Friday 15 August 1662

Up very early, and up about seeing how my work proceeds, and am pretty well pleased therewith; especially my wife’s closet will be very pretty. So to the office and there very busy, and many people coming to me. At noon to the Change, and there hear of some Quakers that are seized on, that would have blown up the prison in Southwark where they are put. So to the Swan, in Old Fish Street, where Mr. Brigden and his father-in-law, Blackbury, of whom we had bought timber in the office, but have not dealt well with us, did make me a fine dinner only to myself; and after dinner comes in a jugler, which shewed us very pretty tricks. I seemed very pleasant, but am no friend to the man’s dealings with us in the office. After an hour or two sitting after dinner talking about office business, where I had not spent any time a great while, I went to Paul’s Church Yard to my bookseller’s; and there I hear that next Sunday will be the last of a great many Presbyterian ministers in town, who, I hear, will give up all. I pray God the issue may be good, for the discontent is great. Home and to my office till 9 at night doing business, and so to bed. My mind well pleased with a letter I found at home from Mr. Coventry, expressing his satisfaction in a letter I writ last night, and sent him this morning, to be corrected by him in order to its sending down to all the Yards as a charge to them.

30 Annotations

First Reading

Terry F.  •  Link

"Quakers...that would have blown up the prison in Southwark"

L&M note: "About 80 Quakers had been incarcerated in the White Lion prison, Southwark, for attending a conventicle on 3 August….They were released in the following January….The reported plot has not been traced; if it existed its authors were more likely to have been the Anabaptists who were in Southwark prison than the Quakers. The two sects were often confused” — at least by others, I presume, and maybe inter se: neither was hierarchical.

Terry F.  •  Link

"many Presbyterian ministers in town, who, I hear, will give up all."

L&M note: "Fifty ministers in London and Middlesex were expropriated.”

Hmmm: neither “resigned” nor “ejected” nor “extruded”: many terms, no one of them adequate for the many things that occurred

Leslie Katz  •  Link

Just following on from Terry F's annotation, "expropriated" would be an appropriate word to describe the taking away by the state of someone's property and, at the time of which we're speaking, offices of clergymen were property. Perhaps that's why the note used that particular word.

Terry F.  •  Link

Good point, Leslie Katz: each man's living was "expropriated" (often to be given to a lesser man, as we have seen attested), whatever his individual response to the mandate -- to "put off" the BCP, retire, emigrate, evangelize, do what we would call "social work," or seek another line of work altogether.

Robert Gertz  •  Link

Mr Brigden, a little advice...Forget the juggler next time unless she's extremely pretty.

Robert Gertz  •  Link

"...especially my wife's closet..."

Now that's salmon dinner Sam talking...She'd be very pleased with you, Sam'l.

Australian Susan  •  Link

Poor Messrs Brigden & Blackbury - a dinner (just for Sam) *and* a juggler, but to no avail. Now a pretty girl who sang (or even a boy performing) would have had more appeal to Sam's eye for beauty and ear for harmonies. But even with that, I doubt he would have been influenced!
Again, we see the phrase about many coming to him. He's pleased his graft is paying off.
Also, the importance of bookshops (which were publishing houses, book binders and stationers combined)for newsgathering.

Cumgranissalis  •  Link

"seek another line of work "
"wot! me sell oranges or pencils on the Strand, moi with a camox BA. It be to Hide Park i'ze go."

Robert Gertz  •  Link

Wonder what kind of dinner and show the munificent Sir William Warren will put on for our boy?

Geesh and poor Sir Will B. has been having to bring the merchants to his place...Hopefully Mingo gets some decent tips out of it at least.

Now, meanwhile...In Brampton...

chris  •  Link

I can stand it no longer:cumgranisallis must unmask him/herself. Be he/her some authentic cyberspatial time-hopper; or be she/he the crazed historical linguist that do set those impossible Guardian crossword puzzles out of Parkhurst Jail. Come clean, aurocaria, the game is up.

Jeannine  •  Link

Chris, regarding the identity of Cumgranisallis.....this is a sad story...in a previous life he drafted the Rosetta Stone, which was to remain a hidden mystery forever. When Jean-Francois Champollion cracked the Rosetta code in 1822, Cumgranisallis' spirit was re-born and set out into eternity searching for linguistic peace. He's found his home at this website and even if we don't always understand him, we still always welcome him..............

Araucaria  •  Link

Chris, our salty friend is not the monkey puzzler known as Araucaria.

