Thursday, June 14, 2012

Sir Richard Rich

A poxy scum and wishy-washy Catholic. To quote author Stephanie Mann:
He betrayed both Bishop John Fisher and Thomas More, perjuring himself in the latter case (thus the title of the post). Rich took full advantage of the Dissolution of Monasteries as Chancellor of the Court of Augmentations to acquire great wealth, even though he was a Catholic. The Pilgrimage of Grace linked his name with Thomas Cromwell's in their umbrage against the suppression of the monasteries. As A.F. Pollard notes in the article linked above, "His religious predilections inclined to Catholicism; but he did not allow them to stand in the way of his advancement."

He also betrayed his master, Thomas Cromwell when his fall was near and he assisted in the torture of Anne Askew in the Tower of London. Rich consulted with Bishop Gardiner, whom he would later prosecute, in efforts to discover and punish heresy according to Henry VIII's desires.

Baron Rich served as an executor of Henry VIII's will and then as Chancellor for Edward VI. He aided Lord Somerset in the prosecution of the Protector's brother, Thomas Seymour and then switched sides to aid John Dudley, later Duke of Northumberland, in the trial and prosecution of Protector Somerset. Rich prosecuted the conservative (Catholic) bishops Gardiner and Bonner, and joined in the harassment of Mary to give up the Catholic Mass and conform to the new Book of Common Prayer.

Again, he switched sides when Northumberland's plot to place his daughter-in-law Jane Dudley (nee Grey) on the throne in 1553 appeared doomed to failure, and then he prosecuted Protestants and heretics during Mary I's reign.

He died on June 12, 1567, having again accommodated himself to the religious settlement under Elizabeth I. He did found a school in Felsted, Essex where he is buried most elegantly. (Read entire post.)


Share

Outside the Abortion Clinic

A young mother reflects. To quote:
Yes, in my youth I was a pro-abortion advocate, and I thought that all pro-life advocates were crazy religious zealots who foamed at the mouth and spewed Bible verses like profanities…like a pro-life version of the Westboro Baptist Church. God Hates Whores!

This is a common stereotype that pro-abortion advocates have about pro-life folks because, honestly, this is how a lot of pro-choice supporters debate. I debated this way myself, by being louder and more vulgar than my opponent, who would just give up frustrated and walk away. I actually considered it “winning” when this happened.

So I can sympathize to some extent when I hear pro-abortion advocates vilify pro-lifers. Immediately it tells me two things about them: they have never honestly spoken to a pro-life advocate, and this is how they themselves debate. I can adjust my behavior accordingly and prepare myself for the verbal lashing.

So yes, I had decided that if I drove to the clinic and there were angry pro-lifers frowning at me and pelting me with Bibles, I would turn around and go home. In fact, on the drive there I actually prayed that there would be angry pro-lifers drunk on their own piety, waiting there for me…like vultures. Please please please, God, let there be Your people standing in between me and the door to the clinic.

In fact, I was so convinced there would be a pro-life presence I drove right by the place. Twice. It was such a quiet, unassuming gray building. This couldn’t be the place, I thought. But I drove by one more time and checked the number on the front of the building – it didn’t have the clinic’s name on the building or on any sign – before finally putting my car in park. Then I waited.

And waited. (You can read the rest here.)
Share

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Chesterton on Dixie

Some interesting reflections from author G.K. Chesterton:
Every age has its special strength, and generally one in which some particular nation is specially strong. Every age has also its special weakness and deficiency, and a need which only another type could supply. This is rather specially the Age of America; but inevitably, and unfortunately, rather the America of the Northern merchants and industrialists. It is also the age of many genuine forms of philanthropy and humanitarian effort, such as modern America has very generously supported. But there is a virtue lacking in the age, for want of which it will certainly suffer and possibly fail. It might be expressed in many ways; but as short a way of stating it as any I know is to say that, at this moment, America and the whole world is crying out for the spirit of the Old South.

