"In my imagination the old provisions were like the worn out ships and rotten food..."
Provisions are food only, 徽柔 .
Butter and cheese in barrels and sea biscuits should be OK. Maybe the beef in brine -- better smell it. If they were still eating pasta, it probably would be fine. For what the Sir Williams are probably selling, see https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
"... Mr. Waith’s perverseness, which did so vex me that I could not sleep at night. But I wrote a letter to him to send to-morrow morning for him to take my money for me, and so with good words I thought to coy with him."
An old trick. When upset, write a letter. DO NOT seal the envelope or put a postage stamp on it. This helps your brain rest as the issues have been clearly expressed; now it doesn't have to remember the details and so you can sleep. In the morning, refreshed, things will probably seem different.
The new trick is NOT to press "send" on the email. Unfortunatley, that discipline is harder than the envelope discipline.
There are some obvious traits: noble birth, charming character, skill in war. And then comes sprezzatura, which is the “one universal rule” concerning graceful behavior: “to avoid affectation to the uttermost”, “to practice in everything a certain nonchalance [sprezzatura]”. ... There is nothing to which we must “give greater care than to conceal art, for if it is discovered, it quite destroys our credit and brings us into small esteem”. He cites the example of classical orators, who, with monologues memorized, pretend to extemporize, as if the language was “springing rather from nature and truth than from study and art; the which, if it had been detected, would have made men wary of being duped by it”.
This is the paradoxical cocktail of qualities in sprezzatura: the achievement of eloquence and honesty through deception and concealment.
Some expressions get close to Castiglione’s ideal: French has 'je ne sais quoi'; Latin, 'ars est celare artem' (it is art to conceal art); Japanese, 'iki', an adjective meaning “subtly elegant, refined with no ostentation”; but nothing captures this aesthetic coolness quite like sprezzatura, which glides off the tongue almost as languidly as the style it describes.
The book was first translated into English by Thomas Hoby in 1561. By 1700 another edition was needed because of the scarcity of copies available.
Although our world looks different to courtly life in Urbino during the Renaissance, these “pages will lack interest only when mankind ceases to be interesting to man, and will reward study so long as the past shall continue to instruct the present and the future”.
I think we may say that Charles II's court excelled at three-quarters of "sprezzatura" -- the achievement of eloquence, deception and concealment. Catherine was accustomed to the honesty part which makes the rest work.
Lying is bad. Arrogance is bad. Gossip should be reined in by a government of the tongue. No one ever wants unsolicited advice.
People who subject others to “jingling puns” mistake wit for the shopworn speech of the low and vulgar.
A prostitute should never be described as such — “an immodest woman” will do.
Galateo ends with prose that shows the author’s grace and manners: “because each of the particulars hitherto mentioned is marked but with a slight degree of error, therefore there can be no great harm in neglecting the whole”. What could be more gauche than instructing a stranger how to act?
Giovanni Della Casa (1503–1556) was a Florentine cleric, born into mercantile wealth with aristocratic origins. After a libertine youth in which he penned obscene poems, he leveraged family connections, which trumped his shaky religious convictions, and found himself appointed Archbishop of Benevento. ... Written between 1552 and 1555, 'Il Galateo' was completed a year before his death. Later, Della Casa asked a nephew to incinerate his compositions, but 'Il Galateo' was published posthumously, with French, Spanish, German, and Latin editions circulating before the century’s turn, and dozens since. ...
Another 16th century Italian book of manners was Baldassare Castiglione’s 'The Book of the Courtier' (1528).
It concerns sprezzatura: While the qualities associated with this Italian word have been praised since the classical era, sprezzatura found an Early Modern patron in Baldassarre Castiglione, whose 'Il Cortegiano' promotes the performance of effortlessness in the highest regard.
In the early 1500s, Castiglione’s treatise achieved widespread renown as a philosophical exploration of etiquette, courtship, and politics. ... “portraying a perfect Courtier, explaining all the conditions and special qualities requisite in one who deserves this title”.
Jeannine's post about Queen Catherine's reluctant ventures into Court life illustrate the problems Charles II and his retinue had in adapting to civilian life back home in England. Ten years on the run must have seemed much more exciting in retrospect; being warm, fed and comfortable now was much less stimulating. However, she was Court-bred and convent-educated, and used to protocol and ceremony.
European manners, such as they were, came from a couple of 16th century Italian books:
'Galatea: or, A Treatise on Politeness and Delicacy of Manners' by Giovanni della Casa made waves in England for centuries. It was first translated into English from Italian in 1576 by Henry Peterson and was immediately taken up by young Oxbridge scholars, who wanted to ditch their reading lists for practical knowledge that would serve them at the Elizabethan court.
Unlike bloodlines, good behavior can be aped, and the popularity of etiquette books speaks not only to a desire for financial reward but also to social mimicry.
