"Because this linkage of Jews and Freemasons would prove so controversial and volatile, it is important to examine the Stuart context that fueled the rumors and the reality. Although the question of Stuart sympathy for Catholicism was the burning public issue of the latter part of Charles II's reign, it was intrinsically linked with less known but broader issues of tolerance that would eventually define the "modern" Masonic theme of universal brotherhood. In the Stuart Temple of Wisdom, not only Protestants and Catholics, but Jews and Moslems, would be welcomed as comrades in chivalric fraternity.
"In Tangier, the projected gateway to the Levant, the governors' cooperation with Jewish interpreters was crucial to completion of the great Mole and stone forts, projects of continuing interest to Sir Robert Moray and Christopher Wren."
The "completion" of the Mole is key to this entry. Certainly at the time of agreeing to build the Mole in 1663, Pepys makes no mention of Wren and Moray, and presumably doesn't know them yet. And Charles II's interest in the Jews hasn't been mentioned in any of the annotations on religion and the implementation of the Book of Common Prayer, even though 1666 was only three years away and Millennialism was alive and well in England.
Perhaps I just haven't read enough of the Dairy yet ...
I notice Sam pops up to the Exchange from time to time. Sometimes this leads to something, but like today, sometimes it doesn't. Is it just a nice place to walk to, and get some fresh air, and possibly bump into interesting traders and wealthy people? Maybe he doesn't want to tell the Diary that Elizabeth sent him to get some more red thread? Perhaps he walks passed the book sellers on the way? This would be a way of hearing what 'the people' are talking about. Or perhaps he was fed up with everyone at the office, and his father and the complainer at home, so he just went "out".
On Mondays in 1663 Pepys goes to meetings with James, Duke of York, the Tangier Committee, etc., and he becomes responsible for giving progress up-dates. I wonder if someone took "minutes" of these meetings ... if those notes were circulated to people who couldn't attend ... how he took the presumably large documents and accounts to their offices (i.e. in boxes, or did he take "briefs" in a briefcase?) ...
'Those who stayed at the London headquarters found that the work tended to be less than exciting. The clerks who worked for the corporation were called ‘writers’ because they were copying documents by hand, again and again. Each dispatch — whether the minutes of a meeting or an account — would have to be copied up to five times. ...
'One of the most thorough accounts of the drudgery of office work was given by prolific writer and lifelong Company official Charles Lamb, who worked there from 1792 to 1825. His life at the office was one many of us might recognise: he became chummy with his co-workers and enjoyed the financial stability. But he also was kept awake at night with anxiety over his work, having “terrors” of “imaginary false entries” and account errors. And he dreamed of retirement.
'“I grow ominously tired of official confinement. Thirty years have I served the Philistines, and my neck is not subdued to the yoke. You don’t know how wearisome it is to breathe the air of four pent walls, without relief, day after day, all the golden hours of the day between ten and four, without ease or interposition,” he wrote poet William Wordsworth in 1822. “O for a few years between the grave and the desk!”'
Thursday 31 July 1662 "... At noon Mr. Coventry and I by his coach to the Exchange together; and in Lumbard-street met Captain Browne of the Rosebush: at which he was cruel angry: and did threaten to go to-day to the Duke at Hampton Court, and get him turned out because he was not sailed. But at the Exchange we resolved of eating a bit together, which we did at the Ship behind the Exchange, and so took boat to Billingsgate, and went down on board the Rosebush at Woolwich, and found all things out of order, but after frightening the officers there, we left them to make more haste, and so on shore to the yard, and did the same to the officers of the yard, that the ship was not dispatched. Here we found Sir W. Batten going about his survey, but so poorly and unlike a survey of the Navy, that I am ashamed of it, and so is Mr. Coventry."
Paul Chapin on 1 Aug 2005 • Link • Flag
Coventry and Brown(e) ... I think the "he" that was "cruel angry" was Coventry, angry at Browne because he had not yet sailed the Rosebush for Jamaica as he was supposed to. Coventry threatened to go to the Duke (James) and have Browne dismissed from his command ("turned out") for dereliction of duty. Then over lunch Coventry and Pepys decided to check on the ship, and found her unready for sea ("all things out of order"). They put a scare into the officers, on the ship and in the yard, deciding that that was the most effective way to get things in order and the ship under way.
