Today's entry seems uncommonly rambling and disjointed. He wrote it at the end of a busy day, so maybe he was tired. He mentions failed effort(s) to see Dr. Williams, but no contact, until he tacks on at the end that he paid Williams 20s.
Per Pauline's posting on 2 March 2005 under Davenant, Harris played Romeo in the first post-Restoration performance of Romeo and Juliet, directed by Davenant. http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclo…
Harris Sorry, should have looked before I posted. Per Pauline's posting on 2 March 2005 under Davenant, Harris played Romeo in the first post-Restoration performance of Romeo and Juliet, directed by Davenant. http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclo…
That leaves open the question of what the issue was between him and Davenant that caused the Duke to intervene, and whether it's Harris or Davenant that will be "high and proud" as a result - I'm guessing it's Harris, because Davenant was already high and proud enough.
Anybody know anything about "Harris"? Presumably a theatrical person, but I don't remember hearing him referred to before, and the linked reference is blank.
Once again, Sam flummoxes us with too many pronouns with unclear antecedents
My best guess, in which I have only about 60% confidence, is that we should parse the second sentence as follows:
Here happened something concerning my Will which Sir W. Batten would fain charge upon him (Hewer), and I heard him (Batten) mutter something against him (Hewer) of complaint for his (Hewer's) often receiving people's money to Sir G. Carteret, which displeased me much, but I will be even with him (Batten).
That is, Batten made a complaint about Hewer to Carteret, which annoyed Sam and made him (Sam) resolve to get back at Batten somehow.
We are getting about 98% OT, but I feel a linguistic responsibility to remark on the above two postings.
1. Ladino was indeed the language of Spanish Jews in diaspora after the expulsion from Spain in 1492. However, the Ladino-speaking communities settled primarily in eastern Europe, the Middle East, and north Africa. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladi… As Language Hat's reference above makes clear, the Jews in western Europe, including England, primarily spoke Portuguese as their first language: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Span…
One must distinguish between the language of everyday usage, Portuguese or Ladino, and the liturgical language used in religious services, which for these people was Sephardi Hebrew.
2. Yiddish is not a dialect of German, but a language of its own, including vocabulary elements drawn from Germanic, Slavic, and Semitic language families. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yidd…
Hoping not to try the patience of other readers, I'd like to extend this linguistic discussion with my learned colleague LH a bit further.
Pepys says that the prayer (for the king) was, "like the rest, in Hebrew." Sephardi Hebrew, like any language, would have imported proper names for which it had no native equivalent, and certainly would have done so for Charles. Because of the nature of the language, and the background of its speakers, the name would have had its Portuguese form. But in the context of a Hebrew prayer, it would have been part of the Hebrew text, and if written, written in the Hebrew alphabet. Thus I say it was in Sephardi Hebrew.
I guess the pivot point is whether you call a loan word part of the language that borrows it, or say that it remains a part of the language from which it was borrowed. My preference is the former.
More likely in Sephardi Hebrew, which Pepys took for Portuguese. Wikipedia: "The Sephardi Hebrew language is an offshoot of Biblical Hebrew favored for liturgical use by Sephardi Jewish practice. Its phonology was influenced by contact languages such as Ladino, Portuguese, Dutch, Turkish and Arabic." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seph…
Many thanks to Terry for his posting about Simchat Torah. Pepys must have been at the synagogue on this day, unaware that it was a special celebration, and supposing that all their services were like that.
Roy, I think Australian Susan has it exactly right in her note above. Sam would like his guests to think his "family" (including staff) prepared the meal, but the staff served the food with the take-away cook's mark on it - as A.S. says, like serving it in Chinese restaurant take-out containers. "They" refers to the guests.
" the King cannot be in debt to the Navy at this time 5,000l.; and it is my opinion that Sir G. Carteret do owe the King money, and yet the whole Navy debt paid."
I have a different take on this puzzling passage from the Aqua-Man. I believe it harks back to two earlier entries, from September 8 and September 12:
8 September: "At the office all the morning making up our last half year’s account to my Lord Treasurer, which comes to 160,000l. or there abouts, the proper expense of this half year, only with an addition of 13,000l. for the third due of the last account to the Treasurer for his disbursements, and 1100l. for this half year’s; so that in three years and a half his thirds come to 14,100l.."
12 September: " Sir Philip Warwick, and there had half an hour’s private discourse with him; and did give him some good satisfaction in our Navy matters, and he also me, as to the money paid and due to the Navy; so as he makes me assured by particulars, that Sir G. Carteret is paid within 80,000l. every farthing that we to this day, nay to Michaelmas day next have demanded; and that, I am sure, is above 50,000l. snore than truly our expenses have been, whatever is become of the money."
Sam is clearly giving us only bits and pieces here of what's on his mind, but I think today's entry means that Carteret has tried to claim that the government ("the King") still owes the navy 5000L to complete the agreed-on payments for the past six months, and Sir Philip has convinced Sam that that is false, the navy has been paid in full, and that in fact Carteret owes money to the government ("the King").
