"... and moreover I was vexed to have a dog brought to my house to lime our little bitch, which they make him do in all their sights, which, God forgive me, do stir my jealousy again, though of itself the thing is a very immodest sight."
Maybe Pepys is vexed that Elizabeth and the staff organized this activity without consulting him first. As many have remarked, being jealous of the dog makes no sense, so maybe it was more about the comradery and enjoyment Elizabeth and the maids -- and Little Sue and young Tom Edwards? -- were having (possibly making remarks about inadequate performance), and generally having a ribald time of it -- but as he hears it, at his expense, as he's not in charge of the party.
They are doing fine without you, Mr. Social Climber.
"... where I occasioned much mirth with a ballet I brought with me, made from the seamen at sea to their ladies in town; saying Sir W. Pen, Sir G. Ascue, and Sir J. Lawson made them."
It is telling that when (former Parliamentarian) Pepys has lunch at Royalist Lord Brouncker's home, in order to be witty and amusing he suggests this poem was written by three elderly (and all former Parliamentarian) Admirals. In order to make himself socially acceptable to his new fellow Commissioner, he again distances himself from his past.
"Mrs. Martin, and to her lodgings which she has now taken to lie in, in Bow Streete, pitiful poor things, yet she thinks them pretty, and so they are for her condition I believe good enough."
Her condition is, of course, pregnant and alone, since Mr. Martin "is gone to be a paymaster to a company to Portsmouth to serve at sea." https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
"Thence, being forced to pay a great deale of money away in boxes (that is, basins at White Hall), ..."
1. Maybe Pepys wasn't prepared and found himself short of cash once this annual tithe was presented to him to pay. Since it seems to have been a surprise, and he hasn't mentioned it in past years, presumably one of the senior Commissioners handled it in the past. In which case, this recognizes his elevated status these days. 2. I'm sure it came out of Petty Cash ultimately, and although he doesn't say so, some of the reimbursement must have attached to his sticky fingers. 3. Interesting boxes are replaced at Whitehall by basins. Boxes are enclosed and private, basins are open and everyone can see how generous/miserly he was being. And services rendered in 1665 will probably be reciprocal.
Monday 2 January 1665 ... Then to the Hall, and there agreed with Mrs. Martin, and to her lodgings which she has now taken to lie in, in Bow Street, pitiful poor things, yet she thinks them pretty, and so they are for her condition I believe good enough. (Her condition is that of being pregnant.)
In 1663 the Cock Tavern on Bow Street was the resort of the rakes of the day, when the house was kept by a woman called "Oxford Kate". Here took place the indecent exposure, which has been told by Johnson, in his Life of Sackville, Lord Dorset. "Sackville, who was then Lord Buckhurst, with Sir Charles Sedley, and Sir Thomas Ogle, got drunk at the Cock, in Bow-street, by Covent-garden, and going into the balcony, exposed themselves to the company in very indecent postures."
31st December, 1664. Set my affairs in order, gave God praise for His mercies the past year, and prepared for the reception of the Holy Sacrament, which I partook of the next day, after hearing our minister on the 4th of Galatians, verses 4, 5, of the mystery of our Blessed Savior's Incarnation.
'"to tear all that I found either boyish or not to be worth keeping." I'm somewhat surprised that books were that disposable then. "or fit to be seen ..." What's up with that?'
re "I'm somewhat surprised that books were that disposable." Pepys lives at the dawn of the scientific age, and he must have looked at some of his old volumes with dated ideas, 'bad' spelling, bizarre vocabulary, etc. with the same shake of the head I have reading my college textbooks.
re "or fit to be seen ..." Well, they did have porn back then, and I suspect Pepys read it. Little survives, but enough to tell us that there were smut publishers. Some of it also came from France and Italy. Now they have been worrying about the plague being in Amsterdam for a year, rumors of it being in Yarmouth started in November, and although not noted by Pepys, the first recorded London death took place in St. Giles on Christmas Eve (see below), so the nagging idea that he should protect his reputation by cleaning up isn't surprising.
Weymouth in Dorset also claims to have been ground zero for the 1665 pestilence -- they have a record of a sailor being brought to shore with it. (Ships had to go through quarantine if they came from an infected port, so how that happened I don't know.)