"Will Griffin tells me this morning that Captain Browne, Sir W. Batten’s brother-in-law, is dead of a blow given him two days ago by a seaman, a servant of his, being drunk, with a stone striking him on the forehead, for which I am sorry, he having a good woman and several small children."
"Up and to the office, and thither came Mr. Coventry and Sir G. Carteret, and among other business was Strutt’s the purser, against Captn. Browne, Sir W. Batten’s brother-in-law, but, Lord! though I believe the Captain has played the knave, though I seem to have a good opinion of him and to mean him well, what a most troublesome fellow that Strutt is, such as I never did meet with his fellow in my life. His talking and ours to make him hold his peace set my head off akeing all the afternoon with great pain. ...
"After dinner came Mrs. Browne, the Captain’s wife, to see me and my wife, and I showed her a good countenance, and indeed her husband has been civil to us, but though I speak them fair, yet I doubt I shall not be able to do her husband much favour in this business of Strutt’s, whom without doubt he has abused."
Mary Ellen -- Wayneman, "my boy", got the beating, and will be leaving next week, per Sam today. William 'Will' Hewer (1642 – 3 December 1715) was one of Samuel Pepys' man-servants, and later Pepys' clerk, before embarking on an administrative career of his own, and they remained friends for Sam's lifetime.
"... they say is removed as to her bed from her own home to a chamber in White Hall, next to the King’s own;" Surely Pepys has known this for a while ... when he and Elizabeth were staying in the Montagu house in Whitehall over New Years, Mrs. Sarah observed Charles II popping in and out of Lady Castlemaine's house next door.
"L&M note that page 47 of the book repeats the common story that Father Sarabras tossed his hat in the air to celebrate the fall of the head of Charles 1, elder son of the Queen Mother." Seems to me Charles I was husband of Henrietta Maria, the now-Queen Mother. But no one else is contesting this ... makes me nervous.
✹ Martin on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag Sam was resolved to get rid of Wayneman, and on Dec. 27 1662 said he would keep him just a week longer. He has said nothing further about this but apparently nothing is in the works. Out of his basic fondness for the boy he seems to have decided to try a little more tough love to see if he will reform. ✹ David A. Smith on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag "he being capable of making a brave man" Judge not by ourselves, but by the 17th-century attitudes toward physical punishment and moral instruction. Whatever one thinks of his tactics, Sam is motivated to improve the lad, and the lad stays (yes, I understand his choices may have been limited). ✹ TerryF on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag What SP did to Wayneman was called 'correction.' ✹ Pedro on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag “yet for all I am afeard it will make the boy never the better” Sam seems to imply that beating may be a trusted way, in those days, of improving the boy. I would love to know if Sam was subjected to the treatment in his youth. ✹ in Aqua Scripto on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag The Military Army/Navy had whippings,100 lashes etc. that were part of the punishment scheme until early 20th Century. ✹ TerryF on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag The status of the lash in the Navy “You say that I am ignoring the time-honored traditions of the Royal Navy? And what might they be? I shall tell you in three words. Rum, buggery, and the lash! Good morning sirs.” - Winston Churchill addressing the Sea Lords, 1912 http://www.clashofarms.com/feargo… ✹ Australian Susan on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag Much is made here of the terrible floggings administered to convicts in the early 19th century, but ... the colony was a military run establishment at the beginning, using military discipline and the floggings were the same as given to members of the Royal Navy at that time. Very brutal. ✹ Jesse on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag "did beat him till I was fain to take breath two or three times" I just finished reading about Uriah Levy http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/…... who's "wish [was] that he be remembered for his singular efforts to abolish the barbarous punishment of flogging in the U.S. Navy, which resulted in Congressional approval of an anti-flogging bill in 1850." http://www.amuseum.org/jahf/virto… . ✹ Paul Dyson on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag salt eel For an interesting, although long, study of the educational use of corporal punishment see the following link. Section 3.5 deals with England up to the 18th Century. http://www.zona-pellucida.com/wil… ✹ in Aqua Scripto on 26 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag For justice and punishment see Old Bailey online: http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/
"Many British clergymen were vehemently opposed to forks; they believed that only human fingers were worthy of touching God's food. Often, when someone died after having used a fork, these clergymen preached that it was God's way of showing His displeasure over the use of such a shocking novelty."
