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 21 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

Keystone Cops, Gilbert and Sullivan...
I have stuck in my mind Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins--dancing across the rooftops with the chimney sweeps with song, dance, big smiles and incredible fancy footwork...... now we know Sam can sing but perhaps we'll need to sign him up for dancing lessons so that he can play himself in the musical version!

About Thursday 19 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

Catherine and her barrenness.
This will unfortunately remain a mystery. (Spoilers about her here, Sam will talk about some of this later). She will conceive 3-4 times (historians debate, my thought is 4) and the first carries she will lose early. The ladies of the court will tell Charles she is lying about the pregnacies altogether. This will be to degrade her in his eyes and to position him to divorce her (Buckingham will scheme in this manner throughout her life). For the first carries Charles will always believe them over her, and treat her accordingly. A later miscarry will be the pregnancy that he believes as her doctor will explain to him that it was developed enough to see that it was a boy. He confirms his belief of this pregnancy in a letter to his sister Minette. Catherine didn't have a problem per se getting pregnant but rather carrying the baby to term.
So some theories follow. There were some letters/comments noted by a non-reputable "snoop" of the court reporting something about her having excessive menstrual bleeding and/or bleeding after sex, but this is not confirmed by any reliable sources. My thought is that this, if true could be endometriosis, which often causes infertilty and heavy bleeding. There is also a serious illness that she will have which some historians believe may have actually have been puerperal fever resulting from one of these miscarries( this is the fever that killed Jane Seymour, Henry VIII's wife after giving birth to her son). Whatever the cause of this illness, it may have also affected her ability to carry to term as it almost killed her and lingered for awhile. Another (speculative, slight side thought) is that she caught some sort of "minor" venereal disease from Charles. He will later infect his mistress Louise with a full blown case of syphillis. Where nothing has ever been reported in this matter regarding Catherine, she may have escaped this "gift" from Charles as hopefully they had parted by that time. Venereal disease was a huge cause of infertilty during these times.
Infertility today is still quite a mystery and heartbreak for couples. With so many medical and other accepted options (adoption, infertiltiy treatments, etc.) today at least couples have more hope for a family. Given the limited choices, the need to pass on the Stuart bloodline, etc. not only did Catherine have to go through the trauma of losing her carries, but she had to do so publicaly and be humiliated and diminished by her husband and society in the the process.

About Thursday 19 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

"Interesting that Charles’s first call on Parliament is not for money, but tolerance. Is he aware of his brother’s leanings? Is he trying to prepare the way for a Catholic monarch? Has he decided Catherine will not have an heir, thus continuing James as heir apparent?"

Susan, I agree, it is an interesting, and controversial choice of topic. At this time, my guess would be that the strongest Catholic influences on Charles were his sister Minette (whom he loved) and perhaps The Sun King, Louis ($$$$!), and then to a lesser extent, his mother. I am not sure if James has made his inclination known yet, nor if Charles has totally given up on Catherine. The other thing about Charles is he always seems to "stack" things in a manner to keep many "escape routes" open at the same time, even if they are in seeming conflict with each other (ie. Titling Monmouth, a known Protestant)was seen as opening the door for him to take precedence over James. This strategy seemed to work for him, although it must have been difficult to live with because you'd never know where you really stood.

About Biographies of related people

jeannine  •  Link

James Duke of York/ James II

The Life of James The Second King Of England Collected Out Of His Memoirs And Writ Of his Own Hand Together With The Kings’ Advice To His Son and His Majesty’s Will. J.S. Clarke, historiographer to the King, London 1816.
This 2 volume set is a rare find, but available in the US through the interlibrary loan system (U of Idaho has a copy). It is also available as a CD ROM at
http://www.tannerritchie.com/book…

This 2 volume book set tracts James life, based upon and including large sections of his writing from about age 16 through his death. The years of that overlap Sam’s Diary are rather scarce in comparison to the whole and did not focus attention to the building of the Navy. The introduction probably has the most interesting “find” in terms of overlap between James and the Naval activities that Sam is involved with during the years of the Diary. It states that few Princes