"The ... unremarkable recording of the death of Goodwoman Phillips in the parish of St. Giles in the Fields, outside the City walls of London, on Christmas Eve 1664, where parish searchers pronounced her to have died of the plague." (From: The Great Plague – The Story of London’s Most Deadly Year – A. Lloyd Moote & Dorothy C. Moote, John Hopkins University Press 2004.)
Searchers were elderly poor women paid a pittance to look at dead bodies and decide how they died. Many accepted bribes from the family not to say that the person had the plague, so the Bills of Mortality are known not to be accurate.
After the Restoration John, Baron Belasyse of Worlaby was appointed Lord-Lieutenant of the East Riding of Yorkshire (1660–1673) and Governor of Hull (1661-1673), while from 1665 to 1666 he held the posts of Governor of Tangier and Captain-General of the forces in Africa. He was the Catholic son-in-law of John Paulet, 5th Marquis of Winchester. Pepys didn't think much of him.
I think Bess is punishing Pepys with another round of passive-aggressive tactics. I wonder how she will reestablish control of the help after all this joie de vivre. "Fun's over. Wash Day tomorrow. Everyone up at 3. Hewer, what are you doing in the wine cellar with Besse?"
I'm with Robert Gertz on the subject of clothes. For more information about "slops" (barrels of spare clothes loaded onto a ship to be distributed as needed, with the money deducted from the seaman's pay at the end of the voyage) see: https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
The Coventry Carol is part of the Feast of the Holy Innocents, celebrated December 28, commemorating the massacre of the young children of Bethlehem ordered by King Herod in an attempt to eliminate the Messiah.
The origins of the Coventry Carol are not clear. It may go back as far as 1392. The lyrics known today are attributed to Robert Croo in 1534 (based on early 19th century copies of a manuscript that was destroyed in 1875), and the music to an unknown composer in 1591. There are conflicting references for this song, but it is known to have been popular in the 16th century in some form, and is still popular today.
During the time of the Diary, Chief Baron of the Exchequer Sir Matthew Hale enjoyed a lot of respect.
In one of his most controversial cases, in March 1662, he presided as judge in the witch trial of two elderly women, Amy Duny and Rose Cullender, in Bury St. Edmunds. During court, three of the children fell into violent screaming fits. In a test away from the jury, the girls were blindfolded and touched by strangers. Tricked into thinking the touches had come from the accused women, the girls had a "bewitched" reaction. The father of one of the girls stated that sorcery was the cause of their mistake.
Sir Matthew refused to allow this evidence to come before the jury -- and failed to give the speech (above) he normally delivered to rape jurors on how easy it is to accuse, and how difficult for the defendant to prove innocence. In fact, he gave the opposite explanation and lectured the jury about the evils of witchcraft. Quickly the jury delivered the expected guilty verdict for 13 counts of witchcraft and sorcery. With the conviction, the children were restored to good health and walked out of the courtroom, healed.
Amy Duny and Rose Cullender were hanged on March 17, 1662.
Otherwise, Hale gets high marks. Although he was a pious Puritan, he was selected to defend Laud, Strafford and King Charles, because he was known to be honorable and smart. He lost those cases, but not his reputation. He stayed away from politics and strove to improve the law. As such, Charles II kept him on, and by the time he died his reputation and law theory were recognized to be equal to Sir Edward Coke.
Judge Matthew Hale made this pronouncement which has caused women a lot of trouble ever since:
"It is true that rape is a most detestable crime, and therefore ought severely and impartially to be punished with death; but it must be remembered, that it is an accusation easily to be made, hard to be proved, but harder to be defended by the party accused, tho innocent." -- Judge Sir Matthew Hale (1609 - 1676)
Nate Lockwood ... Pepys was in charge of the Petty Cash, and so long as he could make a profit off the deal, I suspect they would have the best candles. They are all working a lot of war-related overtime in the dead of winter, so I think anything that improved productivity would be justified -- including keeping good Newcastle coal in the scuttle.