The takeaway from Galateo is simple: politeness is the art of pleasing others. Well-bred men neither take “monstrous strides” nor let their hands “hang dangling down”. Indecent and improper men make a habit of “thrusting their hands into their bosoms, or handling any part of their persons which is usually covered”. Loud and messy sneezers were as detested in Della Casa’s time as our own, those people who deign to “sputter in the very faces of those that sit near them”. Spittle, the public paring of fingernails, and flatulence are held in low esteem.
Pages are devoted to table manners. Toothpicks make one look “like a bird going to build his nest”; only “inn-keepers and parasites” express great pleasure when consuming food and wine.
Other examples are less obvious, such as not smelling anything you intend to eat or drink.
The politest personages in Galateo are those who keep the mouth, ears, and eyes free of offensive stimulus — protecting their bodies and those of their peers. The motif is taken to ends that seem odd to the modern-day reader, who is told that it is rude to peruse personal correspondence in front of guests. The logic makes sense, as one should never portray themselves as bored, idle, or distracted in the company of others:, The affront of an acquaintance checking text messages over drinks predates smartphones by several centuries.
In addition to prohibitions of the body, there are dicta regarding the spirit. Men must not be too “thoughtful” — “wrapt up in your own reflections” — or exceedingly sensitive, for to socialize with the latter kind of person is like being “surrounded with the finest glass ware; to which the slightest stroke may be fatal”.
Discussing dreams is boorish, for most people are not “wise men amongst the ancients” but see only “trifling and frivolous” images thrown against the screen of sleep.
I just realized that Jimmy Wales' of Wikipedia aims to follow in the footsteps of the great Sir Francis Bacon, John Evelyn and the early Royal Society: "Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing."
The quest continues. But please post responsibly. Peer review is essential.
You're absolutely right about the CABAL, 徽柔. Louis XIV would never have put up with them. We can't post about them yet -- we've got year's of annotating to go first.
I think Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon was a good man, 徽柔 , and he had kept Charles II reasonably out of trouble, alive, and taught him how to be a king through more than a dozen years on the run.
As an elderly, tired, and gouty, man in 1660-1667 he was confronted by some impossible situations -- a daughter who got caught behaving badly -- young courtiers wanting power and money -- a wealthy neighbor willing to corrupt everyone -- a king who wanted to reward him more than was politically acceptable -- and a politically/religiously divided bankrupt country that needed scapegoats to blame for its ills.
Louis XIV must have kept a lid on many similar underlying influences better. Since he had taken power from his ministers, 徽柔 , I'm not convinced we can "credit" Mazarin and Colbert. In fact, the more I read about Louis' mistresses, scandals, arrogance, family challenges and ill-conceived wars, the more I am puzzled that France was so highly regarded -- beyond the fact that it produced more in tax money than it spent on its people, so Louis could lavish money abroad (buying people being cheaper than wars -- and he did both).
If you can join Stephane in explaining the French side of things, I for one would be very grateful.
Between the 8th and 16th centuries, the oyster became popular with the rich and poor alike. Oysters were often cooked in their liquor (the small pool of clear seawater found in the oysters' cupped shells) with a splash of ale and black pepper.
In the 17th and 18th centuries, oysters were used in many varied dishes. Smaller oysters were often eaten raw, and larger oysters were often used in stews or cooked in pies. Oysters were used with pork or mutton to make sausages. Oysters were stuffed inside fowl, such as turkey or duck, and then roasted; and the oysters' liquor would be poured over the fowl!
Oysters were also pickled for transport to inland towns.
Famous satirist, essayist, poet and author Jonathon Swift (1667 to 1745) once said: "He was a bold man that first ate an oyster." Swift overcame his fear of oysters to become a convert and enthusiastic advocate of oysters: In Swift's most famous book 'Gulliver's Travels' (1726); the main character and ship's captain 'Gulliver' became shipwrecked and landed at a place called Lilliput, where he collected and ate raw oysters on the beach in order to conserve his food provisions. Swift even penned instructions on how to boil oysters: "Take oysters, wash them clean that is wash their shells clean, then put the oysters into an earthen pot, with their hollow sides down, then put this pot into a kettle of water, and so let them boil. Your oysters are boiled in their own liquor, and not mixed with water."
Between the 8th and 16th centuries, the oyster became popular with the rich and poor alike. Oysters were often cooked in their liquor (the small pool of clear seawater found in the oysters' cupped shells) with a splash of ale and black pepper.
In the 17th and 18th centuries, oysters were used in many varied dishes. Smaller oysters were often eaten raw, and larger oysters were often used in stews or cooked in pies. Oysters were used with pork or mutton to make sausages. Oysters were stuffed inside fowl, such as turkey or duck, and then roasted; and the oysters' liquor would be poured over the fowl!
Oysters were also pickled for transport to inland towns.
Famous satirist, essayist, poet and author Jonathon Swift (1667 to 1745) once said: "He was a bold man that first ate an oyster."