"where my wife: staid up and sister for me" Is this the true text? It's hard to follow. Maybe it means that Elizabeth and Pall were waiting up for him?
"Fire dogs are iron stands at either side of the fireplace for placing logs across to allow air underneath for the draw. I think "andirons" is a corruption of "end irons". I have never heard of fire dogs being called that before today."
Graham, "andirons" is the common term in the U.S. for exactly the devices you describe. I would guess that on this side of the pond, only those of us with excessive exposure to British literature would recognize the phrase "fire dogs".
"in the bank" When you think about it, this is a curious expression for Sam to use, since in his time they did not yet have banks to keep money in, at least in our modern sense. He seems to have kept his actual currency in a strongbox in his cellar, if I remember correctly. Perhaps such a box was called a "bank" then, as we would refer to a piggy bank?
Sam and his father's finances Let us not forget that Sam privately expects the Brampton proceeds to come to 50L a year, sparing him any out of pocket expense if he can get his father to live on that amount. On 1 May 1663 Sam wrote: "...I find that there will be, after all debts paid within 100l., 50l. per annum clear coming towards my father’s maintenance, besides 25l. per annum annuities to my Uncle Thomas and Aunt Perkins. Of which, though I was in my mind glad, yet thought it not fit to let my father know it thoroughly, but after he had gone out to visit my uncle Thomas and brought him to dinner with him, and after dinner I got my father, brother Tom, and myself together, I did make the business worse to them, and did promise 20l. out of my own purse to make it 50l. a year to my father ..."
"Vegans are not cranks!" A.S., I'm sure LH can defend himself amply without my help, but I didn't read him as saying they are; rather, he was saying that they are uninfluential, and that people in Sam's time who had the weird idea that overlords should behave themselves properly were equally uninfluential, even though today we would applaud their insight.
Comments
First Reading
About Monday 26 October 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
Today's entry
seems uncommonly rambling and disjointed. He wrote it at the end of a busy day, so maybe he was tired. He mentions failed effort(s) to see Dr. Williams, but no contact, until he tacks on at the end that he paid Williams 20s.
About Monday 26 October 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
"...my washing being in a good condition over."
Wonder if the maids got their trip to Westminster?
About Monday 26 October 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
Dolphin and Dauphin
Lea, what a wonderful annotation. Thank you!
About Henry Harris
Paul Chapin • Link
Per Pauline's posting on 2 March 2005 under Davenant, Harris played Romeo in the first post-Restoration performance of Romeo and Juliet, directed by Davenant. http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclo…
About Saturday 24 October 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
Harris
Sorry, should have looked before I posted. Per Pauline's posting on 2 March 2005 under Davenant, Harris played Romeo in the first post-Restoration performance of Romeo and Juliet, directed by Davenant. http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclo…
That leaves open the question of what the issue was between him and Davenant that caused the Duke to intervene, and whether it's Harris or Davenant that will be "high and proud" as a result - I'm guessing it's Harris, because Davenant was already high and proud enough.
About Saturday 24 October 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
Anybody know anything about "Harris"?
Presumably a theatrical person, but I don't remember hearing him referred to before, and the linked reference is blank.
About Saturday 17 October 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
Once again, Sam flummoxes us with too many pronouns with unclear antecedents
My best guess, in which I have only about 60% confidence, is that we should parse the second sentence as follows:
Here happened something concerning my Will which Sir W. Batten would fain charge upon him (Hewer), and I heard him (Batten) mutter something against him (Hewer) of complaint for his (Hewer's) often receiving people's money to Sir G. Carteret, which displeased me much, but I will be even with him (Batten).
That is, Batten made a complaint about Hewer to Carteret, which annoyed Sam and made him (Sam) resolve to get back at Batten somehow.
About Wednesday 14 October 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
Ladino and Yiddish
We are getting about 98% OT, but I feel a linguistic responsibility to remark on the above two postings.
1. Ladino was indeed the language of Spanish Jews in diaspora after the expulsion from Spain in 1492. However, the Ladino-speaking communities settled primarily in eastern Europe, the Middle East, and north Africa. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladi…
As Language Hat's reference above makes clear, the Jews in western Europe, including England, primarily spoke Portuguese as their first language: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Span…
One must distinguish between the language of everyday usage, Portuguese or Ladino, and the liturgical language used in religious services, which for these people was Sephardi Hebrew.
2. Yiddish is not a dialect of German, but a language of its own, including vocabulary elements drawn from Germanic, Slavic, and Semitic language families. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yidd…
About Wednesday 14 October 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
Sephardi Hebrew or Portuguese
Hoping not to try the patience of other readers, I'd like to extend this linguistic discussion with my learned colleague LH a bit further.
Pepys says that the prayer (for the king) was, "like the rest, in Hebrew." Sephardi Hebrew, like any language, would have imported proper names for which it had no native equivalent, and certainly would have done so for Charles. Because of the nature of the language, and the background of its speakers, the name would have had its Portuguese form. But in the context of a Hebrew prayer, it would have been part of the Hebrew text, and if written, written in the Hebrew alphabet. Thus I say it was in Sephardi Hebrew.