Hi British Rose ... they had a different work ethic in the 17th century. As one of the bosses, Pepys worked until it was done. If there was nothing important to do, and the office was "covered," he could go to the theater or wench chasing. My observation is that there had to be two of the Navy Board in the office all the time (to sign for deliveries, placate angry captains, etc.) because Pepys had to find another one at lunch one day to counter-sign an order. And when he went to Portsmouth for a few days he had to make sure the two MPs had agreed to be in the office before he could leave. He hasn't told us about the Clerks' work schedules.
He does work a lot of "overtime," which is true of exempt managers today. You need to be available to the drones doing the work during the day, and you need quiet time to plot future strategy and read the old files to discover where the bodies are buried.
The weekend, an 8-hour work day, paid overtime and paid holidays are brought to you courtesy of the Union movement in the early 20th century. Having done my share of drudge work, I thank them heartily.
As the Dowager Countess in Downton Abbey said, "What's a weekend?"
You didn't know there were Finns in Delaware? At the time Finland and Sweden were one country, and this had been Queen Christina's only toe-hold in the New World:
After some years of uneasy if not unfriendly cohabitation, the Dutch decided to build a fort, Fort Casimir, uncomfortably close to Swedish land.
The dashing governor of New Sweden, Johan Rising, captured Fort Casimir in 1654. In doing so, he inadvertently signed New Sweden’s death sentence.
Enraged, the powerful Governor of New Netherlands, Peter Stuyvesant, attacked New Sweden in 1655. In a matter of weeks, the Swedish governor was forced to surrender, and with that the Swedish foothold on the American continent was gone.
Or not ... during the 17 years Sweden had its colony, close to 1,000 settlers emigrated. The Dutch now controlled the area, but the settlers were still there, speaking Swedish or Finnish to each other, and holding to their customs and traditions.
Their Dutch overlords did not interfere, so everyone coexisted peacefully for over a decade. Perhaps their common love of herring and genever (gin) helped.
In the early 1660’s, the English had resolved their Civil Wars. Peace and the Monarchy were restored, and the government found time to study the situation in America. What they saw, they did not like. Between the northern English colonies (Massachusetts, Rhode Island and present-day Connecticut) and the southern colonies (Virginia and Maryland) was New Netherlands.
The English decided to take control of “their” continent.
In 1664, Delaware – together with the rest of New Netherlands – was taken over by the English. With the English came new colonial administration, new laws – and a new, more practical language. (Already Swedish suffered from being a language few learn to speak.)
The settlers held onto their antiquated Swedish when at home or in church, but as the years passed their language, traditions and customs faded into obscurity – except for one small and extremely utilitarian building: the log cabin.
"The Guinea frigate is returned from New England, & brings news that Nicols hath taken all that remained to the Dutch about Delaware Bay, where he took a fort by storm."
October 3, 1664 - Sir Robert Carr (1629-1667) was appointed, with three other commissioners, "to place Delaware and all its inhabitants under the authority of His Majesty the King of England".
Arrived in Delaware Bay on September 30, 1664 with two ships, Sir Robert Carr sailed to the fort of New Amstel with no shots fired, and went up the river to the Finnish colony where he assured its settlers that they would continue to enjoy their farms and herds as under the former jurisdiction. He also guaranteed them that they could trade freely with all the English possessions with the same conditions as those granted to the English people. The colonists saw their freedom of conscience was protected, and the magistrates were confirmed in their offices for six months.
Sir Robert Carr then held a meeting with Director d’Hinoyossa and the Dutch burghers of New Amstel. They agreed to surrender and took an oath of allegiance to Charles II.
However, Director d’Hinoyossa and the Dutch burghers of New Amstel refused to give up the fort. In the end, it was taken by force, killing three people and wounding some on the Dutch side.
After the fall of New Amster fort, the English soldiers and sailors looted the city despite the oath to its inhabitants. The properties of the Dutch authorities and their partisans were confiscated. The city was renamed New Castle.
When Fort Amstel fell to Sir Robert Carr, inside was found a large inventory of goods. Carr appropriated this booty and claimed for himself the houses, farms and stores seized to the Dutch officials.
October 24, 1664 - Sir Robert Carr was called back in New York and the Gov. of New York, Richard Nicolls, was sent in his place to Delaware to put the house in order.
SPOILER ALERT: According to the Bills of Mortality, London’s Dreadful Visitation began 27 December 1664 and ended 19 December 1665.