Swift overcame his fear of oysters to become a convert and enthusiastic advocate of oysters: In Swift's most famous book 'Gulliver's Travels' (1726); the main character and ship's captain 'Gulliver' became shipwrecked and landed at a place called Lilliput, where he collected and ate raw oysters on the beach in order to conserve his food provisions. Swift even penned instructions on how to boil oysters: "Take oysters, wash them clean that is wash their shells clean, then put the oysters into an earthen pot, with their hollow sides down, then put this pot into a kettle of water, and so let them boil. Your oysters are boiled in their own liquor, and not mixed with water."
Beyond that, you had to be there, LKvM. Sounds like anything went to me.
"... to the Commissioners of Parliament, and there did take some course about having my Lord’s salary paid tomorrow when the Charles is paid off, but I was troubled to see how high they carry themselves, when in good truth nobody cares for them."
This may be because Pepys is forced to take his hat off as he is asking the MPs for a consideration -- and as I recall Sandwich wants 4,000l. that can be a considerable consideration. The Commissioners were sitting there with their hats firmly planted on their heads, with all sorts of agendas and considerations which could lead to a resounding 'no -- Sandwich takes his place at the back of the line'.
I think this exchange led to the "I then to the office, where Sir Williams both and I set about making an estimate of all the officers’ salaries in ordinary in the Navy till 10 o’clock at night."
The Parliamentary Committee wanted to know what other surprises could be handed to them. In which case, they had a good point.
The "Commissioners of the Navy" in this case were Members of Parliament assembled for the sole purpose of paying off the Army and Navy.
They all had brief experience in dealing with the sailors and paperwork, but have discovered it's not as simple as it appeared when they were just helping.
William Jessop has been added as their clerk -- probably serving an equal to Mr. Hayter -- a step-down for a former Admiralty official (secretary to Warwick 1642-5 and to the Admiralty Committee 1645-53), after which he served the Council of State (as Assistant Clerk in 1653, and Clerk 1654-9, 1659-60). From this Parliamentary Committee's point-of-view, he's an educated person to employ behind the scenes to get The Navy Pay done, once-and-for-all. https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Sandwich's request must mean once-and-for-all has been delayed if they pay it.
When Sandwich is out-of-town, he has been leaving Pepys in charge of the household. I expect Pepys to be visiting My Lady frequently until My Lord returns -- with Mr. Shepley et al in tow.
It's good to know neither Mr. Lady nor My Lord held Pepys responsible for not visiting her during the recent riots. From their point-of-view they might have thought he should have stayed at Whitehall and made daily trips to the Navy Office. A little attention/communication would have saved her that expensive trip to a place he was not at.
Et al = and everyone, etcetera.
I agree, we should do our best to communicate clearly with everyone. Pepys is confusing enough to the modern-day native English speaker, so we need to help each other as much as possible.
On average, between 1588 and 1608, more than 10,000 French gentlemen were killed in duels in the name of honor -- and that's just the nobility. That equals 2 noblemen dead every week. It is estimated that 8,000 noblemen died during the reign of Henri IV, 1572 to 1610, with 2,000 dying in 1606 alone and 4,000 dying in 1607.
After Francois I all French Monarchs and the Church tried to end duelling. Edicts were issued which the gentlemen ignored, because the Monarchs then issued lettres de grâce which pardoned the duellists.
Louis XIII and Cardinal de Richelieu stopped the pardons. An edict was published in 1626 stating that 'duels d’honneur' were from now on punishable by death, as a crime against the wishes and laws of the Monarch.
The following year, in 1627, François de Montmorency-Bouteville duelled François d’Harcourt-Beuvron in daylight at the Place Royale. Neither gentlemen was injured, but Montmorency-Bouteville’s second killed d’Harcourt-Beuvron’s second, the Marquis de Bussi d’Amboise. Monsieur d’Harcourt-Beuvron fled to England. But François de Montmorency-Bouteville and his second, both noblemen, were beheaded in public on the Place de Place de Grève.
The death sentence was not always enforced, but everyone knew it could now be the case. The least form of punishment was imprisoned for a indefinite time, or exile -- but the gentlemen still duelled.
Louis XIV hated duels: the purpose of his noblemen was to serve him and not to kill each other over trivialities. Louis made himself the last word in quarrels, and urged his nobles to come to him, which they did -- but they also duelled which he punished. Louis XIV was especially hard on duels among his officers, who were supposed to give their lives for France and not die in stupid duels over who saw which lady first.
Louis XIV declared duels as abolished in 1679 -- nobody cared. Duels were a way for the nobility to claim independence from him as well as for their personal quarrels.
The number of duel-caused deaths dropped between 1685 and 1716 to around 400 a year -- but there were still about 7,000 duels a year. They were just more discreet.
Louis XV and Louis XVI continued to outlaw duels, in vain.
Duelling was forbidden in France, but that did not stop duels from happening. Several French Kings tried, with the harshest punishments, and they all failed including Louis XIV.
Duelling is an old practice, but its purpose varied over the centuries. The oldest type of duel is the 'duel judiciaire'. Someone accused of a crime, or misbehaviour, fights the accuser in single combat. If the accused wins, it is God's showing he is innocent. If the accuser wins, it is God's way of showing he spoke the truth. A third party was the referee and before the duel took place, all parties agreed on terms: was it to the death, to the drawing of first blood, or to a surrender? A 'duel judiciaire' usually occurred when it was impossible to know if the accused was guilty or not. If the duel was not to the death, the losing party would receive a fitting punishment. Only the King could pardon the person.