“ have struggled with greater Difficulties than King James the Second, and few ever sustained a greater load of trouble afterwards. Yet the Difficulties he had to struggle with have not always been sufficiently considered by Historians, nor does it appear that the essential and lasting service which James rendered to this Country in compacting and as it were building up its Naval Power has been sufficiently weighed: It is not generally known the Naval regulations now in force are taken almost verbatim from those which he established, or that when lately the Board of Naval Revision wished to add to and improve the Naval Regulations, they sent out for Papers of Pepys, the Marine Secretary of James, as being the best materials whence they could obtain the object they had in view…. James thoroughly understood the whole business of the Admiralty, and knew also the disorders which had crept into the whole economy of the Fleet, in the six years immediately preceding his Accession. This fact is amply corroborated by the honorable testimony of Mr. Secretary Pepys in his Memoirs: the excellent methods there recorded, by which James regenerated the Naval Power, clearly shew how well he understood it on all its bearings. The following were the Qualifications [ as set forth in Pepys Memoirs, date /page not specified] which during that Monarch’s reign were required from every one, who occupied a place in any branch in the Naval Department.

1. A Practiced Knowledge in every part of the Works and Methods of your Navy, both at the Board and in your Yards. The not discerning of which and the others that follow, (adds Mr. Pepsys in addressing James the Second,) appears to have cost your Royal Brother and You within the fore-mentioned five years, above half a million.
2. A General Mastery in the business of Accounts, through more particularly those incident to the Affairs of Your Navy.
3. Vigour of Mind, joyn’d with approve’d Industry, Zeal, and Personal aptness for Labour.
4. An entire Resignation of themselves and their whole time to this Your Service, without lyableness to Avocation from other Business of Pleasure.
5. Lastly, Such Credit with your Majesty for Integrity and Loyalty, as may (with the former conditions) lead both your Self and My Lord Treasurer, to an entire confidence of having all done that can be morally expected from them, in the Advancement of your Service, and the circumspect and orderly dispensing and Improving of your Treasure.

And to the above judicious Qualifications, which cannot be too much attended to in the present day, may be subjoined what Pepys termed, ‘His Three Truths Essential to the Sea Economy of Great Britain’ as corollaries from the premises:

1. That Integrity, and general (but unpracticed) Knowledge, are not alone sufficient to conduct and support a Navy, so as to prevent its Declension into a state little less unhappy than the worst that can befall it under want of both.
2. That not much more (Neither) is to be depended on, even from Experience alone and Integrity, unaccompanied with Viguor of Application, Assiduity, Affection, Strictness of Discipline, and Method.
3. That it was a strenuous Conjunction of all of these (and that Conjunction only) that within half the time, and less than half the charge it cost the Crown in the exposing it, had (at the very instant of its unfortunate Lords’ withdrawing from it) raised the Navy of England from the lowest state of Impotence, to the most advanced step towards a lasting and solid Prosperity, that (all circumstances considered) this Nation had ever seen it at. And yet not such, but that (even at its Zenith) it both did and suffered sufficient to teach us, THAT THERE IS SOMETHING ABOVE BOTH THAT AND US THAT GOVERNS THE WORLD, TO WHICH (INCOMPREHENSIBLE) ALONE BE GLORY.

Such were the Principles and Maxims which James the Second established, whose interesting Commentaries on what had passed before him both as a Prince and A Sovereign, are now given in these Volumes to the Public through the liberal condescension of His Royal Highness The Prince Regent” ( pages xxvi –xxix).

Two other areas of interest, which are included along with James’ life in these volumes are available online. Both of these are the letters of “advice” from Father to Son, first that from Charles I to Charles II and then from James II to his son James, exiled along with him in France.

“Advice that Charles I Bequeathed to his Son Charles II” (which accurately reflects the original text) can be found at
http://anglicanhistory.org/charle…

“The Advice which James the Second Bequeathed to his Son James, Generally known by the Name of The Chevalier de St. George” can be found at the link below. This version has been “modernized” in terms of spelling and has quite a few typos, but it was the only online copy I could locate. The overall document is accurate against the version in this book.
http://www.jacobite.ca/documents/…

About James Stuart (Duke of York, Lord High Admiral)

jeannine  •  Link

The Life of James The Second King Of England Collected Out Of His Memoirs And Writ Of his Own Hand Together With The Kings’ Advice To His Son and His Majesty’s Will. J.S. Clarke, historiographer to the King, London 1816.
This 2 volume set is a rare find, but available in the US through the interlibrary loan system (U of Idaho has a copy). It is also available as a CD ROM at
http://www.tannerritchie.com/book…

