Terry F on 19 Feb 2006  •  Link

"the King’s speech to the Parliament yesterday".

Well worth a short read: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/…

with homage to in Water Writ, past master of British History Online.

Terry F on 19 Feb 2006  •  Link

"our times being changed because of the parliament sitting"

L&M note that during the present session of parliament they met on Tuesday and Thursday afternoons.

in Aqua Scripto on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

Samuells leaders have to attend the Sessions [Commons et Lauds that be] tother wise they will have to contribute to the poor box.

Todd Bernhardt on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

"I to my office till twelve at night, drawing out copies of the overcharge of the Navy"

Just think what our boy could have done with a word processor. Of course, then the Diary would have been encrypted with stronger stuff than his code, and we may never have discovered it (especially since these 1's and 0's sometimes seem to be more fragile than paper and leather bindings...)

Bradford on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

"my eyes begin to fail me, looking so long by candlelight upon white paper."

In "At Day's Close: Night in Times Past" (Norton, 2005), A. Roger Ekirch reminds us that "Light from a single electric bulb is one hundred times stronger than was light from a candle or oil lamp." Beeswax candles gave the best light, but were expensive. Tallow was the common candle for many, but smelled of the animal fat it was made from. Furthermore, they needed trimming every quarter hour, since "Charred bits of wick, known as 'snot,' posed a fire hazard, depending upon where they landed" (such as on your Navy documents). Why not test the experience yourself next time there's a power outage?
(Cf. pages 110 and 106. This study, an awesome compendium of nocturnal lore and thus an eminent bedside book, cites the Diary often.)

Terry F on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

“my eyes begin to fail me"

L&M note this was Samuel's first complaint about the ailment that would eventually terminate the Diary, but not cost him his sight altogether, as he feared.

Is there a consensus in the scholarship about the nature of Sam's vision disorder?

in Aqua Scripto on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

'Why not test the experience yourself next time there’s a power outage? ' Just done so; Candles dothe stinke, and it makes it hard on puzzles and eyes.

in Aqua Scripto on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

"...This day I read the King’s speech to the Parliament yesterday;..." Those type setters be fast, no pies I trust.

in Aqua Scripto on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

In todays session
Rogues and Vagabonds. [bann them ]
A Bill for the Suppressing of Rogues, Vagabonds, and Beggars, and ordering of Persons convict for Theft, or Petit Larceny, was this Day read the First time.

[ No inflation but fish be expensive, filet mignon be cheap, and rents not be paid ]
Address- Observation of Lent.
The Question being put, That an Address be made to his Majesty, That, in respect of the great Scarcity and Dearness of Fish, the great Increase of Cattle, and present Fall of Rents, his Majesty would be pleased to mitigate the Rigour of the Law, as to the strict Observation of this Lent, and prohibiting the Eating of Flesh;
The House was divided.
[also the Act of Uniformity be challenged.]
From: 'House of Commons Journal Volume 8: 19 February 1663', Journal of the House of Commons: volume 8: 1660-1667 (1802), pp. 437-38. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/…. Date accessed: 20 February 2006

in Aqua Scripto on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

"...one to send to Mr. Coventry early to-morrow. ..." Coventry be in the House of Commons, so has to catch him before the first coach leaves.

in Aqua Scripto on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

Indulgence???? "... indulging tender consciences..."
i.e. Carlos Secundo be aware that not all his Angels be of one thought, especially the Jesuits and fellow sympathizers [Papists and fellow travellers that be Protesting sometimes] .
as originally put
"And, because the Passion and Uncharitableness of the Times have produced several Opinions in Religion, by which Men are engaged in Parties and Animosities against each other, which, when they shall hereafter unite in a Freedom of Conversation, will be composed or better understood; We do declare a Liberty to tender Consciences; and that no Man shall be disquieted or called in Question, for Differences of Opinion in Matter of Religion which do not disturb the Peace of the Kingdom: and that We shall be ready to consent to such an Act of Parliament, as, upon mature Deliberation, shall be offered to Us for the full granting that Indulgence."

From: 'House of Commons Journal Volume 8: 1 May 1660', Journal of the House of Commons: volume 8: 1660-1667 (1802), pp. 4-8. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/…. Date accessed: 20 February 2006.

Robert Gertz on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

"...says the same for the Papists, but declares against their ever being admitted to have any offices or places of trust in the kingdom..."

And Chancellor Palpatine loves Democracy...

And the Sudetenland is Hitler's last territory demand in Europe...