And according to http://www.clanntartan.org/articl…: "The English were quite a bit behind the French in the use of forks, maybe because they were naturally suspicious of things from abroad. ... by the mid 1600's, eating with a fork had nearly become the norm for the upper classes and nobility of England. Then slowly the use trickled down to the craftsmen, merchants, and as styles and customs usually did, eventually reached the poor. Even as forks were gaining in popularity amongst those in the upper classes, many hosts, inns, and even the palaces did not provide table settings for dinner guests. By the mid-1600's cutlery centers such as Sheffield, England were not producing large numbers of forks along with knives and spoons. ... By the end of the 1600's, manufacturers were adding additional tines, usually a third to denote the old custom of eating with just the first three fingers, and sometimes a fourth as we generally see now."
So maybe auntie was old-fashioned or superstitious, and young Sam was eager to show off his modern, fashionable, upper-class ways.
"...my Book Manuscript, which pleases me very much..." If you mean the Diary, Sam, we're much pleased too.
Mr. Gertz, I agree about the diary, but suspect in this case Sam was talking about his labor of love from yesterday: "Up betimes and to my office, where first I ruled with red ink my English “Mare Clausum,” which, with the new orthodox title, makes it now very handsome." After all, he has been tasked with writing and presenting a report on flag protocol.
"With Sir G. Carteret and Sir John Minnes by coach to my Lord Treasurer’s, thinking to have spoken about getting money for paying the Yards; but we found him with some ladies at cards: and so, it being a bad time to speak, we parted, ..."
Different times, indeed. First, did they go to Lord Treasurer Thomas Wriothesley, 4th Earl of Southampton's office or home to ask for money to pay wages? Often it was almost the same place, as in Sam's case. The encyclopedia says the Treasurer's Office was on Broad Street, near the Tower (and the Mint), so that's why they went by coach. Second, you have the inconvenience of no established working times or days ... you did what you had to do to get the job done before someone higher up the pecking order became inconvenienced, or the sailors rioted. I'm surprised Charles II didn't want his money man at Whitehall, but perhaps he didn't want to be nagged?
"Charles II (the supreme leader of fashion, of course)" -- does anyone know when Louis XIV started sending out dolls dressed in mock-ups of his latest fashions? I suspect Louis wanted royalty in other countries to start using French brocades, lace and workmanship, so this was as much marketing as vanity. Anyone know?
Where the young scotchman reading, I slept all the While.....I seem to think Sam has a 'thing' for the Scots people, meaning, that he finds them boring.
Sunday 26 October 1662 (Lord’s day). Up and put on my new Scallop, and is very fine. To church, ... Then to church again, and heard a simple Scot preach most tediously.
"The country side be rather muddy and quiet at this time, so much for hearing the Chaffinch trill around that olde Elm tree bowl." And the bluebells are out ... spring is a magic time in England.
✹ TerryF on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag "Mr Shishe" is Jonas Shish, Asst. Shipwright, Deptford. His Diary name IS a bit deceiving , but he's clearly esteemed; more at the link (including a misspell or two).
✹ in Aqua Scripto on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag There be a small problem for written orders from the Admiralty, they had to be translated into words for Shishe, as it is said he could not read or write, he built by eye.
✹ TerryF on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag Jonas Shish Methinks his surname is as Baltic in origin as are many a naval supply, perhaps a contraction of a surname, as are a host from elsewhere - in this case a Slavic one.
✹ Australian Susan on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag If Mr. Shish is from the Baltic (and not just his name), maybe he could not read or write in English, being Estonian/Latvian/Lithuaian. Do they use cyrillic script?
