Annotations and comments

Paul Chapin has posted 849 annotations/comments since 17 January 2003.

Comments

First Reading

About Monday 24 March 1661/62

Paul Chapin  •  Link

"by water to the New Exchange, and there found them"
Like Pauline, I think the 'them' here refers to Elizabeth and Mrs. Pierce, not to Sam's office mates. Otherwise the immediately following clause about taking his wife by coach to Bowes makes no sense. But Dirk is right that Sam spends a lot of time looking for people he works with. Apparently it was a normal, expected part of life. At least Sam doesn't seem to express frustration about it, or report that others were put out that he wasn't there for the 10 AM meeting.

About Wednesday 12 March 1661/62

Paul Chapin  •  Link

That guy Downing
was a piece of work, wasn't he? I've just reread the annotations on him, and I'm amazed that somebody with his well-known history of double crosses could rise and stay as high in public and official favor as he seems to have done. His timing must have been uncanny. We think of today's politicians as unprincipled careerists, but I'm hard pressed to think of a one that equals Downing in that respect.

About Sunday 26 January 1661/62

Paul Chapin  •  Link

Sam and wine
Pauline is right that Sam's later accomplishments show that alcohol never became a disabling problem for him. But it has been only four days since his last reported drinking of wine [Entry for 1/22: "a meeting ... with Tho. Trice and Dr. Williams ... after a pint or two of wine we parted"], so it seems a little premature for him to be congratulating himself on having stopped.

About Tuesday 31 December 1661

Paul Chapin  •  Link

And so we complete two full years with Sam
and among our little virtual community. Huzzah to Phil for conceiving this and keeping it going, and a happy 2005 to all.

About Thursday 26 December 1661

Paul Chapin  •  Link

Aaugliter
Vicenzo (aka Vicente & Vincent inter alia) has made a brilliantly erudite interpretation (in jest, I believe) of what seems an evident mis-scan of "daughter".

About Christmas

Paul Chapin  •  Link

Lotteries
Sorry to wander a bit off topic, but anyone who follows Pedro's link to the Plough Monday essay in the Book of Days should also read the fascinating article about lotteries which immediately precedes it. The author, writing in a time when there was no lottery, expressed amazement at the social behaviors surrounding it, behaviors which are very familiar to us today. And the article concludes with a description of financial practices that we know today as derivatives.

About Saturday 21 December 1661

Paul Chapin  •  Link

Thanks to Dirk for an excellent exegesis of this puzzling passage.
Although some have suggested that the Sir Williams needed Sam to make a quorum, if L&M are right - and who could gainsay them? - two members constitute a quorum. Thus it would seem that they were wanting Sam to take notes, as Dirk's summary implies.

About Wednesday 27 November 1661

Paul Chapin  •  Link

"The fact that we don't know the whereabouts of the paintings of Elizabeth and Samuel Pepys doesn't mean that they still don't exist”
Weren’t we told just the other day, as an established historical fact, that the painting of Elizabeth was destroyed by a 19th century maid who was outraged at the immodesty of her dress?

About Thursday 28 November 1661

Paul Chapin  •  Link

none more there than we two
Thanks to Oz Sue for her interpretation of this sentence that puzzled me, which makes very good sense. The key is in the interpretation of the word "more", which must be understood here as meaning "of higher rank" or "more important", rather than simply as "more people" as I had thought.

About Thursday 28 November 1661

Paul Chapin  •  Link

Nobody there?
I don't quite understand this passage. If there was nobody at the office, as Sam says, then there was nobody to show him "due reverence." Does he mean there was nobody else important there? Or could Sam be making a joke?

About Wednesday 20 November 1661

Paul Chapin  •  Link

Another vote for Charles II
The fascinating debate about history's judgment of C2 prompts me to add an opinion of my own. I have to preface my remark by noting that I have zero knowledge of the history of this period aside from what I have gleaned from daily reading of this wonderful blog - two years ago I couldn't have told you the difference between Charles II and Richard II. So forgive me if my opinion is either commonplace or absurd according to received historical understanding.

It seems to me that C2 deserves great credit for the Declaration of Breda. As far as I know, the concept of forgiving your opponents, in the interest of reconciling a nation, was a bold and unprecedented departure from the bloody norm of vengeance and retribution. It seems to have formed the basis for the evolution of the English political system into one in which power could be channeled and transferred by civil means rather than by combat and murder. It is an example sadly lacking in the history of some other regions of the world, such as the Middle East and the Balkans, where people still kill one another to exact justice for perceived wrongs going back centuries.

About Monday 14 October 1661

Paul Chapin  •  Link

Brampton

If Ruben thinks I was ascribing clairvoyance to Sam, he has misinterpreted my annotation. What I suggested was that Sam is simply relieved that Sir Robert Bernard no longer harbors the doubts expressed in the October 12 entry:
"I received a letter this day from my father, that Sir R. Bernard do a little fear that my uncle has not observed exactly the custom of Brampton in his will about his lands there, which puts me to a great trouble in mind, and at night wrote to him and to my father about it, being much troubled at it."
I'm reasonably certain that Sam understands very well that Sir R.B. doesn't have the final say on the disposition of the estate, and that there is more to be done before it is settled. He is just happy to have this one potential barrier removed.

About Monday 14 October 1661

Paul Chapin  •  Link

Clear title at Brampton?

I'm not sure that this passage means the whole Brampton property business has been settled. I interpret it, rather, as a reference to the doubts Sir R. Bernard raised about the matter a couple of days ago, which evidently Sir R. has now resolved to his satisfaction. If I remember correctly what other annotators have said about the future that hasn't yet been revealed to us daily readers, it will be another year or two before the whole matter is finally settled.

About Saturday 28 September 1661

Paul Chapin  •  Link

how much it cost to go to the Theatre
From what I've read and heard, I have the impression that going to the Theatre then was pretty much like going to the movies today. Anyone and everyone could and did.