Obviously this kind of justice was not infallible. The last time such a duel officially took place in France was in 1547. Now duels evolved into 'duels d’honneur'.
As the kings gained power over the nobility, they took over matters of justice and banned 'duel judiciaire'. Now the nobility evolved another way to fight each other -- which also challenged the Monarch’s power.
The most common reason for 'duels d’honneur' were because a noble's honor was offended; either the man himself (as in Sandwich's case) or that of his family, his wife, his children, his servants, his horses, his carriages, or the cabbage growing on his fields. They came up with all sorts of reasons to fight. They could be serious reasons, or something made up just so the gentlemen could fight.
'Duels d’honneur' became fashionable: fencing masters were highly sought after; the cost of swords soared. From the nobility to the bourgeoisie and peasants, everyone duelled -- and the ladies joined in.
By the beginning of the 17th century, duelling had become a big problem. And for every winner, there was a dead or seriously wounded loser. Not only that, the witnesses, called seconds, often were involved in the fighting and also died or were wounded. The dead toll rose.
For example, in 1652, Louis XIV’s cousin, the Duc de Beaufort, duelled the Duc de Nemours, and their seconds got involved. It ended with 10 people fighting: 3 of them died and the rest were wounded, some seriously.
And in 1663, the Prince de Chalais engaged in a duel with the Marquis de La Frette and their seconds got involved. One gentleman, the brother of the Marquis de Montespan (part of the Chalais party), died while the other members of the Chalais party were seriously wounded.
ooops, I should have posted this one tomorrow! Sorry.
This Sir Richard Browne was John Evelyn’s father-in-law, the former owner of Sayes Court, and former Resident from the King in Paris during the Interregnum. https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Chalcography (from Ancient Greek chalcos, meaning copper, and graphein, meaning 'to write'), are engravings on copper plates used for printmaking and illustrations, although the term has also been used of engravings on any type of metal. In 1662 John Evelyn produced “Sculptura, or, The History and Art of Chalcography and Engraving in Copper” which contains a small mezzotint by Prince Rupert known as the 'Little Executioner': the first mezzotint to be published in England. https://www.rct.uk/collection/115…
The Diary of John Evelyn (Vol 1) http://www.gutenberg.org/files/41… EDITED FROM THE ORIGINAL MSS by WILLIAM BRAY M. WALTER DUNNE, PUBLISHER -- WASHINGTON & LONDON COPYRIGHT, 1901
6th February, 1661. To London, to our Society, where I gave notice of the visit of the Danish Ambassador-Extraordinary, and was ordered to return him their acceptance of that honor, and to invite him the next meeting day.
Danish Ambassador Extraordinary, possibly Rosenwing, Henry Wishelme, Danish deputy extraordinary in England in 1661 = https://www.british-history.ac.uk…
Torricelli's experiment was invented in Pisa in 1643 by the Italian scientist Evangelista Torricelli (1608-1647). The purpose of his experiment is to prove that the source of vacuum comes from atmospheric pressure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor…
From one point-of-view, many started out as child actors, don't you think? In 1660, all the actors were starting out. Some were older than others.
In general, poor children had to pay their way at very young ages. I can see an adult actor volunteering his pretentious son for the part. There were lots of orphans, cared for by the parish, who would jump at a chance to do something other than be a chimneysweep. Also the two London cathedrals were attached to schools, so they could educate and develop their choristers. St. Paul's and Westminster Schools exist today, fulfilling the same function. Maybe one of their charges would aspire to acting after his voice broke?
There was talent out there -- parents/guardians would be grateful for (1) the money, and (2) the possibility that the child would have a career or find a sponsor.
Keep reading. Soon there is a further idea/answer, but I'll be chastised for posting spoilers.
Comments
Third Reading
About Thursday 7 March 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
"In my imagination the old provisions were like the worn out ships and rotten food..."
Provisions are food only, 徽柔 .
Butter and cheese in barrels and sea biscuits should be OK. Maybe the beef in brine -- better smell it. If they were still eating pasta, it probably would be fine.
For what the Sir Williams are probably selling, see
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
For the selling of surplus ships, see Candle Auctions:
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
About Thursday 7 March 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
"... Mr. Waith’s perverseness, which did so vex me that I could not sleep at night. But I wrote a letter to him to send to-morrow morning for him to take my money for me, and so with good words I thought to coy with him."
An old trick. When upset, write a letter. DO NOT seal the envelope or put a postage stamp on it. This helps your brain rest as the issues have been clearly expressed; now it doesn't have to remember the details and so you can sleep. In the morning, refreshed, things will probably seem different.
The new trick is NOT to press "send" on the email. Unfortunatley, that discipline is harder than the envelope discipline.