Australian Susan on 20 Feb 2006  •  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?

Sad that the first bill discussed is against Rogues and Vagabonds - just like so many Tudor Parliaments - the attitudes towards these wretches remains harsh over the century. The landed, the titled, and the middle classes protecting themselves against the great unwashed. Fear of the mob, fear of the unknown.

David A. Smith on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

"Very short, and not very obliging"
Thanks to Terry F's great link, I have plucked the following quote from His Majesty:
"The truth is, I am in my nature an Enemy to all Severity for Religion and Conscience, how mistaken soever it be, when it extends to capital and sanguinary Punishments"
Words to live by, in that age and this.

A. Hamilton on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

A Bill for the Suppressing of Rogues

First matter before Parliament "after their long prorogation."

Terry F on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

The Pepys family politics of recent weeks unveiled?

"Dined by my wife’s bedside, she not being yet well. We fell out almost upon my discourse of delaying the having of Ashwell, where my wife believing that I have a mind to have Pall, which I have not, though I could wish she did deserve to be had."

I imagine that Bess's belief may have animated her recent appeals to Balty for alternatives to Pall?

Poor Pall.

in Aqua Scripto on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

"and sanguinary Punishments" so bl**** Saxon;

in Aqua Scripto on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

"and sanguinary Punishments" so bl**** Saxon; OED

sanguinary
1. A name applied to certain plants having styptic properties, esp. milfoil, Achillea Millefolium, and shepherd's purse, Capsella Bursa-pastoris; also to Polygonum Hydropiper (see 2nd quot. 1526). In some recent Dicts. said to be used in the sense of SANGUINARIA.
n & v
1. Attended by bloodshed; characterized by slaughter; bloody. Of laws: Imposing the death-penalty freely.
1625 BACON Ess., Unity in Relig. (Arb.) 431 We may not..propagate Religion, by Warrs, or by Sanguinary Persecutions, to force Consciences. c1645 HOWELL Lett. (1655) IV. xxix. 70 The eagerst, and most sanguinary Warrs are about Religion. 1647 CLARENDON Hist. Reb. I. §107 For the Penal Laws (those only excepted which were Sanguinary,..) were never more rigidly executed.
2. a. Bloodthirsty; delighting in carnage.

jeannine on 20 Feb 2006  •  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.

stolzi on 20 Feb 2006  •  Link

Poor Pall; Charles and Toleration

Naturally Sam would rather, all things being equal, do something nice for his sister and at the same time provide company for Bess. Trouble is, as I recall, neither of them can stand very much of his sister.

Australian Susan, I doubt Charles knew at this early time that he would not have an heir. I think his innermost sympathies were always with the Papists and of course pre-eminently with his brother who later (1667 or 1668, Wikipedia says) recame a Roman Catholic. Remember, Charles himself turned Papist upon his death-bed.

Australian Susan on 21 Feb 2006  •  Link

As I haven't got access to a biog. of Catherine (but I know jeannine has!) I don't know if we ever know what was the cause of Catherine's barrenness: we do know it was her that had the problems as we know all too well that Charles had no problems in the fertility department. If she had a problem to do with intercourse itself, rather than with fertility, Charles would have known by this time that conception was unlikely.
Sideline on this: women were universally held to "blame" for centuries if no children resulted from a marriage. Or if the "wrong" sex resulted. In Andrew Morton's biog. of Diana, Princess of Wales, it is reported that her mother was sent to be checked out by a gynaecologist to see why she kept having baby girls and not a boy. It is not reported in the biog. what the Dr had to say about this nonsense. And this was in the late 1950s.

in Aqua Scripto on 21 Feb 2006  •  Link

re: priorities: Headlines in Blah {Lairds must have quiet to sleep between 9.am and 1pm.}
{Bishops are Lairds too}
Today the Lairds, make rules for parking ,and [un]loading of Dreys and Hackneys, and that Bishops request that they must be titled,
Order to consider of Bishops being Peers, renewed.
ORDERED, That the Order made last Sessions of Parliament, for referring to the Committee of Privileges, to consider of the Bishops Claim to be Peers of Parliament, be renewed.

From: 'House of Lords Journal Volume 11: 19 February 1663', Journal of the House of Lords: volume 11: 1660-1666, p. 480. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/…. Date accessed: 21 February 2006.

Yesterday the Lairds request that Tythes be set for poor Parsons and Vicars. [to be squashed 270 years later]

URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/…. Date accessed: 21 February 2006.