✹ TerryF on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag Estonians/Latvians/Lithuaians did and do not use Kyrillic until it was imposed on them in 1864 by the Russians, but Shish could be a derivation of Polish, and the Poles were included in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. http://www.scantours.com/lithuani…
✹ gerry on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag Shish is surely a Turkish word as in kebab; it means skewer.
✹ JWB on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag Shish I suggest he carries the German word for dung, the English variant we all know; and being so named, would be a compelling reason to immigrate.
http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1… Saturday 11 April 1663 ... After dinner in comes Captain Lambert of the Norwich, this day come from Tangier, whom I am glad to see. There came also with him Captain Wager, and afterwards in came Captain Allen to see me, of the Resolution.
What struck me was that the three captains all called on Sam at home, not in the office. Maybe they reported to the office first, found he was at lunch, and went over hoping to be fed? Or perhaps all the Captains expected to give Sam some money, and preferred not to do it in the office? Thank goodness it wasn't wash day!
✹ alanB. on 11 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag This visit to The Royal Oak tavern is the first mention of what is now one of the most popular public house names in Britain. Sam has yet to write down Charles II's account of his time in the Boscobel Oak so is this tavern named after the Royal Oak ship, or in tribute to the King's derring-do?
✹ Australian Susan on 12 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag The first Royal Oak ship was launched in 1664, so the pub name predates this, but as the account of Charles II in the oak tree had not yet been written, is this an instance of oral history being used in the pub name? Searching for details of this, I cannot find any mention of WHEN the name came into use, just its derivation. As far as I know, Charles is the only monarch to have an association with an oak tree. (Incidently, the Crown still pays a pension to direct descendents of the Penderel family who assisted Charles at the time of the oak tree episode - and you can still see the hiding place in Boscobell house where he hid). See The Escape of Charles II after the Battle of Worcester by Ollard (Sandwich's biographer). So, this name coming up now seems rather a puzzle. By the way, the first Royal Oak ship was very shortlived - the Dutch sank her in 1667.
✹ Pedro on 22 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag “but as the account of Charles in the oak tree had not yet been written” The legend of the Royal Oak already appears to be common knowledge, as can be seen from the annotation for Leaden Hall Street. At the coronation of Charles II, the first triumphal arch erected in Leadenhall Street, near Lime Street, for the king to pass under on his way from the Tower to Westminster, is described in Ogilby’s contemporary account of the ceremony as having in its center a figure of Charles, royally attired, behind whom, ‘on a large table, is deciphered the Royal Oak bearing crowns and sceptres instead of acorns; amongst the leaves, in a label.
✹ Solomon Key on 7 Oct 2006 • Link • Flag Australian Susan: "By the way, the first Royal Oak ship was very short-lived - the Dutch sank her in 1667." Wrong. The Royal Oak sunk by the Dutch was of the Royal Navy. The Royal Oak referenced by Pepys was of the East India Company and a merchant ship, sunk off the Scilly Isles in 1665: Name of Vessel: Royal Oak Tons: 400 Number of Voyages: 1 Period of Service (Seasons): 1663 Year Lost: 1665 Location: Isles of Scilly See Catalogue of East India Company Ships' Journals and Logs 1600-1834 National Archives: GB/NNAF/O94727 Record Reference: HCA 14/53
Comments
Second Reading
About Tangier Committee
San Diego Sarah • Link
According to this Masonic history site:
http://www.themasonictrowel.com/A…
"Because this linkage of Jews and Freemasons would prove so controversial and volatile, it is important to examine the Stuart context that fueled the rumors and the reality. Although the question of Stuart sympathy for Catholicism was the burning public issue of the latter part of Charles II's reign, it was intrinsically linked with less known but broader issues of tolerance that would eventually define the "modern" Masonic theme of universal brotherhood. In the Stuart Temple of Wisdom, not only Protestants and Catholics, but Jews and Moslems, would be welcomed as comrades in chivalric fraternity.
"In Tangier, the projected gateway to the Levant, the governors' cooperation with Jewish interpreters was crucial to completion of the great Mole and stone forts, projects of continuing interest to Sir Robert Moray and Christopher Wren."