About Monday 30 June 1662
San Diego Sarah • Link
CONCLUSION:
There are some obvious traits: noble birth, charming character, skill in war. And then comes sprezzatura, which is the “one universal rule” concerning graceful behavior: “to avoid affectation to the uttermost”, “to practice in everything a certain nonchalance [sprezzatura]”. ...
There is nothing to which we must “give greater care than to conceal art, for if it is discovered, it quite destroys our credit and brings us into small esteem”. He cites the example of classical orators, who, with monologues memorized, pretend to extemporize, as if the language was “springing rather from nature and truth than from study and art; the which, if it had been detected, would have made men wary of being duped by it”.
This is the paradoxical cocktail of qualities in sprezzatura: the achievement of eloquence and honesty through deception and concealment.
Some expressions get close to Castiglione’s ideal: French has 'je ne sais quoi'; Latin, 'ars est celare artem' (it is art to conceal art); Japanese, 'iki', an adjective meaning “subtly elegant, refined with no ostentation”; but nothing captures this aesthetic coolness quite like sprezzatura, which glides off the tongue almost as languidly as the style it describes.
The book was first translated into English by Thomas Hoby in 1561. By 1700 another edition was needed because of the scarcity of copies available.
Although our world looks different to courtly life in Urbino during the Renaissance, these “pages will lack interest only when mankind ceases to be interesting to man, and will reward study so long as the past shall continue to instruct the present and the future”.
Excerpted from
https://publicdomainreview.org/co…
and
https://publicdomainreview.org/co…
I think we may say that Charles II's court excelled at three-quarters of "sprezzatura" -- the achievement of eloquence, deception and concealment.
Catherine was accustomed to the honesty part which makes the rest work.
About Monday 30 June 1662
San Diego Sarah • Link
PART 2
Lying is bad. Arrogance is bad. Gossip should be reined in by a government of the tongue. No one ever wants unsolicited advice.
People who subject others to “jingling puns” mistake wit for the shopworn speech of the low and vulgar.
A prostitute should never be described as such — “an immodest woman” will do.
Galateo ends with prose that shows the author’s grace and manners: “because each of the particulars hitherto mentioned is marked but with a slight degree of error, therefore there can be no great harm in neglecting the whole”.
What could be more gauche than instructing a stranger how to act?
Giovanni Della Casa (1503–1556) was a Florentine cleric, born into mercantile wealth with aristocratic origins. After a libertine youth in which he penned obscene poems, he leveraged family connections, which trumped his shaky religious convictions, and found himself appointed Archbishop of Benevento. ... Written between 1552 and 1555, 'Il Galateo' was completed a year before his death. Later, Della Casa asked a nephew to incinerate his compositions, but 'Il Galateo' was published posthumously, with French, Spanish, German, and Latin editions circulating before the century’s turn, and dozens since. ...
Another 16th century Italian book of manners was Baldassare Castiglione’s 'The Book of the Courtier' (1528).
It concerns sprezzatura:
While the qualities associated with this Italian word have been praised since the classical era, sprezzatura found an Early Modern patron in Baldassarre Castiglione, whose 'Il Cortegiano' promotes the performance of effortlessness in the highest regard.
In the early 1500s, Castiglione’s treatise achieved widespread renown as a philosophical exploration of etiquette, courtship, and politics. ... “portraying a perfect Courtier, explaining all the conditions and special qualities requisite in one who deserves this title”.
About Monday 30 June 1662
San Diego Sarah • Link
Jeannine's post about Queen Catherine's reluctant ventures into Court life illustrate the problems Charles II and his retinue had in adapting to civilian life back home in England. Ten years on the run must have seemed much more exciting in retrospect; being warm, fed and comfortable now was much less stimulating. However, she was Court-bred and convent-educated, and used to protocol and ceremony.
European manners, such as they were, came from a couple of 16th century Italian books:
'Galatea: or, A Treatise on Politeness and Delicacy of Manners' by Giovanni della Casa made waves in England for centuries. It was first translated into English from Italian in 1576 by Henry Peterson and was immediately taken up by young Oxbridge scholars, who wanted to ditch their reading lists for practical knowledge that would serve them at the Elizabethan court.
Unlike bloodlines, good behavior can be aped, and the popularity of etiquette books speaks not only to a desire for financial reward but also to social mimicry.
The takeaway from Galateo is simple: politeness is the art of pleasing others.
Well-bred men neither take “monstrous strides” nor let their hands “hang dangling down”.
Indecent and improper men make a habit of “thrusting their hands into their bosoms, or handling any part of their persons which is usually covered”.
Loud and messy sneezers were as detested in Della Casa’s time as our own, those people who deign to “sputter in the very faces of those that sit near them”.
Spittle, the public paring of fingernails, and flatulence are held in low esteem.
Pages are devoted to table manners. Toothpicks make one look “like a bird going to build his nest”; only “inn-keepers and parasites” express great pleasure when consuming food and wine.
Other examples are less obvious, such as not smelling anything you intend to eat or drink.