Pedro on 21 Feb 2006  •  Link

I don’t know if we ever know what was the cause of Catherine’s barrenness:

It would be interesting if Jeannine can enlighten us on this subject.

It is sad for Catherine at this present time in the Diary. Under normal circumstances the Court would not be asking too many questions, but we have the dastardly Bristol in the wings stoking the fire.

Due to his like of Spain he had been opposed to the marriage, and had told Charles that it was well known in Spain and Portugal that she could not bring an heir to the throne of England.

It is interesting to note that, even for the Portugues biographers Rau and Casimiro, virtually nothing is known of Catherine’s life before the time that she was due to sail for England. The statement of her convent education is based on one letter sent back to England by Southwell to Parry around 1668 ish.

jeannine on 21 Feb 2006  •  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.

Allen on 23 Feb 2006  •  Link

"my eyes begin to fail me"
RE: the cause for Samuel's eye problems. Vol X (the "Companion" to the Latham and Matthews "Diary") has the following: "It is generally agreed that the nature of Pepys's eye trouble was a combination of long sight [farsightedness or hyperopia] and astigmatism." Both problems are rather easily corrected today by glasses; such glasses were not really available in the time of Pepys.

San Diego Sarah on 20 Feb 2016  •  Link

Charles II's conversion to Catholicism:
According to http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/0…
"In 1651 Father Huddleston was residing at Moseley Old Hall, Staffordshire, as chaplain to the Whitgreave family. After the defeat at Worcester on 3 September, 1651, Charles II was conducted by Colonel Gyfford to Whiteladies, where he was sheltered by the Penderell family, and it was while seeking for some safer hiding place for the King that John Penderell happened to meet Father John Huddleston. Accordingly Charles was disguised as a peasant and removed to Moseley Old Hall during the night of Sunday, 7 September.
To guard against surprise, Father John Huddleston was constantly in attendance on Charles II; his three pupils were stationed as sentinels at upper windows and Thomas Whitgreave patrolled the garden.
On Tuesday, 9 September, Cromwell's soldiers came to search the house. Charles II and Father John Huddleston were hurriedly shut away in the priest's hiding place, and the troops, after first seizing Thomas Whitgreave as a fugitive cavalier from Worcester, were eventually convinced that he had not left the house for some weeks and were persuaded to depart without searching the mansion.
That night Charles II left for Bentley Hall, after promising to befriend Father John Huddleston when restored to his throne.
At the Restoration in 1660, Father John Huddleston was invited to live at Somerset House, London, under the protection of the Queen Dowager, Henrietta Maria. ...
Shortly after the Queen Dowager's death in 1669 Father John Huddleston was appointed Chaplain to Queen Catherine, with a salary of 100 pounds a year besides a pension of like amount. ...
When Charles II lay dying "upon Thursday, 5 February, 1685, between 7 and 8 o'clock in the evening" James, Duke of York brought Father John Huddleston to his bedside, saying, "Sire, this good man once saved your life. He now comes to save your soul." Charles received him gladly, declaring that he wished to die in the faith and communion of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. Huddleston then heard the King's confession, reconciled him to the Church and absolved him, afterwards administering Extreme Unction and the Viaticum.
On the accession of James II, Father John Huddleston continued to reside with the Queen Dowager at Somerset House.

According to http://www.english-heritage.org.u…, after the Battle of Worcester Charles II of Scotland hid at remote Boscobel House, also home of the Catholic Giffard family. And many of the places Charles sheltered during his exile were Catholic, and he was mostly treated kindly by them.

It's fair to think Charles was quite fond of Catholics, more so than most of his subjects.

San Diego Sarah on 20 Feb 2016  •  Link

Meetings: Who took the Minutes? Did everyone keep their own log of the discussion and their responsibilities? Pepys must have taken a trunk of documents to some of the Whitehall meetings with James, Duke of York. Or did he have a "cheat sheet" summary, and everyone took his word for details and money? The Queen still receives a daily red Dispatch Box of documents to read. I suppose boxes came before briefcases. How did they manage???? How we fought WWII with manual typewriters, carbon paper and the Gestetner still boggles my mind.

StanB on 20 Feb 2016  •  Link

As mentioned by San Diego Sarah Moseley Old Hall Staffordshire i myself live in Staffs and have visited the Hall on a couple of occasions its a fascinating place and well worth a visit it boasts the legend, An atmospheric Elizabethan farmhouse that saved a King http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/m…