The "completion" of the Mole is key to this entry. Certainly at the time of agreeing to build the Mole in 1663, Pepys makes no mention of Wren and Moray, and presumably doesn't know them yet. And Charles II's interest in the Jews hasn't been mentioned in any of the annotations on religion and the implementation of the Book of Common Prayer, even though 1666 was only three years away and Millennialism was alive and well in England.
Perhaps I just haven't read enough of the Dairy yet ...
About Thursday 30 April 1663
San Diego Sarah • Link
I notice Sam pops up to the Exchange from time to time. Sometimes this leads to something, but like today, sometimes it doesn't. Is it just a nice place to walk to, and get some fresh air, and possibly bump into interesting traders and wealthy people? Maybe he doesn't want to tell the Diary that Elizabeth sent him to get some more red thread? Perhaps he walks passed the book sellers on the way? This would be a way of hearing what 'the people' are talking about. Or perhaps he was fed up with everyone at the office, and his father and the complainer at home, so he just went "out".
About East India Company (English)
San Diego Sarah • Link
On Mondays in 1663 Pepys goes to meetings with James, Duke of York, the Tangier Committee, etc., and he becomes responsible for giving progress up-dates. I wonder if someone took "minutes" of these meetings ... if those notes were circulated to people who couldn't attend ... how he took the presumably large documents and accounts to their offices (i.e. in boxes, or did he take "briefs" in a briefcase?) ...
At the East India Company 200 years later Charles Lamb wrote of his life as a clerk
http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/…
'Those who stayed at the London headquarters found that the work tended to be less than exciting. The clerks who worked for the corporation were called ‘writers’ because they were copying documents by hand, again and again. Each dispatch — whether the minutes of a meeting or an account — would have to be copied up to five times. ...
'One of the most thorough accounts of the drudgery of office work was given by prolific writer and lifelong Company official Charles Lamb, who worked there from 1792 to 1825. His life at the office was one many of us might recognise: he became chummy with his co-workers and enjoyed the financial stability. But he also was kept awake at night with anxiety over his work, having “terrors” of “imaginary false entries” and account errors. And he dreamed of retirement.
'“I grow ominously tired of official confinement. Thirty years have I served the Philistines, and my neck is not subdued to the yoke. You don’t know how wearisome it is to breathe the air of four pent walls, without relief, day after day, all the golden hours of the day between ten and four, without ease or interposition,” he wrote poet William Wordsworth in 1822. “O for a few years between the grave and the desk!”'
About Capt. John Browne (c)
San Diego Sarah • Link
Thursday 31 July 1662
"... At noon Mr. Coventry and I by his coach to the Exchange together; and in Lumbard-street met Captain Browne of the Rosebush: at which he was cruel angry: and did threaten to go to-day to the Duke at Hampton Court, and get him turned out because he was not sailed. But at the Exchange we resolved of eating a bit together, which we did at the Ship behind the Exchange, and so took boat to Billingsgate, and went down on board the Rosebush at Woolwich, and found all things out of order, but after frightening the officers there, we left them to make more haste, and so on shore to the yard, and did the same to the officers of the yard, that the ship was not dispatched. Here we found Sir W. Batten going about his survey, but so poorly and unlike a survey of the Navy, that I am ashamed of it, and so is Mr. Coventry."
Paul Chapin on 1 Aug 2005 • Link • Flag
Coventry and Brown(e) ... I think the "he" that was "cruel angry" was Coventry, angry at Browne because he had not yet sailed the Rosebush for Jamaica as he was supposed to. Coventry threatened to go to the Duke (James) and have Browne dismissed from his command ("turned out") for dereliction of duty.
Then over lunch Coventry and Pepys decided to check on the ship, and found her unready for sea ("all things out of order"). They put a scare into the officers, on the ship and in the yard, deciding that that was the most effective way to get things in order and the ship under way.
About Capt. John Browne (c)
San Diego Sarah • Link
Monday 27 April 1663
"Will Griffin tells me this morning that Captain Browne, Sir W. Batten’s brother-in-law, is dead of a blow given him two days ago by a seaman, a servant of his, being drunk, with a stone striking him on the forehead, for which I am sorry, he having a good woman and several small children."