The Bills of Mortality shaped how people in the 17th century understood the spread of disease, specifically from Parish to Parish. An online exhibition on Pinterest highlights the dramatic increase and decrease in plague deaths each week in 1665 – starting from 21 March 1665 to 12 December 1665 – which is shown in a simple line graph.
A few pages from the Bills of Mortality are shown, for July to September, which record the most shocking increase in plague deaths. It was during the hot summer months of 1665 when the black rat and its fleas rapidly multiplied. However, in the 17th century no one knew this was the source of infection. During this period it was believed that the air was infected, and the dreadful visitation was a punishment from God.
What is most striking about the Great Plague is that it changed the lives of everyone in London – rich, poor, men, women and children. Those who could afford to flee, for example, merchants, doctors and lawyers, escaped the city by land or river.
Others who witnessed and wrote about this devastating period are also explored in the exhibition, including Samuel Pepys, John Evelyn and Daniel Defoe.
There are the remedies recommended by physicians like Doctor Thomas Cocke, who advised the poor to drink ‘hot posset drink’ and ‘wash their mouth and hands with warm water and vinegar’ to avert the infection.
Also, one Doctor George Thomson practiced the dissection of the pestilential body alongside the burning of incense ‘to drive away the infected air.’
The nine engravings by John Dunstall show the last major outbreak of bubonic plague in England. Scenes like these were familiar in London throughout 1665. Nurses treating plague victims, homes that were shut and marked with a red cross, the rich fleeing the city, the burying and mourning of the dead, and survivors returning back to London after the rapid decline in plague deaths.
I've found more about Sir Matthew Hale's activities:
He was Chief Baron of the Exchequer in March of 1662 when he presiding as judge in the witch trial of two elderly women, Amy Duny and Rose Cullender in Bury St. Edmunds. During court, three of the children fell into violent screaming fits. In a test, the girls were blindfolded and touched by strangers. Tricked into thinking the touches had come from the accused women, the girls had a "bewitched" reaction. The father of one of the girls stated that sorcery was the cause of their mistake.
Sir Matthew refused to allow this evidence to come before the jury -- and failed to give the speech (above) he normally delivered to rape jurors on how easy it is to accuse, and how difficult for the defendant to prove innocence. In fact, he gave the opposite explanation and lectured the jury about the evils of witchcraft. Quickly the jury delivered the expected guilty verdict for 13 counts of witchcraft and sorcery. With the conviction, the children were restored to good health and walked out of the courtroom, healed.
Amy Duny and Rose Cullender were hanged on March 17, 1662.
Otherwise, Hale gets high marks. Although he was a pious Puritan, he was selected to defend Laud, Wentworth and King Charles, because he was known to be honorable and smart. He lost those cases, but not his reputation. He stayed away from politics and strove to improve the law. As such, Charles II kept him on, and by the time he died his reputation and law theory were recognized to be on a par with Sir Edward Coke.
Adding this below the fun Boxing Day entry is a downer, but following JWB's enlightening citation on "The Law's Resolutions of Women's Rights; Or, the Law's Provision for Women," I feel I must add this legal ruling which still provides the legal basis for deciding rape and assault cases against women in many places. Perhaps T.E. was explaining to women their rights after Judge Hale made this pronouncement?
"It is true that rape is a most detestable crime, and therefore ought severely and impartially to be punished with death; but it must be remembered, that it is an accusation easily to be made, hard to be proved, but harder to be defended by the party accused, tho innocent." -- Judge Sir Matthew Hale (1609 - 1676)
Comments
Second Reading
About Monday 2 January 1664/65
San Diego Sarah • Link
"... and moreover I was vexed to have a dog brought to my house to lime our little bitch, which they make him do in all their sights, which, God forgive me, do stir my jealousy again, though of itself the thing is a very immodest sight."
Maybe Pepys is vexed that Elizabeth and the staff organized this activity without consulting him first. As many have remarked, being jealous of the dog makes no sense, so maybe it was more about the comradery and enjoyment Elizabeth and the maids -- and Little Sue and young Tom Edwards? -- were having (possibly making remarks about inadequate performance), and generally having a ribald time of it -- but as he hears it, at his expense, as he's not in charge of the party.
They are doing fine without you, Mr. Social Climber.