In a previous incarnation, he was known as "vincent" or "vicente". He channels a latin-educated pirate of post-Elizabethan vintage. If you mentally add an "Arrh! Avast!" to his annotations, his voice will come alive.

I must confess, I am not a (or The) great crypic setter, but I do admire the art.

Cumgranissalis  •  Link

Hide park, it became famous for out of lime-light would be orators. Before the advent of dole, if one wanted to eat, one sold any odds and ends, pencils be popular and apples, it replaced out right begging. Very popular during the great ejection of the work force of the 19 twenties. Camox be a polite way of saying those with a degree from the banks of the Isis or the Granta. Other wise one goes to Padua, if they fail to be accepted by sane [Seine] Profs.
Who be I, I be out of the running, over the hill, elementary school drop out, that has enjoyed life.

Bradford  •  Link

Well, at least we know you're not the Bishop, cher V., or He Who Is Not to Be Named Among Us.

What one wouldn't give for a depiction of Elizabeth's pretty little closet once finished.

Glyn  •  Link

Chris.

If you're suffering, please do consider that in 300 years time there will be students doing doctoral degrees in 20th-century linguistics, and citing extracts from the contributions of Cumgranissalis to this site as examples of the speech patterns of Californians in the 20th/21st century.

Terry F.  •  Link

Presbyterian preachers and the Act of Uniformity of 1662: roots of the great discontent.

The act was related to a series of so-called "Test Acts" "English penal laws that imposed various civil disabilities on Roman Catholics and nonconformists" including Presbyterians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test…

There is the view of the Act of Uniformity of 1662 of Australian Susan on Thu 11 Aug 2005:
Book of Common Prayer
I think the fact that the first thing in the 1662 BCP is the relevant Act of Parliament in its entirety says it all - this is much more to do with legalities, outward behaviour, treasonable activities and so forth than how one worshipped God
http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1…

Methinks spoken like one who has worshipped as a modern Anglican, which I, a Presbyterian, have; but neither of us subject to "An Act For the Uniformity of Publick Prayers; and Administration of Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies: And for the establishing the Form of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating Bishops, Priests, and Deacons in the Church of England. XIV. Carol. II.[1762]" which requires that every one who seeks to retain a benefice,

"openly; publickly, and solemnly read the Morning and Evening Prayer appointed to be read by, and according to the said Book of Common Prayer at the times thereby appointed, and after such reading thereof shall openly and publickly, before the Congregation there assembled, declare his unfeigned assent, and consent to the use of all things in the said Book contained and prescribed, in these words, and no other;

"I, A. B. Do here declare my unfeigned assent, and consent to all, and every thing contained, and prescribed in, and by the Book intituled [sic], The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites, and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the Church of England; together with the Psalter, or Psalms of David, Pointed as they are to be sung, or said in Churches, and the form, or manner of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons;..."
http://www.eskimo.com/~lhowell/bc…

Now this, Australian Susan, is indeed to do, actually dictated "how one worshipped God."

Moreover, there is the related question: What is a "Presbyterian"?

In the earliest church, to simplify, the two forms of governance were by presbyteroi ("elders," who heard appeals as a committee, as a Jewish village in the ancient world was), and by an episkopos ("overseer" = ET "bishop," as an urban and more Romanized community was): hence, Episcopal and Presbyterian forms of governance. (for the latter see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pres… ).

Some of the Presbyterian divines in 1662 no doubt had trouble serving under a bishop.

Terry F.  •  Link

"I seemed very pleasant"

Today's entry strikes me as telling us little about what Sam accomplished TODAY; much more about his discontents and distractions therefrom by frauds and books during the the course of a day bracketed by pleasures at what he had done earlier -- at the state of his house, and the letter from Coventry.

Nix  •  Link

Terry F. --

Excellent discussion of the prayer book. It is hard for us, in these secular times, when the Book of Common Prayer is thought of mostly as a masterpiece of English literature, to remember what things were like in Samuel's day: The Prayer Book, dictating how you pray, when you pray, to whom you pray and the precise wording of those prayers, was instrumental in cementing the unification of church and state. Priests worked for the king -- not for god, and not for their congregations. The threat of hellfire was a monopoly of the government. Today, at least in the English-speaking world, even most congregants of the great monopolist Roman church think of religion in terms of their direct relationship with the deity, but that is the complete antithesis of the view that the church holds "the keys to the kingdom" -- and that the king holds the keys to the church.