Not surprised he came to a bad end!
About Capt. John Browne (c)
San Diego Sarah • Link
Tuesday 16 December 1662
"Up and to the office, and thither came Mr. Coventry and Sir G. Carteret, and among other business was Strutt’s the purser, against Captn. Browne, Sir W. Batten’s brother-in-law, but, Lord! though I believe the Captain has played the knave, though I seem to have a good opinion of him and to mean him well, what a most troublesome fellow that Strutt is, such as I never did meet with his fellow in my life. His talking and ours to make him hold his peace set my head off akeing all the afternoon with great pain. ...
"After dinner came Mrs. Browne, the Captain’s wife, to see me and my wife, and I showed her a good countenance, and indeed her husband has been civil to us, but though I speak them fair, yet I doubt I shall not be able to do her husband much favour in this business of Strutt’s, whom without doubt he has abused."
About Monday 27 April 1663
San Diego Sarah • Link
Mary Ellen -- Wayneman, "my boy", got the beating, and will be leaving next week, per Sam today. William 'Will' Hewer (1642 – 3 December 1715) was one of Samuel Pepys' man-servants, and later Pepys' clerk, before embarking on an administrative career of his own, and they remained friends for Sam's lifetime.
About Saturday 25 April 1663
San Diego Sarah • Link
"... they say is removed as to her bed from her own home to a chamber in White Hall, next to the King’s own;" Surely Pepys has known this for a while ... when he and Elizabeth were staying in the Montagu house in Whitehall over New Years, Mrs. Sarah observed Charles II popping in and out of Lady Castlemaine's house next door.
About Saturday 25 April 1663
San Diego Sarah • Link
"L&M note that page 47 of the book repeats the common story that Father Sarabras tossed his hat in the air to celebrate the fall of the head of Charles 1, elder son of the Queen Mother." Seems to me Charles I was husband of Henrietta Maria, the now-Queen Mother. But no one else is contesting this ... makes me nervous.
About Salt eel
San Diego Sarah • Link
More on sale eels, floggings and "correction":
✹ Martin on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
Sam was resolved to get rid of Wayneman, and on Dec. 27 1662 said he would keep him just a week longer. He has said nothing further about this but apparently nothing is in the works. Out of his basic fondness for the boy he seems to have decided to try a little more tough love to see if he will reform.
✹ David A. Smith on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
"he being capable of making a brave man" Judge not by ourselves, but by the 17th-century attitudes toward physical punishment and moral instruction. Whatever one thinks of his tactics, Sam is motivated to improve the lad, and the lad stays (yes, I understand his choices may have been limited).
✹ TerryF on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
What SP did to Wayneman was called 'correction.'
✹ Pedro on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
“yet for all I am afeard it will make the boy never the better” Sam seems to imply that beating may be a trusted way, in those days, of improving the boy. I would love to know if Sam was subjected to the treatment in his youth.
✹ in Aqua Scripto on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
The Military Army/Navy had whippings,100 lashes etc. that were part of the punishment scheme until early 20th Century.
✹ TerryF on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
The status of the lash in the Navy “You say that I am ignoring the time-honored traditions of the Royal Navy? And what might they be? I shall tell you in three words. Rum, buggery, and the lash! Good morning sirs.” - Winston Churchill addressing the Sea Lords, 1912 http://www.clashofarms.com/feargo…
✹ Australian Susan on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
Much is made here of the terrible floggings administered to convicts in the early 19th century, but ... the colony was a military run establishment at the beginning, using military discipline and the floggings were the same as given to members of the Royal Navy at that time. Very brutal.
✹ Jesse on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
"did beat him till I was fain to take breath two or three times" I just finished reading about Uriah Levy http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/…... who's "wish [was] that he be remembered for his singular efforts to abolish the barbarous punishment of flogging in the U.S. Navy, which resulted in Congressional approval of an anti-flogging bill in 1850." http://www.amuseum.org/jahf/virto… .