The politest personages in Galateo are those who keep the mouth, ears, and eyes free of offensive stimulus — protecting their bodies and those of their peers. The motif is taken to ends that seem odd to the modern-day reader, who is told that it is rude to peruse personal correspondence in front of guests.
The logic makes sense, as one should never portray themselves as bored, idle, or distracted in the company of others:, The affront of an acquaintance checking text messages over drinks predates smartphones by several centuries.
In addition to prohibitions of the body, there are dicta regarding the spirit. Men must not be too “thoughtful” — “wrapt up in your own reflections” — or exceedingly sensitive, for to socialize with the latter kind of person is like being “surrounded with the finest glass ware; to which the slightest stroke may be fatal”.
Discussing dreams is boorish, for most people are not “wise men amongst the ancients” but see only “trifling and frivolous” images thrown against the screen of sleep.
About The Royal Society
San Diego Sarah • Link
I just realized that Jimmy Wales' of Wikipedia aims to follow in the footsteps of the great Sir Francis Bacon, John Evelyn and the early Royal Society:
"Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing."
The quest continues. But please post responsibly. Peer review is essential.
About Monday 4 March 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
Pepys could pawn it, and make the George's security someone else's problem, which would solve his immediate want of cash.
About Sunday 3 March 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
You're absolutely right about the CABAL, 徽柔. Louis XIV would never have put up with them.
We can't post about them yet -- we've got year's of annotating to go first.
About Sunday 3 March 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
I think Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon was a good man, 徽柔 , and he had kept Charles II reasonably out of trouble, alive, and taught him how to be a king through more than a dozen years on the run.
As an elderly, tired, and gouty, man in 1660-1667 he was confronted by some impossible situations -- a daughter who got caught behaving badly -- young courtiers wanting power and money -- a wealthy neighbor willing to corrupt everyone -- a king who wanted to reward him more than was politically acceptable -- and a politically/religiously divided bankrupt country that needed scapegoats to blame for its ills.
Louis XIV must have kept a lid on many similar underlying influences better. Since he had taken power from his ministers, 徽柔 , I'm not convinced we can "credit" Mazarin and Colbert. In fact, the more I read about Louis' mistresses, scandals, arrogance, family challenges and ill-conceived wars, the more I am puzzled that France was so highly regarded -- beyond the fact that it produced more in tax money than it spent on its people, so Louis could lavish money abroad (buying people being cheaper than wars -- and he did both).
If you can join Stephane in explaining the French side of things, I for one would be very grateful.
About Oysters
San Diego Sarah • Link
Between the 8th and 16th centuries, the oyster became popular with the rich and poor alike. Oysters were often cooked in their liquor (the small pool of clear seawater found in the oysters' cupped shells) with a splash of ale and black pepper.
In the 17th and 18th centuries, oysters were used in many varied dishes. Smaller oysters were often eaten raw, and larger oysters were often used in stews or cooked in pies. Oysters were used with pork or mutton to make sausages. Oysters were stuffed inside fowl, such as turkey or duck, and then roasted; and the oysters' liquor would be poured over the fowl!
Oysters were also pickled for transport to inland towns.
Famous satirist, essayist, poet and author Jonathon Swift (1667 to 1745) once said: "He was a bold man that first ate an oyster."
Swift overcame his fear of oysters to become a convert and enthusiastic advocate of oysters:
In Swift's most famous book 'Gulliver's Travels' (1726); the main character and ship's captain 'Gulliver' became shipwrecked and landed at a place called Lilliput, where he collected and ate raw oysters on the beach in order to conserve his food provisions.
Swift even penned instructions on how to boil oysters: "Take oysters, wash them clean that is wash their shells clean, then put the oysters into an earthen pot, with their hollow sides down, then put this pot into a kettle of water, and so let them boil. Your oysters are boiled in their own liquor, and not mixed with water."
FROM https://simplyoysters.com/oyster-…
About Tuesday 5 March 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
"... how did they eat them?"
Between the 8th and 16th centuries, the oyster became popular with the rich and poor alike. Oysters were often cooked in their liquor (the small pool of clear seawater found in the oysters' cupped shells) with a splash of ale and black pepper.
In the 17th and 18th centuries, oysters were used in many varied dishes. Smaller oysters were often eaten raw, and larger oysters were often used in stews or cooked in pies. Oysters were used with pork or mutton to make sausages. Oysters were stuffed inside fowl, such as turkey or duck, and then roasted; and the oysters' liquor would be poured over the fowl!
Oysters were also pickled for transport to inland towns.
Famous satirist, essayist, poet and author Jonathon Swift (1667 to 1745) once said: "He was a bold man that first ate an oyster."
Swift overcame his fear of oysters to become a convert and enthusiastic advocate of oysters:
In Swift's most famous book 'Gulliver's Travels' (1726); the main character and ship's captain 'Gulliver' became shipwrecked and landed at a place called Lilliput, where he collected and ate raw oysters on the beach in order to conserve his food provisions.