This 2 volume book set tracts James life, based upon and including large sections of his writing from about age 16 through his death. The years of that overlap Sam’s Diary are rather scarce in comparison to the whole and did not focus attention to the building of the Navy. The introduction probably has the most interesting “find” in terms of overlap between James and the Naval activities that Sam is involved with during the years of the Diary. It states that few Princes

“ have struggled with greater Difficulties than King James the Second, and few ever sustained a greater load of trouble afterwards. Yet the Difficulties he had to struggle with have not always been sufficiently considered by Historians, nor does it appear that the essential and lasting service which James rendered to this Country in compacting and as it were building up its Naval Power has been sufficiently weighed: It is not generally known the Naval regulations now in force are taken almost verbatim from those which he established, or that when lately the Board of Naval Revision wished to add to and improve the Naval Regulations, they sent out for Papers of Pepys, the Marine Secretary of James, as being the best materials whence they could obtain the object they had in view…. James thoroughly understood the whole business of the Admiralty, and knew also the disorders which had crept into the whole economy of the Fleet, in the six years immediately preceding his Accession. This fact is amply corroborated by the honorable testimony of Mr. Secretary Pepys in his Memoirs: the excellent methods there recorded, by which James regenerated the Naval Power, clearly shew how well he understood it on all its bearings. The following were the Qualifications [ as set forth in Pepys Memoirs, date /page not specified] which during that Monarch’s reign were required from every one, who occupied a place in any branch in the Naval Department.

1. A Practiced Knowledge in every part of the Works and Methods of your Navy, both at the Board and in your Yards. The not discerning of which and the others that follow, (adds Mr. Pepsys in addressing James the Second,) appears to have cost your Royal Brother and You within the fore-mentioned five years, above half a million.
2. A General Mastery in the business of Accounts, through more particularly those incident to the Affairs of Your Navy.
3. Vigour of Mind, joyn’d with approve’d Industry, Zeal, and Personal aptness for Labour.
4. An entire Resignation of themselves and their whole time to this Your Service, without lyableness to Avocation from other Business of Pleasure.
5. Lastly, Such Credit with your Majesty for Integrity and Loyalty, as may (with the former conditions) lead both your Self and My Lord Treasurer, to an entire confidence of having all done that can be morally expected from them, in the Advancement of your Service, and the circumspect and orderly dispensing and Improving of your Treasure.

And to the above judicious Qualifications, which cannot be too much attended to in the present day, may be subjoined what Pepys termed, ‘His Three Truths Essential to the Sea Economy of Great Britain’ as corollaries from the premises:

1. That Integrity, and general (but unpracticed) Knowledge, are not alone sufficient to conduct and support a Navy, so as to prevent its Declension into a state little less unhappy than the worst that can befall it under want of both.
2. That not much more (Neither) is to be depended on, even from Experience alone and Integrity, unaccompanied with Viguor of Application, Assiduity, Affection, Strictness of Discipline, and Method.
3. That it was a strenuous Conjunction of all of these (and that Conjunction only) that within half the time, and less than half the charge it cost the Crown in the exposing it, had (at the very instant of its unfortunate Lords’ withdrawing from it) raised the Navy of England from the lowest state of Impotence, to the most advanced step towards a lasting and solid Prosperity, that (all circumstances considered) this Nation had ever seen it at. And yet not such, but that (even at its Zenith) it both did and suffered sufficient to teach us, THAT THERE IS SOMETHING ABOVE BOTH THAT AND US THAT GOVERNS THE WORLD, TO WHICH (INCOMPREHENSIBLE) ALONE BE GLORY.

Such were the Principles and Maxims which James the Second established, whose interesting Commentaries on what had passed before him both as a Prince and A Sovereign, are now given in these Volumes to the Public through the liberal condescension of His Royal Highness The Prince Regent” ( pages xxvi –xxix).

Two other areas of interest, which are included along with James’ life in these volumes are available online. Both of these are the letters of “advice” from Father to Son, first that from Charles I to Charles II and then from James II to his son James, exiled along with him in France.