About Monday 2 January 1664/65
San Diego Sarah • Link
"... where I occasioned much mirth with a ballet I brought with me, made from the seamen at sea to their ladies in town; saying Sir W. Pen, Sir G. Ascue, and Sir J. Lawson made them."
It is telling that when (former Parliamentarian) Pepys has lunch at Royalist Lord Brouncker's home, in order to be witty and amusing he suggests this poem was written by three elderly (and all former Parliamentarian) Admirals. In order to make himself socially acceptable to his new fellow Commissioner, he again distances himself from his past.
About Monday 2 January 1664/65
San Diego Sarah • Link
"Mrs. Martin, and to her lodgings which she has now taken to lie in, in Bow Streete, pitiful poor things, yet she thinks them pretty, and so they are for her condition I believe good enough."
Her condition is, of course, pregnant and alone, since Mr. Martin "is gone to be a paymaster to a company to Portsmouth to serve at sea."
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
About Monday 2 January 1664/65
San Diego Sarah • Link
"Thence, being forced to pay a great deale of money away in boxes (that is, basins at White Hall), ..."
1. Maybe Pepys wasn't prepared and found himself short of cash once this annual tithe was presented to him to pay. Since it seems to have been a surprise, and he hasn't mentioned it in past years, presumably one of the senior Commissioners handled it in the past. In which case, this recognizes his elevated status these days.
2. I'm sure it came out of Petty Cash ultimately, and although he doesn't say so, some of the reimbursement must have attached to his sticky fingers.
3. Interesting boxes are replaced at Whitehall by basins. Boxes are enclosed and private, basins are open and everyone can see how generous/miserly he was being. And services rendered in 1665 will probably be reciprocal.
You need these folk, Pepys. Be generous.
About Bow Street / Thieving Lane
San Diego Sarah • Link
Not a great address, apparently.
Monday 2 January 1665
... Then to the Hall, and there agreed with Mrs. Martin, and to her lodgings which she has now taken to lie in, in Bow Street, pitiful poor things, yet she thinks them pretty, and so they are for her condition I believe good enough. (Her condition is that of being pregnant.)
In 1663 the Cock Tavern on Bow Street was the resort of the rakes of the day, when the house was kept by a woman called "Oxford Kate". Here took place the indecent exposure, which has been told by Johnson, in his Life of Sackville, Lord Dorset. "Sackville, who was then Lord Buckhurst, with Sir Charles Sedley, and Sir Thomas Ogle, got drunk at the Cock, in Bow-street, by Covent-garden, and going into the balcony, exposed themselves to the company in very indecent postures."
About Saturday 31 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
From John Evelyn's Diary:
31st December, 1664. Set my affairs in order, gave God praise for His mercies the past year, and prepared for the reception of the Holy Sacrament, which I partook of the next day, after hearing our minister on the 4th of Galatians, verses 4, 5, of the mystery of our Blessed Savior's Incarnation.
About Saturday 31 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
'"to tear all that I found either boyish or not to be worth keeping." I'm somewhat surprised that books were that disposable then. "or fit to be seen ..." What's up with that?'
re "I'm somewhat surprised that books were that disposable." Pepys lives at the dawn of the scientific age, and he must have looked at some of his old volumes with dated ideas, 'bad' spelling, bizarre vocabulary, etc. with the same shake of the head I have reading my college textbooks.
re "or fit to be seen ..." Well, they did have porn back then, and I suspect Pepys read it. Little survives, but enough to tell us that there were smut publishers. Some of it also came from France and Italy. Now they have been worrying about the plague being in Amsterdam for a year, rumors of it being in Yarmouth started in November, and although not noted by Pepys, the first recorded London death took place in St. Giles on Christmas Eve (see below), so the nagging idea that he should protect his reputation by cleaning up isn't surprising.
Weymouth in Dorset also claims to have been ground zero for the 1665 pestilence -- they have a record of a sailor being brought to shore with it. (Ships had to go through quarantine if they came from an infected port, so how that happened I don't know.)
Yarmouth - https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
"The ... unremarkable recording of the death of Goodwoman Phillips in the parish of St. Giles in the Fields, outside the City walls of London, on Christmas Eve 1664, where parish searchers pronounced her to have died of the plague." (From: The Great Plague – The Story of London’s Most Deadly Year – A. Lloyd Moote & Dorothy C. Moote, John Hopkins University Press 2004.)
