by the author but instead Sugden opts for a history lesson and data exploration.

Essentially this is a book about a changing Victorian London, the rising of the press, Jewish expansion of the East End, social conditions and the poor, the victims and their unfortunate past, the early years of CID and how the city responded to the Whitechapel murders. Sugden even goes into detail with relatively suppressed topics like the bloodhound trials at CID, undercover investigations involving officers dressing up as prostitutes, innocent but violent vagabonds being hunted through the streets seeking refuge with the police and the creation of vigilante groups who raised reward monies and patrolled the streets.

The book is written in an extremely flat way but like we have said this all goes to prove a point - that Jack the Ripper was no talent. He was no boogeyman and he is certainly undeserving of the personality that he seems to have been accredited with throughout the ages. Yes he was a monster, a sexual serial killer, but one who could easily slip away with a prostitute at the height of the murders without attracting much suspicion - although one important witness (of the very many that are covered in this book) may have actually witnessed an attack and the suspect. In many instances Jack took chances and in all probability he should have been caught. What you are left with is a feeling that the investigators probably had their man, had seen their man, had probably interviewed their man, but didn't recognize him for what he was. The more you play down the hype the more you begin to see what conclusions Sugden is trying to draw. That the investigators had not a single scrap of good evidence to go by and didn't get the break that they so sorely needed.

In the final pages of the book Sugden covers four Ripper suspects, - Druitt, Kosminski, Ostrog and Chapman. He gives Chapman good coverage and names him as the best suspect but the reader is left feeling that that there is a good case against Kosminski because he was identified as Jack the Ripper by a witness.

Pros:
- Meticulously researched, especially the victims.
- Extremely detailed account of everything connected to the case.
- Levelheaded approach to profiling Jack the Ripper.
- Everything is kept real and factual. Very limited guesswork and theories.
- Highly detailed bibliography and references including police files and their locations.

Cons:
- Needs more pictures, especially of the investigators, more Mary Kelly crime scene photos, more Eddowes morgue shots, photographs of the alleged Ripper letters, some pictures of news articles would be good too.
- Not everyone's cup of tea. This is not something that will grip you throughout from start to finish.
- Index is extremely limited to names and places. Could be much better.
- Not all the modern day suspects are considered or covered.
- Does not delve into the investigators' backgrounds as much as the victims.

In light of the recent 'resolution' regarding the identity of Jack the Ripper I offer only this - Patricia Cornwell should read this book! Cornwell bases her beliefs on a series of suppositions that are completely repudiated by the facts - facts found in Philip Sugden's book. I am not saying that Walter Sickert is NOT Jack the Ripper. I am saying that to create and perpetrate a theory based on spurious information and then purport it to be fact is irresponsible. Well, I guess that's why Cornwell writes fiction - Sugden writes fact.

I might also add that the facts contained in this book are much more frightening than any 'theory' can make them. The biographies on the victims seem rather long and arduous but, eventually, help you to realize that the victims were real people with real problems. And the brutal and fantastic way that the REAL Ripper operated is the stuff of nightmares. Thank you Mr. Sugden for presenting the facts.

I personally own six or seven non-fiction books about the Jack the Ripper murders, but by far Philip Sugden's "The Complete History of Jack the Ripper" is the best volume on the subject to date. Sugden's writing style is engrossing and the completeness of his research is impressive. The single most crucial aspect of this book is the fact that Sugden has reviewed every tidbit of fact and fancy from the "authoritative" books on the subject and then compared that information to the original records and newspaper accounts of the murders. The result is a book which clears the air surrounding the murders--air which has become musty and stale over the last century. Sugden's examination dispels many myths surrounding the case and points out the many errors which have simply been handed down from one author to another over the years. My own attitude toward the evidence of the case was refocused after reading "The Complete History of Jack the Ripper." I've even considered tossing out some of my other volumes, several of which I bought in London during a trip there twenty years ago. I can't recommend this book too highly for the true student of the Ripper murders

I actually came to Amazon looking for another book on Jack the Ripper. The reviews were really critical, and recommended The Complete History of Jack the Ripper by Sugden as being a much better book, so I bought it instead.

I think this book is very well done. Sugden gives a complete history of the case, and the facts, as they were known to the police back then. He describes each case in detail, along with any eyewitness accounts and leads that were pursued. While he does go into all the big theories everybody had at the time, he doesn't presume to "know" anymore than the police did then.

I also liked his treatment of the victims. He looks into their histories, telling where they were born, what their family and life was like, and how the came to be in Whitechapel. I think this does a better job of humanizing them than just listing their names, what they did their last night, and the condition of their bodies.

And on the occasions where he mentions what is wrong with another author's conclusions, he does so in a respectful manner. He states what is wrong with the other's theory according to the facts, without trashing anybody in the process.

While the book did seem to be a little bit of a slow read in a couple places, all in all I think this is one of the best Jack the Ripper books out there.