Australian Susan  •  Link

In the 16th century when what became the Church of England came into being (by a series of lurches, hasty decisions, out of fear as well as conviction) it was unthinkable to have anything other than one Church. This had to be a State Church with a conforming population: religious toleration crept in towards the end of the century. Elizabeth I was a clever and farthinking ruler who realised that what most of her people wanted was a quiet life: food, housing, stability, work. She was criticised for it, but resisted calls for persucutions of Catholics and Reformers.
By the time we get to the 1660s, the picture is more complex. Britain had had a period of independent Kingless rule, but Charles was not perhaps the anointed Saviour many people hoped for. Nevertheless, he was King, head of State and Head of the Church, which he re-established as the Church of England to which people, especially its clergy had to conform. The English Church is uniquely woven into the fabric ofEnglish society. The lowest unit of government is the Parish Council which uses as its boundaries, the Parish boundaries of the Church: other countries do not do this. It is tied up with education too: until the establishment of the University of London, if you wanted tertiary education in England you had to be a conforming member of the Church of England to attend Cambridge or Oxford. And the monarch is bound by the Test Act (not yet introduced in the diary period)not to be a Catholic. It was a different world. I could go on about this for hours, but must do some "work"...

A. Hamilton  •  Link

"examples of the speech patterns of Californians in the 20th/21st century"

Glyn elicits a small, amused smile.

Cumgranissalis  •  Link

cripes! When ise speaks to an Englishman, He always wonders how I know England and the English, as he be thinking I be from Ozarks. But a Yank, now he doth think I be from a Foreign land, the land of tea and crumpets.
As Karl Mark did hint, your first seven years are deeply in-bedded in the syche. One of my best Friends be Belgian and the English thought ihe from Eton, he having such a plummy accent and speech pattern.
So take every thing with a PoS.
Maledictus a malefico non distat nisi occasione.
Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria, XII, 9, 9 .

Pedro  •  Link

The Vicente Code.

The annotations of Vincente would make a study in themselves, maybe a best seller, but I detect a hidden yearning to be back in Blighty on the eve of the return of the Ashes. (Oh! Sorry Australian Susan!)

Second Reading

Bill  •  Link

"I hear that next Sunday will be the last of a great many Presbyterian ministers in town, who, I hear, will give up all"

There is more background information in the encyclopedia:
Act of Uniformity 1662 http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclo…
Book of Common Prayer http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclo…

David Hume, the philosopher, quoted in the second entry, had the best succinct comment, I think. "Instead of [the church party] enlarging their terms of communion, in order to comprehend the Presbyterians, they gladly laid hold of the prejudices, which prevailed among that sect, in order to eject them from all their livings."

Dick Wilson  •  Link

The following Test Act is still used,today:
From the Kentucky State Constitution, Section 228:
"Members of the General Assembly and all officers, before they enter upon the execution of the duties of their respective offices, and all members of the bar, before they enter upon the practice of their profession, shall take the following oath or affirmation: I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth, and be faithful and true to the Commonwealth of Kentucky so long as I continue a citizen thereof, and that I will faithfully execute, to the best of my ability, the office of .... according to law; and I do further solemnly swear (or affirm) that since the adoption of the present Constitution, I, being a citizen of this State, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons within this State nor out of it, nor have I sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, nor aided or assisted any person thus offending, so help me God."

This is the land of the Martins and the Coys.

Terry Foreman  •  Link

Kentucky "is the land of the Martins and the Coys"? Not quite:

The 1946 Disney cartoon short, The Martins and the Coys in Make Mine Music animated feature was a very thinly disguised caricature of the Hatfield–McCoy feud: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hat…

Dick Wilson  •  Link

Okay, it was Hatfields & the Coys, and half of them were from West Virginia (reckless mountain boys) but you get my point, about the test act...

Dick Wilson  •  Link

Incidently, that usage of "Swear (or affirm)" is a nod to the Quakers, who decline to take formal oaths, but will make affirmations. In Sam's day law was used to harass them; now it is used to include them. An affirmation by a Quaker that he has not fought a duel is a might silly.

Chris Squire UK  •  Link

OED has:

‘expropriate, v. < late Latin expropriāt- . .
1. trans. To dispossess (a person) of ownership; to deprive of property . .
1611 R. Cotgrave Dict. French & Eng. Tongues Exproprié, expropriated . . ‘

Log in to post an annotation.

If you don't have an account, then register here.