Searchers were elderly poor women paid a pittance to look at dead bodies and decide how they died. Many accepted bribes from the family not to say that the person had the plague, so the Bills of Mortality are known not to be accurate.
About Thursday 29 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
After the Restoration John, Baron Belasyse of Worlaby was appointed Lord-Lieutenant of the East Riding of Yorkshire (1660–1673) and Governor of Hull (1661-1673), while from 1665 to 1666 he held the posts of Governor of Tangier and Captain-General of the forces in Africa. He was the Catholic son-in-law of John Paulet, 5th Marquis of Winchester. Pepys didn't think much of him.
About Wednesday 28 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
I think Bess is punishing Pepys with another round of passive-aggressive tactics. I wonder how she will reestablish control of the help after all this joie de vivre. "Fun's over. Wash Day tomorrow. Everyone up at 3. Hewer, what are you doing in the wine cellar with Besse?"
About Wednesday 28 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
I'm with Robert Gertz on the subject of clothes.
For more information about "slops" (barrels of spare clothes loaded onto a ship to be distributed as needed, with the money deducted from the seaman's pay at the end of the voyage) see: https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
About Wednesday 28 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
The Coventry Carol is part of the Feast of the Holy Innocents, celebrated December 28, commemorating the massacre of the young children of Bethlehem ordered by King Herod in an attempt to eliminate the Messiah.
The origins of the Coventry Carol are not clear. It may go back as far as 1392. The lyrics known today are attributed to Robert Croo in 1534 (based on early 19th century copies of a manuscript that was destroyed in 1875), and the music to an unknown composer in 1591. There are conflicting references for this song, but it is known to have been popular in the 16th century in some form, and is still popular today.
A lovely version is available on You Tube, with the Westminster Cathedral Choir: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QI…
Per http://englishhistoryauthors.blog…
About Sir Matthew Hale (Chief Baron of the Exchequer)
San Diego Sarah • Link
During the time of the Diary, Chief Baron of the Exchequer Sir Matthew Hale enjoyed a lot of respect.
In one of his most controversial cases, in March 1662, he presided as judge in the witch trial of two elderly women, Amy Duny and Rose Cullender, in Bury St. Edmunds. During court, three of the children fell into violent screaming fits. In a test away from the jury, the girls were blindfolded and touched by strangers. Tricked into thinking the touches had come from the accused women, the girls had a "bewitched" reaction. The father of one of the girls stated that sorcery was the cause of their mistake.
Sir Matthew refused to allow this evidence to come before the jury -- and failed to give the speech (above) he normally delivered to rape jurors on how easy it is to accuse, and how difficult for the defendant to prove innocence. In fact, he gave the opposite explanation and lectured the jury about the evils of witchcraft. Quickly the jury delivered the expected guilty verdict for 13 counts of witchcraft and sorcery. With the conviction, the children were restored to good health and walked out of the courtroom, healed.
Amy Duny and Rose Cullender were hanged on March 17, 1662.
For more, see http://www.lowestoftwitches.com/t…...
Otherwise, Hale gets high marks. Although he was a pious Puritan, he was selected to defend Laud, Strafford and King Charles, because he was known to be honorable and smart. He lost those cases, but not his reputation. He stayed away from politics and strove to improve the law. As such, Charles II kept him on, and by the time he died his reputation and law theory were recognized to be equal to Sir Edward Coke.
About Sir Matthew Hale (Chief Baron of the Exchequer)
San Diego Sarah • Link
Judge Matthew Hale made this pronouncement which has caused women a lot of trouble ever since:
"It is true that rape is a most detestable crime, and therefore ought severely and impartially to be punished with death; but it must be remembered, that it is an accusation easily to be made, hard to be proved, but harder to be defended by the party accused, tho innocent." -- Judge Sir Matthew Hale (1609 - 1676)
About Tuesday 13 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
Nate Lockwood ... Pepys was in charge of the Petty Cash, and so long as he could make a profit off the deal, I suspect they would have the best candles. They are all working a lot of war-related overtime in the dead of winter, so I think anything that improved productivity would be justified -- including keeping good Newcastle coal in the scuttle.