Swift even penned instructions on how to boil oysters: "Take oysters, wash them clean that is wash their shells clean, then put the oysters into an earthen pot, with their hollow sides down, then put this pot into a kettle of water, and so let them boil. Your oysters are boiled in their own liquor, and not mixed with water."
Beyond that, you had to be there, LKvM. Sounds like anything went to me.
FROM https://simplyoysters.com/oyster-…
About Tuesday 5 March 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
"... to the Commissioners of Parliament, and there did take some course about having my Lord’s salary paid tomorrow when the Charles is paid off, but I was troubled to see how high they carry themselves, when in good truth nobody cares for them."
This may be because Pepys is forced to take his hat off as he is asking the MPs for a consideration -- and as I recall Sandwich wants 4,000l. that can be a considerable consideration. The Commissioners were sitting there with their hats firmly planted on their heads, with all sorts of agendas and considerations which could lead to a resounding 'no -- Sandwich takes his place at the back of the line'.
I think this exchange led to the "I then to the office, where Sir Williams both and I set about making an estimate of all the officers’ salaries in ordinary in the Navy till 10 o’clock at night."
The Parliamentary Committee wanted to know what other surprises could be handed to them. In which case, they had a good point.
The "Commissioners of the Navy" in this case were Members of Parliament assembled for the sole purpose of paying off the Army and Navy.
As I recall this Commission included William Prynne MP
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Col. John Birch MP
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
and the Lord Mayor of London, Sir Richard Browne MP
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
They all had brief experience in dealing with the sailors and paperwork, but have discovered it's not as simple as it appeared when they were just helping.
William Jessop has been added as their clerk -- probably serving an equal to Mr. Hayter -- a step-down for a former Admiralty official (secretary to Warwick 1642-5 and to the Admiralty Committee 1645-53), after which he served the Council of State (as Assistant Clerk in 1653, and Clerk 1654-9, 1659-60). From this Parliamentary Committee's point-of-view, he's an educated person to employ behind the scenes to get The Navy Pay done, once-and-for-all.
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Sandwich's request must mean once-and-for-all has been delayed if they pay it.
About Tuesday 5 March 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
"What did Sam and His Lady talk about --"
When Sandwich is out-of-town, he has been leaving Pepys in charge of the household. I expect Pepys to be visiting My Lady frequently until My Lord returns -- with Mr. Shepley et al in tow.
It's good to know neither Mr. Lady nor My Lord held Pepys responsible for not visiting her during the recent riots. From their point-of-view they might have thought he should have stayed at Whitehall and made daily trips to the Navy Office. A little attention/communication would have saved her that expensive trip to a place he was not at.
Et al = and everyone, etcetera.
I agree, we should do our best to communicate clearly with everyone. Pepys is confusing enough to the modern-day native English speaker, so we need to help each other as much as possible.
About Thursday 7 February 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
CONCLUSION:
On average, between 1588 and 1608, more than 10,000 French gentlemen were killed in duels in the name of honor -- and that's just the nobility. That equals 2 noblemen dead every week. It is estimated that 8,000 noblemen died during the reign of Henri IV, 1572 to 1610, with 2,000 dying in 1606 alone and 4,000 dying in 1607.
After Francois I all French Monarchs and the Church tried to end duelling. Edicts were issued which the gentlemen ignored, because the Monarchs then issued lettres de grâce which pardoned the duellists.
Louis XIII and Cardinal de Richelieu stopped the pardons. An edict was published in 1626 stating that 'duels d’honneur' were from now on punishable by death, as a crime against the wishes and laws of the Monarch.
The following year, in 1627, François de Montmorency-Bouteville duelled François d’Harcourt-Beuvron in daylight at the Place Royale. Neither gentlemen was injured, but Montmorency-Bouteville’s second killed d’Harcourt-Beuvron’s second, the Marquis de Bussi d’Amboise.
Monsieur d’Harcourt-Beuvron fled to England.
But François de Montmorency-Bouteville and his second, both noblemen, were beheaded in public on the Place de Place de Grève.
The death sentence was not always enforced, but everyone knew it could now be the case. The least form of punishment was imprisoned for a indefinite time, or exile -- but the gentlemen still duelled.
Louis XIV hated duels: the purpose of his noblemen was to serve him and not to kill each other over trivialities.
Louis made himself the last word in quarrels, and urged his nobles to come to him, which they did -- but they also duelled which he punished.
Louis XIV was especially hard on duels among his officers, who were supposed to give their lives for France and not die in stupid duels over who saw which lady first.
Louis XIV declared duels as abolished in 1679 -- nobody cared. Duels were a way for the nobility to claim independence from him as well as for their personal quarrels.
The number of duel-caused deaths dropped between 1685 and 1716 to around 400 a year -- but there were still about 7,000 duels a year. They were just more discreet.
Louis XV and Louis XVI continued to outlaw duels, in vain.
Excerpted from https://partylike1660.com/duels-t…
About Thursday 7 February 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
Duelling was forbidden in France, but that did not stop duels from happening. Several French Kings tried, with the harshest punishments, and they all failed including Louis XIV.