“Advice that Charles I Bequeathed to his Son Charles II” (which accurately reflects the original text) can be found at
http://anglicanhistory.org/charle…

“The Advice which James the Second Bequeathed to his Son James, Generally known by the Name of The Chevalier de St. George” can be found at the link below. This version has been “modernized” in terms of spelling and has quite a few typos, but it was the only online copy I could locate. The overall document is accurate against the version in this book.
http://www.jacobite.ca/documents/…

About Tuesday 17 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

” … and that the King had it in his closett a week after, and did dissect it; and making great sport of it …”

SPOLIERS... Michael, did not find an eye witness to this specific incident but did find the following. Also,we may be looking at this with 21st century eyes, when we may need to step back and look at the times, something which for me personally is hard to do here. When I asked my husband about this today he reminded me that Sam would never have been operated on for the stone unless the doctors understood the inside of the human body and what to look for. As unnerving a topic as it is dissection, in terms of medical advances, etc. was as critical as element in the study of medicine yesterday as it it today. There also were not readily accessible means (organ doantions, etc.) to obtain a human cadaver to experiment upon in the times of Charles II. If you want an eye opening (and easy to read) view on the topic read "Stiff" by Mary Roach. In terms of Charles II, this entry may not be a far-fetched idea, as he was interested in dissection ,science, etc. per the sites quoted below. Not to be trite here, but "dissection" was an "in" thing in 1663. The focus was on scientific curiosity and no doubt the scientists were able to separate the "human being who once was" from the cadaver.
In my house growing up, the focus was on mechanics and there wasn't an appliance in the house, a car engine, machine,etc, which wasn't taken apart by my brother who had a curiosity to explore it, understand it, fix it (even if it wasn't broken to begin with!) and put it back together. Thank goodness for all who have benefited from medicine today that there weren't some scientists with the same drives in understanding the anatomy. Some food for thought (spoilers!)

“In 1654 Queen Elizabeth granted a "special charter of anatomies" to the College of Physicians of London whereby four bodies of executed felons were to be delivered to the College for "anatomizing". In 1663 Charles II increased the yearly quota of bodies to six.”
http://elane.stanford.edu/wilson/…

“At Whitehall, Charles II had his “little elaboratory, under his closet, a pretty place,” and was working there but a day or two before his death, his illness disinclining him for his wonted exercise. The king took a curious interest in anatomy; on 11 May, 1663, Pierce, the surgeon, tells Pepys “that the other day Dr. Clerke and he did dissect two bodies, a man and a woman before the King with which the King was highly pleased.” Pepys also records, 17 February, 1662/3, on the authority of Edward Pickering, another story of a dissection in the royal closet by the king’s own hands.” 29
http://www.bartleby.com/218/1509.…

“The New Science was also diffused by public demonstrations. This was especially the case in public anatomy lessons. Scientist and layman alike were invited to witness the dissection of human cadavers. The body of a criminal would be brought to the lecture hall and the surgeon would dissect the body, announcing and displaying organs as they were removed from the body.
Throughout major European cities there were wealthy men who, with lots of free time on their hands, would dabble in science. These were the virtuosi -- the amateur scientists. These men oftentimes made original contributions to scientific endeavor. They also supplied organizations like the Royal Society with needed funds.”
http://www.historyguide.org/intel…

About Tuesday 17 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

Todd, I found one of the quotes which references today. It's in Wilson's "All the King's Women" and reads ..."there were several branches of science which intrigued Charles. In July 1662, while he was in the midst of his domestic crisis{Bedchamber incident, I presume??], Charles presented a charter to the Royal Society of London for the Improvement of Natural Knowledge. Its remit was as wide as its name suggested and Charles took a close interest in its work. He also carried out his own expriments. Pepys had a somewhat gruesome story from one of his court contacts concerning the foetus that was dropped by a lady who miscarried in the middle of the ball.. [quotes Pepys from above]. ... It it not difficult to imagine how the straitlaced Catherine of Braganza and her sombre guardians reacted to a style of court life that was shockingly amoral and quite alien to anything they had ever experienced". (p. 173)
It is known that Charles DID have a very keen interest in science and was a strong supporter of scientific activity throughout his life. This story pops up in alot of books about Charles/Catherine/Court life, etc. but I'm not sure exactly what sources each one uses.

