jeannine

Articles

jeannine has written 14 articles:

Encyclopedia topics

jeannine has written summaries for eight topics:

Annotations and comments

jeannine has posted 1,236 annotations/comments since 16 June 2004.

Comments

First Reading

About Saturday 11 February 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

“Journals of the Earl of Sandwich” edited by R.C. Anderson

11th. Saturday. Wind at W.S.W. fresh but little sea. Thick sleety weather, not cold. At noon S.W. cold and fresh. At 2 oclock in the afternoon weighed and anchored again in Southwold Bay in the evening. We ran this day W.N.W. ½ northerly, 7.5 leagues.
In the Southwold Bay a S.S.E. moon makes high water. It runs whole tide. The stream of the tide sets. S.S.W. and N. N.E.

About Thursday 9 February 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

“Journals of the Earl of Sandwich” edited by R. C. Anderson

9th. Thursday. The wind at west. In the morning in the fairway between Yarmouth sands and Flushing, turning to and again to get Sould Bay. About 2 oclock in the afternoon the Mermaid, ahead of us a league and ½ to the westward of us on our weather bow, ran over the Galloper in 17 foot water. We had 17, 16 and 15 fathom. Tacked and stood for the North Foreland. We could make but a S. by West way at the sunset had run by judgment about 8 leagues and we thought we saw the North Foreland W. & by S. 7 leagues off. [Marginal note: but it was at least 11 leagues off S.W.] Came then to an anchor in 25 fathom sandy ground. The flood ran there to the east north east and the flood is done at S.W. moon, and the Rear Admiral Teddiman says it is a ½ tide and half ¼ tide.
I spoke with Capt. King (of the Mermaid) and he says he thinks it must be the Galloper sand that he went over, but says he never met with like soundings. He had 15, 14 fathom, then 5 fathom, over it 15 fathom again (Standing N.W.). Then, tacking to give me notice, he came over again in 17 foot when it was ¾ flood, so that upon a low water there was not above 7 foot water, which seems strange to us all.

About Friday 10 February 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

“Journals of the Earl of Sandwich” edited by R.C. Anderson

10th. Friday. Weighed anchor about 10 oclock, course N. by E. Before 12 we had the shoaling of 16 fathom, about 3 oclock 10 fathom. 4 oclock we came into 18 and 21 fathom and in 20 fathom came to an anchor. Wind a hard gale at S.W. & by S. A S.S.E. moon made full sea, but it ran flood south. The Rear Admiral accounts the ship to be W. ½ southerly from Oxfordness about 9 leagues off. The stream of the tide wan N.E. by N. and S.W. by S. We ran this day from out last anchoring to our anchoring this evening N. by E. 7.5 leagues. This day the Dutch fleet are reported to be gone in again to Flushing.

About Thursday 9 February 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

Today Charles writes to his newly pregnant sister Minette. He mixes words of war and the birth of her child, which he hopes will be a son. He also gives a dig to the Duchess of York who had the nerve to recently give birth to a daughter instead of a son! From Ruth Norrington’s’My Derest Minette”

9 February 1665

I must, in the first place, aske your pardon for having mist so many posts, the truth of it is, which betweene businesse and the little mascarades we have had, and besides the little businesse I had to write, with the helpe of the cold wether, I did not think it worth your trouble and my owne to freeze my fingers for nothing, haveing sayd all to Ruvingy that was upon my harte. I am very glad to find by yours that you are well satisfied with what he brings, it lies wholy on your part now to answer the advances I have made, and if all be not as you wish, the faute is not on my side, I was this morning at the parlament house, to passe the Bill for the five and twenty hundered thousand pounds, and the commissioners are going into there several countryes, for the raysing of it according to the Act. We are useing al possible diligence in the setting out of the fleete for the spring. My Lrd Sandwich sett sail two dayes since, with 18 good ships to seeke out a squadron of the Dutch fleete, wch heare was seene upon the north coast of England, and if he had the good fortune to meet with them, I hope he will give a good accounte of them. I am very glad to here that your indisposition of health is turned into a greate belly. I hope you will have better lucke with it then the Duchesse heere had, who was brought to bed, monday last, of a girle. One part I shall wish for you to have, which is that you may have as easy a labour, for she dispatched her businesse in little more than an houer. I am afraide your shape is not so advantageously made for that convenience as hers is, however a boy will recompense two grunts more, and so good night, for feare I fall into naturale philosophy, before I thinke to. I am Yours. C.R.

About Wednesday 8 February 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

“Journals of the Earl of Sandwich” edited by R.C. Anderson

8th. Wednesday. Wind at South west. Early in the morning we saw the London and Montagu sail past the Knock and then by advice of a Council of War sailed with the fleet towards the Downs. About noon the Guernsey came to me with letters from Margate.
Another Council of War, and resolved to sail according to the proposition in Mr. Coventry’s letter. Executed accordingly.