About Tuesday 13 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
Hi British Rose ... they had a different work ethic in the 17th century. As one of the bosses, Pepys worked until it was done. If there was nothing important to do, and the office was "covered," he could go to the theater or wench chasing. My observation is that there had to be two of the Navy Board in the office all the time (to sign for deliveries, placate angry captains, etc.) because Pepys had to find another one at lunch one day to counter-sign an order. And when he went to Portsmouth for a few days he had to make sure the two MPs had agreed to be in the office before he could leave. He hasn't told us about the Clerks' work schedules.
He does work a lot of "overtime," which is true of exempt managers today. You need to be available to the drones doing the work during the day, and you need quiet time to plot future strategy and read the old files to discover where the bodies are buried.
The weekend, an 8-hour work day, paid overtime and paid holidays are brought to you courtesy of the Union movement in the early 20th century. Having done my share of drudge work, I thank them heartily.
As the Dowager Countess in Downton Abbey said, "What's a weekend?"
About Tuesday 27 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
You didn't know there were Finns in Delaware? At the time Finland and Sweden were one country, and this had been Queen Christina's only toe-hold in the New World:
After some years of uneasy if not unfriendly cohabitation, the Dutch decided to build a fort, Fort Casimir, uncomfortably close to Swedish land.
The dashing governor of New Sweden, Johan Rising, captured Fort Casimir in 1654. In doing so, he inadvertently signed New Sweden’s death sentence.
Enraged, the powerful Governor of New Netherlands, Peter Stuyvesant, attacked New Sweden in 1655. In a matter of weeks, the Swedish governor was forced to surrender, and with that the Swedish foothold on the American continent was gone.
Or not ... during the 17 years Sweden had its colony, close to 1,000 settlers emigrated. The Dutch now controlled the area, but the settlers were still there, speaking Swedish or Finnish to each other, and holding to their customs and traditions.
Their Dutch overlords did not interfere, so everyone coexisted peacefully for over a decade. Perhaps their common love of herring and genever (gin) helped.
In the early 1660’s, the English had resolved their Civil Wars. Peace and the Monarchy were restored, and the government found time to study the situation in America. What they saw, they did not like. Between the northern English colonies (Massachusetts, Rhode Island and present-day Connecticut) and the southern colonies (Virginia and Maryland) was New Netherlands.
The English decided to take control of “their” continent.
In 1664, Delaware – together with the rest of New Netherlands – was taken over by the English. With the English came new colonial administration, new laws – and a new, more practical language. (Already Swedish suffered from being a language few learn to speak.)
The settlers held onto their antiquated Swedish when at home or in church, but as the years passed their language, traditions and customs faded into obscurity – except for one small and extremely utilitarian building: the log cabin.
For more see http://englishhistoryauthors.blog…
About Tuesday 27 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
"The Guinea frigate is returned from New England, & brings news that Nicols hath taken all that remained to the Dutch about Delaware Bay, where he took a fort by storm."
notes from
http://gerard-tondu.blogspot.com/…
October 3, 1664 - Sir Robert Carr (1629-1667) was appointed, with three other commissioners, "to place Delaware and all its inhabitants under the authority of His Majesty the King of England".
Arrived in Delaware Bay on September 30, 1664 with two ships, Sir Robert Carr sailed to the fort of New Amstel with no shots fired, and went up the river to the Finnish colony where he assured its settlers that they would continue to enjoy their farms and herds as under the former jurisdiction. He also guaranteed them that they could trade freely with all the English possessions with the same conditions as those granted to the English people.
The colonists saw their freedom of conscience was protected, and the magistrates were confirmed in their offices for six months.
Sir Robert Carr then held a meeting with Director d’Hinoyossa and the Dutch burghers of New Amstel. They agreed to surrender and took an oath of allegiance to Charles II.
However, Director d’Hinoyossa and the Dutch burghers of New Amstel refused to give up the fort. In the end, it was taken by force, killing three people and wounding some on the Dutch side.
After the fall of New Amster fort, the English soldiers and sailors looted the city despite the oath to its inhabitants. The properties of the Dutch authorities and their partisans were confiscated. The city was renamed New Castle.
