Friday 25 May 2018

SOMERTON MAN: LAUNDRY MARKS, LAUNDRY BAG?




Given the last few posts, we would all be pretty familiar with the image above., it is of the laundry marks found on SM's trousers. Whilst we have spent quite some time on these, the story hasn't finished just yet, there are still a number of emails awaiting responses that may contain some more useful information on these markings.

In between times there are some downloads for all who may be interested, they are PDF documents containing information on the beginnings of the US laundry mark database including how the information on laundry marks was organised. You will read that markings were sometimes stamped onto clothing or on strips and, as in this case, handwritten directly on to the items. Essentially the marks consisted of :

1. Serial number only
2. Serial number and date (Alphabetical, Numerical)
3. Serial number and name
4. Serial number and number of pieces
5. Serial number, name and date
6. Serial number, name and number of pieces

...and variations thereof.

Downloads:
https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4193&context=jclc

https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3379&context=jclc

One of the interesting aspects of following up on laundry marks was the almost total absence of online images showing handwritten laundry marks. There are a few exceptions to that and below are some images:





This brings me to another interesting but missing item found in the suitcase, the laundry bag, a white laundry bag to be precise. I managed to track down a few examples, images shown below:

These first images are of a white laundry bag that was once owned by a US Army Air Corps pilot by the name of T. O'Craig, the letter T is something of  interest as you will read:





In the image below, the T looks a J but it has been confirmed to be a T, I wonder how often that mistake was made? The initial on the Keane tie may well have been a J do you think?



Next up a white laundry bag from the WRNS, in the first image you can make out a service number:



Now a US Army white laundry bag:


These are the few I have managed to find, it is interesting to note that the individual bags seem to have been owned by Officers, for enlisted men, the practice was apparently to have a barracks or perhaps platoon level bag.
Share:

Thursday 10 May 2018

SOMERTON MAN: THE LAUNDRY MARKS, A HIDDEN CODE?


A CODE?




Taking a longer look at what seems to be the first image published of the laundry marks, you can see quite clearly in this magnified version of the image, that the first number is indeed a 7.

Let's look at the second image:



In this image, there is no sign of the first number being anything like a number 7.

Why is that important?

Let's look at the third and last image of the sets of numbers:



Here you can see that in the last set, 3053/1, there is now a break between the 5 and the three, it's not there in the previous images though. Could that break have another meaning?

Are the laundry marks a code?

Firstly let me acknowledge you Milongal, I know that you were not sure about that first number but hopefully, now you can see that it is quite definitely a number 7 and not a 1.

So what we have are 3 sets of numbers:

1. 7171/7
2. 4393/3
3. 3053/1

Set 1: 7171/7. There are 2  numbers 7 in the first part of the set and that number 7 is repeated after the virgule (forward slash).

Set 2. 4393/3. There are 2 numbers 3 in the first part of the set and that number 3 is repeated after the virgule.

Set 3. 3053-3/1. We do not have a repeated number in the first part and the number 1 only appears after the virgule. Is that just a dash between the 5 and the three or is it a minus sign?

Given the similarity between sets  1 and 2 and not in 3, I wondered whether there was another way that you could, by using the first 4 numbers in each set, arrive at the end number shown in each set.

Here's what I came up with:

Set 1. 7171...7+1+7+1 = 16. If we add the last two digits, 1+6 we get 7

Set 2. 4393...4x3+9x3= 12+27 = 39 = 3+9 = 12 = 1+2 and we get 3

Set 3.3053...30+5-3 = 32 = 3-2 and we get 1

I don't pretend to be a code breaker but I am able to find codes as per the micro writing on the code page and verse 70, this example is screaming out for an experienced code breaker to take a good look at what we have here and contribute to the furtherance of the work or take it off the list.

A couple of additional thoughts in closing, well one thought and then a set of images.

Is it possible that these number sets are some kind of poem code? Are the numbers referring to pages, quatrains, paragraphs, lines and words? The intention this weekend is to test that out.

Now that image, within reason, you can improve/enhance some aspects of images by reducing them in size. When I looked at the third image above, I could make out some odd markings in the background:



Here are two smaller versions of this image plus a super small version:



What do you see in the backgrounds to these images? 








Share:

ABOUT US and OUR RECORD

Learn more about, when the blog started our location plus a long list of 'finds' and new evidence discovered by this blog