About Monday 6 February 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

"Journals of the Earl of Sandwich” edited by R.C. Anderson

6th. Monday. This morning I removed myself out of London into the Revenge. Little wind till the evening. Then a gale at S.S.E. The fleet sailed to accompany the London and Montagu to the Longsand head. We all came to an anchor some 5 leagues N.E. eastwardly from the North Foreland. At midnight the wind southerned and blew hard.

About Saturday 4 February 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

"Was he really a pirate at one time, before the restoration?"

Margaret, as Pedro mentions Rupert was not a 'pirate' but perhaps more of a 'privateer'. This link explains the difference pretty well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priv…

Under Charles I most of Rupert's activity was on land, where he built up an amazing reputation as an army leader. In 1647 his career as an army officer came to an end and he became an Admiral, or a "general-at-sea' as the role was often called then.

Kitson, in his book “Prince Rupert Admiral and General-at-Sea” explains that “When Rupert first took charge of the Royalist fleet at the end of 1648, the Commonwealth government was firmly established in England. For the next four and a half years he kept the Royalist flag flying in the approaches to the Channel, the Mediterranean, the Atlantic and the Caribbean, with no base, harried by Parliamentary commanders like Blake, Ayscue and Penn and subjected to the violence of the elements as well as the enemy. It was a tremendous achievement and illustration of endurance and courage of epic proportions, even though it did little to advance the Royalist cause at the time.”

While at sea, and in the course of confrontations or battles, it was common for ships to get taken over and for any goods on board taken in the process. In the case of people like Carteret and Rupert, a percentage of that was given to the King (or in the case of Charles, when he was Prince of Wales, in his exile). For Rupert it was part of his naval activity where for Carteret, who had a Letter of Marque, it was almost a business. While Charles was in exile, he really needed any money that he could get and authorizing this ‘pirating’ under the name of being a ‘privateer’ or under military action on his behalf was a welcome cash flow when it worked out in his favor.

And as an aside, Rupert had such a fearful reputation that many of the stories about him got blown out of proportion. His stature (about 6’ 5’’) and dark hair gave him a physically striking presence. He also had a very strong temper (which somewhat mellowed with age) and many people even within the Royalist cause were very jealous of him. His army troops and seamen, however, tended to be very loyal to him. Most of what Sam records about him does not align with the actual history. In the case of Sam, for some unknown reason, Rupert starts out in his Diary on a bad footing and never regains it, but rather continues to be the subject of slander from Sam. We also need to understand that Sam often gets his gossip from very biased parties and tends to record it in a way that sounds so factual that one may just believe it to be true.

About Saturday 4 February 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

“Pepys doesn’t know it, but this passage is at odds in what it says of what the King did and said.”, Yes Terry, in regards to Rupert, Sam is once again off in his information.

All information& quotes from “Prince Rupert :The Last Cavalier” by Charles Spencer

Rupert arrived in Newark and the King had lost control of the town. “Sir John Oglander, a Royalist knight, witnessed similar debauchery elsewhere: ”Truly all, of the greatest part, of the Kings’ commanders, were so debased by drinking, whoring and swearing that no man could expect God’s blessings on their actions.’ When Charles tried to establish order, he was ignored.

A large welcoming party greeted Rupert outside the town walls, while the king skulked inside. Rupert rode into Newark, dismounted, and to the consternation of Sir Edward Walker, an eyewitness, ‘comes straight into the [King’s] presence, and without any usual ceremony, tells his Majesty that he has come to render an account of the loss of Bristol,’ Charles refused to acknowledge his nephew’s presence and, appalled by his insolence, walked silently to his supper chair, Rupert eagerly trying to open a dialogue. The king started to eat and addressed only Maurine [Rupert’s younger brother].

Rupert’s persistence eventually won through, thought, and Charles agreed to his request for a court martial. Sitting in judgment were seven Royalist grandees, including the Earl of Linsey (son of the general slain at Edgehill), Lord Astley, Lord Gerard, Sir Richard Willis (governor of Newark), Lord Bellasis, and John Ashbeunham. Bellasis and Ashburnham were Digby’s men [note:Digby is Rupert’s political enemy and had become favored by Charles I at this time], but the court martial’s verdict was unanimous: the prince was declared innocent of cowardice and treachery. The panel accepted that Rupert would have defended Bristol’ to the last man: though the tender regard he had to the preservation of so many officers and soldiers, was the chief reason that induced him to capitulate for the whole; they having so long and faithfully served us.’ Charles’s counterclaim – that he would have saved the city if his nephew had held out for longer – was rejected.