Duelling is an old practice, but its purpose varied over the centuries. The oldest type of duel is the 'duel judiciaire'. Someone accused of a crime, or misbehaviour, fights the accuser in single combat. If the accused wins, it is God's showing he is innocent. If the accuser wins, it is God's way of showing he spoke the truth. A third party was the referee and before the duel took place, all parties agreed on terms: was it to the death, to the drawing of first blood, or to a surrender?
A 'duel judiciaire' usually occurred when it was impossible to know if the accused was guilty or not. If the duel was not to the death, the losing party would receive a fitting punishment. Only the King could pardon the person.
Obviously this kind of justice was not infallible.
The last time such a duel officially took place in France was in 1547.
Now duels evolved into 'duels d’honneur'.
As the kings gained power over the nobility, they took over matters of justice and banned 'duel judiciaire'.
Now the nobility evolved another way to fight each other -- which also challenged the Monarch’s power.
The most common reason for 'duels d’honneur' were because a noble's honor was offended; either the man himself (as in Sandwich's case) or that of his family, his wife, his children, his servants, his horses, his carriages, or the cabbage growing on his fields. They came up with all sorts of reasons to fight. They could be serious reasons, or something made up just so the gentlemen could fight.
'Duels d’honneur' became fashionable: fencing masters were highly sought after; the cost of swords soared. From the nobility to the bourgeoisie and peasants, everyone duelled -- and the ladies joined in.
By the beginning of the 17th century, duelling had become a big problem. And for every winner, there was a dead or seriously wounded loser. Not only that, the witnesses, called seconds, often were involved in the fighting and also died or were wounded. The dead toll rose.
For example, in 1652, Louis XIV’s cousin, the Duc de Beaufort, duelled the Duc de Nemours, and their seconds got involved. It ended with 10 people fighting: 3 of them died and the rest were wounded, some seriously.
And in 1663, the Prince de Chalais engaged in a duel with the Marquis de La Frette and their seconds got involved. One gentleman, the brother of the Marquis de Montespan (part of the Chalais party), died while the other members of the Chalais party were seriously wounded.
About Wednesday 13 March 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
John Evelyn's Diary belongs today, not yesterday -- sorry!
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
About Tuesday 12 March 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
ooops, I should have posted this one tomorrow! Sorry.
This Sir Richard Browne was John Evelyn’s father-in-law, the former owner of Sayes Court, and former Resident from the King in Paris during the Interregnum. https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Sir Thomas Clayton MP, Warden of Merton College, Oxford = https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Archbishop William Juxon = https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Col. Samuel Tuke, Evelyn’s cousin -- https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Cardinal Jules Mazarin (1602 - 9 March 1661) = https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Miniatures - https://theframeblog.com/2017/12/…
Royal Society = https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Tenerife = https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Rupert and Mezzotinto = https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Chalcography (from Ancient Greek chalcos, meaning copper, and graphein, meaning 'to write'), are engravings on copper plates used for printmaking and illustrations, although the term has also been used of engravings on any type of metal. In 1662 John Evelyn produced “Sculptura, or, The History and Art of Chalcography and Engraving in Copper” which contains a small mezzotint by Prince Rupert known as the 'Little Executioner': the first mezzotint to be published in England. https://www.rct.uk/collection/115…
About Wednesday 6 February 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
The Diary of John Evelyn (Vol 1)
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/41…
EDITED FROM THE ORIGINAL MSS by WILLIAM BRAY
M. WALTER DUNNE, PUBLISHER -- WASHINGTON & LONDON
COPYRIGHT, 1901
6th February, 1661.
To London, to our Society, where I gave notice of the visit of the Danish Ambassador-Extraordinary, and was ordered to return him their acceptance of that honor, and to invite him the next meeting day.
@@@
“Our society” = the Royal Society =
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
Danish Ambassador Extraordinary, possibly Rosenwing, Henry Wishelme, Danish deputy extraordinary in England in 1661 = https://www.british-history.ac.uk…
About Wednesday 16 January 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
Torricelli's experiment was invented in Pisa in 1643 by the Italian scientist Evangelista Torricelli (1608-1647). The purpose of his experiment is to prove that the source of vacuum comes from atmospheric pressure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor…
About Saturday 2 March 1660/61
San Diego Sarah • Link
From one point-of-view, many started out as child actors, don't you think? In 1660, all the actors were starting out. Some were older than others.
In general, poor children had to pay their way at very young ages.
I can see an adult actor volunteering his pretentious son for the part.
There were lots of orphans, cared for by the parish, who would jump at a chance to do something other than be a chimneysweep.
Also the two London cathedrals were attached to schools, so they could educate and develop their choristers. St. Paul's and Westminster Schools exist today, fulfilling the same function. Maybe one of their charges would aspire to acting after his voice broke?
There was talent out there -- parents/guardians would be grateful for (1) the money, and (2) the possibility that the child would have a career or find a sponsor.
Keep reading. Soon there is a further idea/answer, but I'll be chastised for posting spoilers.