I guess the pivot point is whether you call a loan word part of the language that borrows it, or say that it remains a part of the language from which it was borrowed. My preference is the former.
About Wednesday 14 October 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
"they pronounced his name in Portugall"
More likely in Sephardi Hebrew, which Pepys took for Portuguese.
Wikipedia: "The Sephardi Hebrew language is an offshoot of Biblical Hebrew favored for liturgical use by Sephardi Jewish practice. Its phonology was influenced by contact languages such as Ladino, Portuguese, Dutch, Turkish and Arabic." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seph…
Many thanks to Terry for his posting about Simchat Torah. Pepys must have been at the synagogue on this day, unaware that it was a special celebration, and supposing that all their services were like that.
About Sunday 11 October 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
slide rule
Patricia, that gets the prize for the most unsettling image in a good while! Yuck.
About Tuesday 6 October 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
"they might know it was not my own dinner"
Roy, I think Australian Susan has it exactly right in her note above. Sam would like his guests to think his "family" (including staff) prepared the meal, but the staff served the food with the take-away cook's mark on it - as A.S. says, like serving it in Chinese restaurant take-out containers. "They" refers to the guests.
About Thursday 24 September 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
" the King cannot be in debt to the Navy at this time 5,000l.; and it is my opinion that Sir G. Carteret do owe the King money, and yet the whole Navy debt paid."
I have a different take on this puzzling passage from the Aqua-Man. I believe it harks back to two earlier entries, from September 8 and September 12:
8 September: "At the office all the morning making up our last half year’s account to my Lord Treasurer, which comes to 160,000l. or there abouts, the proper expense of this half year, only with an addition of 13,000l. for the third due of the last account to the Treasurer for his disbursements, and 1100l. for this half year’s; so that in three years and a half his thirds come to 14,100l.."
12 September: " Sir Philip Warwick, and there had half an hour’s private discourse with him; and did give him some good satisfaction in our Navy matters, and he also me, as to the money paid and due to the Navy; so as he makes me assured by particulars, that Sir G. Carteret is paid within 80,000l. every farthing that we to this day, nay to Michaelmas day next have demanded; and that, I am sure, is above 50,000l. snore than truly our expenses have been, whatever is become of the money."
Sam is clearly giving us only bits and pieces here of what's on his mind, but I think today's entry means that Carteret has tried to claim that the government ("the King") still owes the navy 5000L to complete the agreed-on payments for the past six months, and Sir Philip has convinced Sam that that is false, the navy has been paid in full, and that in fact Carteret owes money to the government ("the King").
About Saturday 19 September 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
"where my wife: staid up and sister for me"
Is this the true text? It's hard to follow. Maybe it means that Elizabeth and Pall were waiting up for him?
About Monday 7 September 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
Fire dogs and Englishmen
"Fire dogs are iron stands at either side of the fireplace for placing logs across to allow air underneath for the draw. I think "andirons" is a corruption of "end irons". I have never heard of fire dogs being called that before today."
Graham, "andirons" is the common term in the U.S. for exactly the devices you describe. I would guess that on this side of the pond, only those of us with excessive exposure to British literature would recognize the phrase "fire dogs".
About Monday 7 September 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
"dogs, tongs, and shovels"
Since tongs and shovels are fireplace tools, I think 'dogs' probably means andirons, as per Terry's second definition.
About Monday 7 September 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
"in the bank"
When you think about it, this is a curious expression for Sam to use, since in his time they did not yet have banks to keep money in, at least in our modern sense. He seems to have kept his actual currency in a strongbox in his cellar, if I remember correctly. Perhaps such a box was called a "bank" then, as we would refer to a piggy bank?
About Wednesday 2 September 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
"sic every where"
Thanks, Aqua, but superfluous; we all do that already with your contributions. They're worth it.
About Tuesday 18 August 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
Sam and his father's finances
Let us not forget that Sam privately expects the Brampton proceeds to come to 50L a year, sparing him any out of pocket expense if he can get his father to live on that amount. On 1 May 1663 Sam wrote:
"...I find that there will be, after all debts paid within 100l., 50l. per annum clear coming towards my father’s maintenance, besides 25l. per annum annuities to my Uncle Thomas and Aunt Perkins. Of which, though I was in my mind glad, yet thought it not fit to let my father know it thoroughly, but after he had gone out to visit my uncle Thomas and brought him to dinner with him, and after dinner I got my father, brother Tom, and myself together, I did make the business worse to them, and did promise 20l. out of my own purse to make it 50l. a year to my father ..."
About Saturday 15 August 1663
Paul Chapin • Link
"Vegans are not cranks!"
A.S., I'm sure LH can defend himself amply without my help, but I didn't read him as saying they are; rather, he was saying that they are uninfluential, and that people in Sam's time who had the weird idea that overlords should behave themselves properly were equally uninfluential, even though today we would applaud their insight.