On 21 October the king was obliged to sign the humiliating verdict. He then declared he would be leaving for Oxford. His parting shot was the dismissal of Willis as governor, and his replacement by Digby’s acolyte, Bellasis……”

Rupert, Gerard and about 20 followers set upon the King as Willis’s friendship to him had cost him his position. John Evelyn’s Diary then recorded that “Digby’s character, however, was supported by Bellasis, the governor, and several others, but the Princes, Rupert and Maurice, side with Gerard. At length swords were drawn, and the King rushed to part them… ‘

Private conversations between the King, Rupert and Maurice took place and the Princes finally determined that “Digby and his faction are too firmly in favour for the king to treat them favourably or honourably. With regret they decide to quit Newark.

The king watched from the castle window as the princes led away 400 of his supporters. Eyewitnesses recalled seeing tears in Charles’s eyes as the columns rode off.”

About Friday 3 February 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

Quotes from “All for the King” by Balleine (bio about Sir George Carteret)….

References to Phillip…

“When Pepys became intimate with the family in 1663, it consisted wholly of girls. The two elder brothers were in the Navy, Philip as Lieutenant of the ‘Foresight’ and James in the “Royal Prince’.

Balleine provides this summary to date

“When Pepys left Cambridge, the Earl of Sandwich, Admiral of the Blue, had taken him into his household to help his wife in her business affairs, while the Admiral was at sea. In this way he grew friendly with the family, and little Jemimah, one of the children, was his special pet. She taught him cribbage, and he took her to see the monkeys at Bartholomew Fair and the lions in the Tower. Now however she was seventeen, and he was Secretary of the Navy Board. In February 1665 her mother sounded him as to whether Sir George would welcome a marriage between Jemimah and his eldest son, but nothing could be done till Lord Sandwich returned from his cruise….”

This potential match, as proposed by Lady Sandwich , shows that she has “a lot on the ball”. Not only is Sir George a wealthy man, but he is a very devoted and loving father who is not part of the ‘libertines’ of the Court, etc. From all indications, both Philip and Jemimah seem to be ‘nice’ people who could be well suited for each other. From a political perspective this would be a ‘win’ as it would strengthen the tie between Lord Sandwich and Sir George (who always seems to remain in the favor of the King). As Sandwich has been a “Clarendon” man and Clarendon’s political stance is in question these days, Sandwich could always use any additional ‘friends’ in the political circle that he can get.

The Balleine entry goes on with the details to come, which I’ll try to remember to add in the future. Of note, this potential match is something that we do want to pay special attention to see how this unfolds. It will be a delightful read and is noted by many to be one of the highlights of the Diary.

About Monday 30 January 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

This is probably what Towser would have looked like ...

Susan when I saw the 5th picture down I wanted to tell the lady behind the dog that she should run! There's a saying that people tend to look like their dogs and unless she wants jowls hanging down to her knees those 'gentle giants' aren't the way to go!!

Actually any barking type of dog is a 'good house defense' against a burglar-either large or small. If they make a lot of noise that's exactly what someone wouldn't want to hear when they broke into your house. I am curious where Sam's current dog is and if she made any noise.

Our old neighbors had a huge doberman pinscher that looked horribly mean. One time the owner locked herself out of the house and went to 'break in' through the back door. She was curious as to what the dog would do so she said nothing. She hit the glass and the silent dog peed all over the rug, took off and was cowering behind a bed when she finally found him.

We used to have a house broken rabbit and he would make a huge sound (thumping-sounded like a hammer hitting the floor) whenever something went 'boom' in the night. We'd wake up, on would go the lights and we'd have to go calm him down. For all I know he could have been scaring away someone in the process too. We used to joke that a burglar would probably trip over him in the process of breaking in and we'd, of course be sued!

About Monday 30 January 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

"Wonder what Sam has in mind for security?"

Well Martin, usually he relies on one of his little female servants to protect him! (Wish I could find the entry when this last happened).

It's surprising that Sam returned home at all. In the bravery department our hero seems the type who lives by that famous saying, "he who turns and runs away lives to run another day"...

"Am I understanding it correctly in thinking that Mercer came to him at about midnight, and then our mighty Clerk of the Acts was paralyzed with fear for two hours, finally coming home at 2 a.m.? Lord knows what could have happened to Elizabeth and the rest of his “family” during those two hours…"

Well Todd, we can only hope that Elizabeth was having her own tryst and actually entertaining Mr. Pembleton will full knowledge that Sam would be shaking in his boots and not show up for awhile.....beats meeting someone in a blind alehouse.....