When Fort Amstel fell to Sir Robert Carr, inside was found a large inventory of goods. Carr appropriated this booty and claimed for himself the houses, farms and stores seized to the Dutch officials.
October 24, 1664 - Sir Robert Carr was called back in New York and the Gov. of New York, Richard Nicolls, was sent in his place to Delaware to put the house in order.
About Tuesday 27 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
SPOILER ALERT: According to the Bills of Mortality, London’s Dreadful Visitation began 27 December 1664 and ended 19 December 1665.
The Bills of Mortality shaped how people in the 17th century understood the spread of disease, specifically from Parish to Parish. An online exhibition on Pinterest highlights the dramatic increase and decrease in plague deaths each week in 1665 – starting from 21 March 1665 to 12 December 1665 – which is shown in a simple line graph.
A few pages from the Bills of Mortality are shown, for July to September, which record the most shocking increase in plague deaths. It was during the hot summer months of 1665 when the black rat and its fleas rapidly multiplied. However, in the 17th century no one knew this was the source of infection. During this period it was believed that the air was infected, and the dreadful visitation was a punishment from God.
What is most striking about the Great Plague is that it changed the lives of everyone in London – rich, poor, men, women and children. Those who could afford to flee, for example, merchants, doctors and lawyers, escaped the city by land or river.
Others who witnessed and wrote about this devastating period are also explored in the exhibition, including Samuel Pepys, John Evelyn and Daniel Defoe.
There are the remedies recommended by physicians like Doctor Thomas Cocke, who advised the poor to drink ‘hot posset drink’ and ‘wash their mouth and hands with warm water and vinegar’ to avert the infection.
Also, one Doctor George Thomson practiced the dissection of the pestilential body alongside the burning of incense ‘to drive away the infected air.’
The nine engravings by John Dunstall show the last major outbreak of bubonic plague in England. Scenes like these were familiar in London throughout 1665. Nurses treating plague victims, homes that were shut and marked with a red cross, the rich fleeing the city, the burying and mourning of the dead, and survivors returning back to London after the rapid decline in plague deaths.
To visit the Great Plague 1665 board please click on this link: http://pinterest.com/guildhalllib…
About Monday 26 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
I've found more about Sir Matthew Hale's activities:
He was Chief Baron of the Exchequer in March of 1662 when he presiding as judge in the witch trial of two elderly women, Amy Duny and Rose Cullender in Bury St. Edmunds. During court, three of the children fell into violent screaming fits. In a test, the girls were blindfolded and touched by strangers. Tricked into thinking the touches had come from the accused women, the girls had a "bewitched" reaction. The father of one of the girls stated that sorcery was the cause of their mistake.
Sir Matthew refused to allow this evidence to come before the jury -- and failed to give the speech (above) he normally delivered to rape jurors on how easy it is to accuse, and how difficult for the defendant to prove innocence. In fact, he gave the opposite explanation and lectured the jury about the evils of witchcraft. Quickly the jury delivered the expected guilty verdict for 13 counts of witchcraft and sorcery. With the conviction, the children were restored to good health and walked out of the courtroom, healed.
Amy Duny and Rose Cullender were hanged on March 17, 1662.
For more, see http://www.lowestoftwitches.com/t…
Otherwise, Hale gets high marks. Although he was a pious Puritan, he was selected to defend Laud, Wentworth and King Charles, because he was known to be honorable and smart. He lost those cases, but not his reputation. He stayed away from politics and strove to improve the law. As such, Charles II kept him on, and by the time he died his reputation and law theory were recognized to be on a par with Sir Edward Coke.
About Monday 26 December 1664
San Diego Sarah • Link
Adding this below the fun Boxing Day entry is a downer, but following JWB's enlightening citation on "The Law's Resolutions of Women's Rights; Or, the Law's Provision for Women," I feel I must add this legal ruling which still provides the legal basis for deciding rape and assault cases against women in many places. Perhaps T.E. was explaining to women their rights after Judge Hale made this pronouncement?
"It is true that rape is a most detestable crime, and therefore ought severely and impartially to be punished with death; but it must be remembered, that it is an accusation easily to be made, hard to be proved, but harder to be defended by the party accused, tho innocent." -- Judge Sir Matthew Hale (1609 - 1676)