✹ Paul Dyson on 25 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
salt eel For an interesting, although long, study of the educational use of corporal punishment see the following link. Section 3.5 deals with England up to the 18th Century. http://www.zona-pellucida.com/wil…
✹ in Aqua Scripto on 26 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
For justice and punishment see Old Bailey online: http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/
About Wednesday 22 April 1663
San Diego Sarah • Link
Forks were a recent addition to tableware. According to http://www.askandyaboutclothes.co…
"Many British clergymen were vehemently opposed to forks; they believed that only human fingers were worthy of touching God's food. Often, when someone died after having used a fork, these clergymen preached that it was God's way of showing His displeasure over the use of such a shocking novelty."
And according to http://www.clanntartan.org/articl…:
"The English were quite a bit behind the French in the use of forks, maybe because they were naturally suspicious of things from abroad. ... by the mid 1600's, eating with a fork had nearly become the norm for the upper classes and nobility of England. Then slowly the use trickled down to the craftsmen, merchants, and as styles and customs usually did, eventually reached the poor. Even as forks were gaining in popularity amongst those in the upper classes, many hosts, inns, and even the palaces did not provide table settings for dinner guests. By the mid-1600's cutlery centers such as Sheffield, England were not producing large numbers of forks along with knives and spoons. ... By the end of the 1600's, manufacturers were adding additional tines, usually a third to denote the old custom of eating with just the first three fingers, and sometimes a fourth as we generally see now."
So maybe auntie was old-fashioned or superstitious, and young Sam was eager to show off his modern, fashionable, upper-class ways.
About Wednesday 22 April 1663
San Diego Sarah • Link
"...my Book Manuscript, which pleases me very much..." If you mean the Diary, Sam, we're much pleased too.
Mr. Gertz, I agree about the diary, but suspect in this case Sam was talking about his labor of love from yesterday: "Up betimes and to my office, where first I ruled with red ink my English “Mare Clausum,” which, with the new orthodox title, makes it now very handsome." After all, he has been tasked with writing and presenting a report on flag protocol.
About Monday 20 April 1663
San Diego Sarah • Link
"With Sir G. Carteret and Sir John Minnes by coach to my Lord Treasurer’s, thinking to have spoken about getting money for paying the Yards; but we found him with some ladies at cards: and so, it being a bad time to speak, we parted, ..."
Different times, indeed. First, did they go to Lord Treasurer Thomas Wriothesley, 4th Earl of Southampton's office or home to ask for money to pay wages? Often it was almost the same place, as in Sam's case. The encyclopedia says the Treasurer's Office was on Broad Street, near the Tower (and the Mint), so that's why they went by coach. Second, you have the inconvenience of no established working times or days ... you did what you had to do to get the job done before someone higher up the pecking order became inconvenienced, or the sailors rioted. I'm surprised Charles II didn't want his money man at Whitehall, but perhaps he didn't want to be nagged?
About Sunday 19 April 1663
San Diego Sarah • Link
"Charles II (the supreme leader of fashion, of course)" -- does anyone know when Louis XIV started sending out dolls dressed in mock-ups of his latest fashions? I suspect Louis wanted royalty in other countries to start using French brocades, lace and workmanship, so this was as much marketing as vanity. Anyone know?
About Sunday 19 April 1663
San Diego Sarah • Link
JudithS on 20 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
Where the young scotchman reading, I slept all the While.....I seem to think Sam has a 'thing' for the Scots people, meaning, that he finds them boring.
In passing I found one example, "http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1…
Sunday 26 October 1662 (Lord’s day).
Up and put on my new Scallop, and is very fine. To church, ... Then to church again, and heard a simple Scot preach most tediously.
About Thursday 16 April 1663
San Diego Sarah • Link
"The country side be rather muddy and quiet at this time, so much for hearing the Chaffinch trill around that olde Elm tree bowl." And the bluebells are out ... spring is a magic time in England.
About Jonas Shish
San Diego Sarah • Link
✹ TerryF on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
"Mr Shishe" is Jonas Shish, Asst. Shipwright, Deptford. His Diary name IS a bit deceiving , but he's clearly esteemed; more at the link (including a misspell or two).