About Saturday 28 January 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

” … His claim to have saved money for the King ignores the fact that calico was inferior to bewpers: see B. Pool, ‘Navy Office Contracts, 1660-1832,’ p. 39.”

A little off topic and a spoiler, but Michael brings up a good point here. As corners are cut and money is pocketed Sam doesn't show any thought to the effects of using poor quality materials. This comment reminds me of Prince Rupert's biographies and some of the issues to come as men actually go to battle and are stuck using the sub-standard supplies that Sam contracted for. You can't fight a war without being able to supply your ships and feed your men. As Sam, and others focus on filling their pockets the results for the men at war will be horrible, and Sam will find himself at odds with one furious Prince, to say the least. This may be a interesting theme to note along the way as we read.

About Saturday 28 January 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

“I received a good sum of money due to me upon one score or another from Sir G. Carteret”

From “Record of Pepys’ Financial Accounts” by Samuel Rogal
(Figures pounds/shillings/pence)

On Oct 12, 1664 Sam paid out 208/18/0 to a linen draper for calico. Today he was reimbursed 258/18/0, thus leaving him with a profit of 50£ for his efforts.

http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1…

About Wednesday 25 January 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

"my grandmother used to send a dead rabbit through the mail to my mother every couple of weeks or so"
Ok, so I am going to be arrested by the Off Topic Police, but Margaret, you made me think of this funny story. My brother in law, a veterinarian, lives in the South and is an avid gardener. He visited us and wanted to try to grow some rhubarb, which grows like a weed for us, but it's hard for him to grow. At the 'right' time of year, we pulled out some very hardy roots to send him this way. We sent them to his office address in a big box. Just to be 'jerks' we wrote on the box "Fragile: Patient enclosed!" Apparently, the box was delivered and the person receiving it screamed and made a dramatic scene in front of customers, etc. My brother in law almost split his side in laughter, but I guess not everyone shares the same sense of humor…..

About Monday 23 January 1664/65

jeannine  •  Link

"I wonder why the Stuarts were such poor breeders"….. you are not the only one to wonder such things. In his book "Royal Confinements' Jack Dewhurst he devotes 2 chapters to the Restoration Stuart women. Here’s a brief summary of his findings:

Catherine of Braganza was childless and he notes that there was no evident explanation for this.

Ann Hyde, wife of the Duke of York had 6 children in 11 years and only the 2 daughters (Anne and Mary) lived.

Mary of Modena second wife of the Duke of York had been pregnant 8 times before she became queen. After that she finally gave birth to a son, who would never make it to the throne.

Mary (wife of William III) had a miscarriage and then what was perhaps a ‘phantom pregnancy’. After that she never became pregnant again and no reason is noted for that.

Poor Anne’s situation must have been horrible with different records of the time recording differences in the number of pregnancies that she had.
Dewhurst provides a history from David Green which was written in 1974 summarizing his findings on Anne’s history of births, miscarries and stillborn children.

1684 12 May a stillborn daughter
1685 2 June Mary or Marie (died February 8 1687)
1686 2 June Anne Sophia (died 2 February 1687)
1687 Between 20 January and 4 February a miscarriage
1687 October a miscarriage (male)
1688 16 April a miscarriage
1689 24 July William Duke of Gloucester (died 30 July 1700)
1690 14 October Mary (born 2 months premature, lived two hours)
1692 17 April George (born at Syon, lived a few minutes)
1693 23 March a miscarriage (female)
1694 21 January a miscarriage
1696 18 February a miscarriage (female)
1696 20 September a double miscarriage ( a son of 7 months growth, the other of 2 or 3 months)
1697 25 March a miscarriage
1697 December a miscarriage
1698 15 September a miscarriage (male)
1700 25 January a miscarriage (male)

Dewhurst then goes on to dispute the different summaries of the number of Anne’s pregnancies/miscarries, etc. and the conflicting records of her time. He also talks of how awful her emotional state must have been and notes that her faith must have been the only thing to maintain her (ie. “God’s will”). He then sums up the little that is known of these miscarriages and pregnancies from the different records of Anne’s time.

Finally he takes on the question of ‘why’ this happened to Mary. He disputes causes set forth in the past by others (syphilis, deformed pelvis). He looks at the pattern of her carries and miscarries and offers 3 explanations, which include Rhesus disease, diabetes or an intra-uterine growth retardation due to placental insufficiency. He tends to lean towards the last as the most logical, as either a poorly formed placenta or a lack of oxygen to the placenta could cause fetuses to die in utero before birth, or be born very small with a serious risk of dying in the first few days or weeks of life. (p 1-46). This seems the most consistent with her pattern from his perspective. In any case, she must have suffered greatly and the Stuart line ended.