About Tuesday 17 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

"who tells me the story is very true of a child being dropped at the ball at Court; and that the King had it in his closett a week after, and did dissect it; and making great sport of it, said that in his opinion it must have been a month and three hours old; and that, whatever others think, he hath the greatest loss (it being a boy, as he says), that hath lost a subject by the business".
This is an affirmation of the gossip that Ferrers told Sam on Feb 8th. The story of Charles dissecting the baby and his comment about the loss being a boy is hard enough to stomach, but what I believe (my speculation, not recorded anywhere) is that the baby was his own son. It was believed, per Ferrers, that the baby belonged to Winifred Wells, who was a lesser mistress to Charles, and nowhere else "linked" to anyone else.
This incident also comes up in one of the biographies of the Queen (forgive me for not digging for the exact quote here), but it basically gives a listing of all of the antics, factions, gambling, whoring, mistresses, mayhem, etc. going on in the court to which this dissection is the final "cherry on top" example to explain the total depravity to which Catherine has found herself living. So amid all of these episodes and disappointments, how did our Queen cope? According to Gertrude Thomas in "Richer than Spices" nobody "ever expected that Catherine has placed her problem in more capable hands, for she had presented a portrait of her husband to Syon Abbey in Devon, with the request that the nuns there pray for him. To this day Charles still hangs on the wall of their Great Hall smiling his half-satiric smile amidst rows of English saints with solemn faces, as if her were amused by the whole situation".
http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/Docu…

About Tuesday 10 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

Bradford, Pepys coat of arms link. I finally found a few moments to really look through the site where this led to and it's quite interesting. I recently bought (sight unseen) the book referenced (written by Chappell "Eight Generations of the Pepys Family 1500-1800") and was overwhelmed by the amount of information and how to make sense of how the people related, etc. Needless to say I put the book aside as it was too much for me to figure out. This site actually did all of the work and pulled the Sam/Elizabeth notes together. Thanks for the find~~you saved me hours of frustration!

About Thursday 12 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

Dirk, What a wonderful piece of work you've found. As the article says "It was left me in the nature of a Legacy by my Father.." What an unbelievable legacy to leave for one's child~~ morals, business smarts, etc. all in one. The 12 points in the beginning (as Susan noted) are a find and the ongoing details amazing. Thanks!

About Friday 13 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

Dirk, Thanks so much for YOUR kind words and great poem! Sam is such a delight. I can just imagine him all excited over the propects of Mrs. Pierce and then Bess drops the bomb. I could just feel him squirming to back out of the whole thing. Can't you just see his eyes deflating as she says, "Oh maybe I'll pick Mr. Hunt, or perhaps Captain Ferrers....."
What gives Sam's writing such life is that in between words of history, intelligence, greatness, Naval wonders, etc. is a level of emotion that is just so raw, vulnerable, sometimes humourous and just plain human. You never know what he will deliver one day to the next, but he's a fun adventure to be with for the ride.

About Friday 13 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

Our Valentine's Hero

Sam eyed that beauty Mrs. Pierce
With a lust that was fiery and fierce
Bess coyly mentioned she may like Ferrers
Filling Sam with matrimonial terrors

Sam slid gingerly off his high studly horse
Turning words of love to fiscal discourse
Claiming now that he didn’t have the money
For them both to pursue a new honey

To cover he thought he’d be rightly smart
He claimed his wife held his devoted heart
Bess sweetly smiled playing along with it
Knowing well Sam was so full of Sh--!

Now for those of you who tend to keep score
No matter if Sam or Bess you adore
Clerke, Pierce, Hunt and Ferrers get zero
While Bess trumps over our Valentine’s hero.

About Thursday 12 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

A Valentine's Idea!
How about making your own soap in a posset for someone you love. Just pick one of these little castile soap recipes http://www.millersoap.com/castile…
and pour them into heart shaped little pans. Place the soaps in a glass and fill with posset for that someone special. This idea will not only rid your intended sweetie of any potential kidney stones they may happen to have but will also rid you of any future expenses that the potential relationship could impose, as any hopes for a future together will be over after the first sip.

About Wednesday 11 February 1662/63

jeannine  •  Link

"our new maid Mary"...obviously Wheatley made a massive mistake in his translation, today's entry should have read "Saint" Mary....

About A Walk with Ferrers

jeannine  •  Link

Susan, Frances was a distant relative of Charles, not exactly sure how related (second-cousin or what), but at one point when people will be full of gossip as to Charles marrying her, this "relation" will make her an "appropriate" choice status wise. Her mother was also here (at some point) living with Henrietta Marie. That twosome is seen as somewhat scheming behind the scenes from time. When she arrived here she was still quite young (about 12 as I recall). Another thing to note, like Lady Castlemaine, Charles will find her a position in Catherine's court and eventually set her up with her own private apartments, etc., but never becasue she asked. She wasn't greedy or demanding, it just wasn't the type of person who she was.