✹ in Aqua Scripto on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
There be a small problem for written orders from the Admiralty, they had to be translated into words for Shishe, as it is said he could not read or write, he built by eye.
✹ TerryF on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
Jonas Shish Methinks his surname is as Baltic in origin as are many a naval supply, perhaps a contraction of a surname, as are a host from elsewhere - in this case a Slavic one.
✹ Australian Susan on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
If Mr. Shish is from the Baltic (and not just his name), maybe he could not read or write in English, being Estonian/Latvian/Lithuaian. Do they use cyrillic script?
✹ TerryF on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
Estonians/Latvians/Lithuaians did and do not use Kyrillic until it was imposed on them in 1864 by the Russians, but Shish could be a derivation of Polish, and the Poles were included in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. http://www.scantours.com/lithuani…
✹ gerry on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
Shish is surely a Turkish word as in kebab; it means skewer.
✹ JWB on 16 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
Shish I suggest he carries the German word for dung, the English variant we all know; and being so named, would be a compelling reason to immigrate.
About Norwich
San Diego Sarah • Link
http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1…
Saturday 11 April 1663
... After dinner in comes Captain Lambert of the Norwich, this day come from Tangier, whom I am glad to see. There came also with him Captain Wager, and afterwards in came Captain Allen to see me, of the Resolution.
About Saturday 11 April 1663
San Diego Sarah • Link
What struck me was that the three captains all called on Sam at home, not in the office. Maybe they reported to the office first, found he was at lunch, and went over hoping to be fed? Or perhaps all the Captains expected to give Sam some money, and preferred not to do it in the office? Thank goodness it wasn't wash day!
About Royal Oak (Lombard St)
San Diego Sarah • Link
✹ alanB. on 11 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
This visit to The Royal Oak tavern is the first mention of what is now one of the most popular public house names in Britain. Sam has yet to write down Charles II's account of his time in the Boscobel Oak so is this tavern named after the Royal Oak ship, or in tribute to the King's derring-do?
✹ Australian Susan on 12 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
The first Royal Oak ship was launched in 1664, so the pub name predates this, but as the account of Charles II in the oak tree had not yet been written, is this an instance of oral history being used in the pub name? Searching for details of this, I cannot find any mention of WHEN the name came into use, just its derivation. As far as I know, Charles is the only monarch to have an association with an oak tree. (Incidently, the Crown still pays a pension to direct descendents of the Penderel family who assisted Charles at the time of the oak tree episode - and you can still see the hiding place in Boscobell house where he hid). See The Escape of Charles II after the Battle of Worcester by Ollard (Sandwich's biographer). So, this name coming up now seems rather a puzzle.
By the way, the first Royal Oak ship was very shortlived - the Dutch sank her in 1667.
✹ Pedro on 22 Apr 2006 • Link • Flag
“but as the account of Charles in the oak tree had not yet been written”
The legend of the Royal Oak already appears to be common knowledge, as can be seen from the annotation for Leaden Hall Street. At the coronation of Charles II, the first triumphal arch erected in Leadenhall Street, near Lime Street, for the king to pass under on his way from the Tower to Westminster, is described in Ogilby’s contemporary account of the ceremony as having in its center a figure of Charles, royally attired, behind whom, ‘on a large table, is deciphered the Royal Oak bearing crowns and sceptres instead of acorns; amongst the leaves, in a label.
✹ Solomon Key on 7 Oct 2006 • Link • Flag
Australian Susan: "By the way, the first Royal Oak ship was very short-lived - the Dutch sank her in 1667."
Wrong. The Royal Oak sunk by the Dutch was of the Royal Navy. The Royal Oak referenced by Pepys was of the East India Company and a merchant ship, sunk off the Scilly Isles in 1665:
Name of Vessel: Royal Oak
Tons: 400
Number of Voyages: 1
Period of Service (Seasons): 1663
Year Lost: 1665
Location: Isles of Scilly
See Catalogue of East India Company Ships' Journals and Logs 1600-1834
National Archives: GB/NNAF/O94727
Record Reference: HCA 14/53