Putting AI to work on Preston’s suffragette history

Over a year ago now, Margaret Keane and I independently came across two letters from a Preston suffragette at Lancashire Archives. We transcribed them and they can now be read here: Letters from a Preston suffragette

I thought I’d give the first page of the first letter (pictured) to ChatGPT to transcribe as a test. It produced a reasonable transcript with just three mistakes (shown in bold italics between square brackets). ChatGPT also offered to supply historical annotations, which I’ve also included below.

What I’m learning as I delve into AI is that it is a very useful tool for doing the spade work of what were time-consuming tasks for researchers. What it needs is human oversight, especially when it offers information beyond the written text, as here with the historical annotations.

That is where students of suffragette history step in to authenticate the AI suggestions. What I do find is that having set aside the information I’m already aware of, the remaining suggestions can suggest unexplored avenues.

This is what ChatGPT gave me:

---

Below is a faithful transcription of the handwritten letter as visible in the image. Original spelling, punctuation, line breaks, and abbreviations have been preserved as closely as possible; uncertain readings are indicated in [square brackets].

The Quakers’ Lodge
85, Broomfield Road,
Chelmsford,
Essex.
30th [20th] September
1914 [1964]

Dear Mr Ronald Towler,

It was indeed
a pleasure to have your letter,
your mother was one of the founder
members of the Preston Branch of
the W.S.P.U.

She, I & Mrs Hennedy [Hesmondalgh]
& Mrs Edith Rigby were all in
Holloway gaol early in February
1908.

This was Mrs Edith Rigby’s
3rd imprisonment – by rights
her sentence should only have
been a fortnight – but six weeks
was handed out to all – but
Mrs Rigby was given a month

If you would like, I can also:

• Provide a cleaned modernised version (standardised spelling and punctuation)
• Add historical annotations (e.g. W.S.P.U., Holloway Gaol, Edith Rigby)
• Assess authorship, date consistency, or historical context (suffragette correspondence)

---

I asked it to add historical annotations, and this is what if gave me:

---

Below are historical annotations keyed to the people, organisations, places, and events mentioned in the letter. The aim is to clarify significance and context without altering the original text.

Historical Annotations

“The Quakers’ Lodge, 85 Broomfield Road, Chelmsford, Essex”

This was a known Quaker residence in Chelmsford in the early 20th century. Quakers were disproportionately involved in social reform movements, including women’s suffrage, prison reform, and pacifism. The address suggests the author was either a Quaker or closely associated with Quaker reform networks.

“Mr Ronald Towler”

Ronald Towler appears to be the son of a suffragette activist. The letter is clearly a response to his inquiry about his mother’s involvement in the movement, indicating later-generation interest in documenting suffragette history.

“your mother was one of the founder members of the Preston Branch of the W.S.P.U.”

The Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) was founded in 1903 by Emmeline Pankhurst and her daughters.

• It was the most militant suffrage organisation in Britain, adopting the slogan “Deeds, not words.”
• Local branches such as Preston played a crucial role in organising protests, fundraising, and civil disobedience outside London.
• Being a founder member indicates the recipient’s mother was an early and significant activist, not a peripheral supporter.

“She, I & Mrs Hennedy [Hesmondalgh] & Mrs Edith Rigby”

This lists four women imprisoned together, indicating close collaboration:

• Mrs Edith Rigby (1872–1950)
  A prominent Lancashire suffragette and socialist, Edith Rigby was among the most radical activists outside London.
• She participated in arson attacks on unoccupied buildings, hunger strikes, and repeated acts of civil disobedience.
• She was imprisoned multiple times and force-fed in Holloway Prison.
• After suffrage, she continued activism through socialism and birth-control advocacy.
• Mrs Hennedy [Hesmondalgh]
  Almost certainly a regional WSPU activist, though less well documented nationally. The shared imprisonment implies she was directly involved in militant suffrage actions rather than supportive roles.
• The letter’s author (“I”)
  The writer is herself a former suffragette prisoner, lending the letter first-hand authority.

“Holloway gaol”

Holloway Prison (London) was the primary prison for suffragettes.

• It became a symbol of state repression against the women’s suffrage movement.
• Many suffragettes imprisoned there went on hunger strike and were subjected to force-feeding, a practice widely condemned even at the time.
• Shared imprisonment at Holloway was often a marker of militant action, not merely peaceful protest.

“early in February 1908”

This date aligns with a period of escalating suffragette militancy.

• In 1908 the WSPU intensified confrontational tactics, including demonstrations, obstruction, and property damage.
• Imprisonment at this stage reflects participation in high-risk activism when public sympathy was still uncertain.

“This was Mrs Edith Rigby’s 3rd imprisonment”

Repeated imprisonment underscores Rigby’s status as a hardened militant rather than a symbolic protester.

• Multiple imprisonments were common among core WSPU activists and were often worn as badges of honour within the movement.

“by rights her sentence should only have been a fortnight – but six weeks was handed out to all”

This reflects judicial inconsistency and punitive sentencing applied to suffragettes.

• Magistrates increasingly imposed longer sentences to deter protest.
• Uniform sentencing “to all” suggests collective punishment rather than case-by-case justice.

“but Mrs Rigby was given a month”

The discrepancy implies either:

• A partial concession by the court due to Rigby’s prior imprisonments or health, or
• Administrative inconsistency typical of suffragette trials.

Either interpretation reinforces the arbitrary nature of sentencing faced by suffrage activists.

Overall Historical Significance

This letter is valuable as:

• Primary evidence of suffragette imprisonment networks
• Confirmation of regional activism (Preston, Lancashire)
• First-hand corroboration of Edith Rigby’s prison history
• Insight into how suffragettes later documented and validated each other’s roles

If you wish, I can also:

• Assess whether this letter would be suitable for archival citation or museum use
• Cross-reference names with prison records or WSPU documents
• Prepare a formal footnoted version suitable for publication or heritage submissions