In other words, what is most lacking in modern psychology is the sentiment of Honour; the sentiment to which personal independence is vital and to which wealth is entirely incommensurate. I know very well that Honour had all sorts of fantasies and follies in the days of its excess. But that does not affect the danger of its deficiency, or rather its disappearance. The world will need, and need desperately, the particular spirit of the landowner who will not sell his land, of the shopkeeper who will not sell his shop, of the private man who will not be bullied or bribed into being part of a public combination; of what our fathers meant by the free man. And we need the Southern gentleman more than the English or French or Spanish gentleman. For the aristocrat of Old Dixie, with all his faults and inconsistencies, did understand what the gentle man of Old Europe generally did not. He did understand the Republican ideal, the notion of the Citizen as it was understood among the noblest of the pagans. That combination of ideal democracy with real chivalry was a particular blend for which the world was immeasurably the better; and for the loss of which it is immeasurably the worse. It may never be recovered; but it will certainly be missed. (Read entire post.)
Share

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Simon the Cobbler and Louis XVII

From Vive la Reine:
There is evidence that the leaders of the Commune gave their tacit approval for Simon to go much further [in his abuse of Louis-Charles.] On July 3, 1793, Simon questioned his superiors quite bluntly about their aims.

“Citizens, what have you decided about the wolf cub? He has been taught to be insolent bu I shall know how to tame him. Hard luck if he dies because of it. I will not answer for that. After all, what do you want done with him? To deport him? To kill him? To poison him?”

The unequivocal answer from the members of the commune was, “We want to get rid of him!”
Inspired by these men, in the secret, hidden environment of the Tower, a pattern of abuse began to develop which, unchecked, grew worse and more terrible over time.
The Lost King of France by Deborah Cadbury
Share

Queen Victoria's Journals

Catherine Delors links to the journals, now available online, saying: "Victoria was an excellent, lively writer. And what better way to know her than to listen to her voice? Various illustrations in Victoria’s hand are also available." (Read entire post.) Share

Monday, June 11, 2012

Ball Games at Weddings

I never heard of this custom but Gio has researched it.
What have ball games got to do with weddings, I hear you ask? Well, in some parts of North England, Scotland and France there was a tradition dictating that the bridegroom had to contribute either a football, or money to buy one, to the local youths or community. It sure sounds like a weird way to celebrate a wedding, doesn't it? But there's a reason for it. This custom seems to have derived from the traditions of "paying the footing", which dictated that someone joining a community (or removing someone from the community, as is the case in some weddings) had to make a donation to it. In this case, the ball was the donation required by the bridegroom to the community. Sometimes, it was the bride to give the ball to youths. (Read entire post.)
Share

Sunday, June 10, 2012

Abbé Magnin's Testimony


Lenotre's The Last Days of Marie Antoinette (1907) includes some revealing first hand accounts, including the testimony of the priest who, in spite of the great risks, was able to say Mass for the queen before her death. Abbé Magnin stated the following:  
The day of the sacred ceremony being agreed upon, the gaoler came to meet us during the night at a particular spot, and took us into the prison. I heard the Queen's confession. Mademoiselle Fouché was prepared to receive her Saviour and the two gendarmes assured me that they also were ready, and earnestly desired to communicate in these fortunate and unexpected circumstances.
I celebrated Holy Mass and gave the Communion to the Queen, who, as she fortified herself with the eucharistic bread, received from God the courage to bear uncomplainingly all the torture that awaited her. Mademoiselle Fouché and the two gendarmes were at the same time admitted to the divine banquet. Having undertaken to tell my story in few words, I cannot possibly dwell upon the emotion to which so touching a scene must give rise....

Share

Saturday, June 9, 2012

The Dauphin

Someone wrote me asking about the origins of the word "Dauphin," the title of the heir to the throne of France. Here is the historical background:
During the feudal period, the County of Viennois, which became later more or less the modern Dauphiné, was not part of the Kingdom of France. In documents, its ruler was named Count (comes) and sometimes Dauphin (delfinus) of Viennois. There was also a Dauphin both in Forez and Auvergne, but the origin of the name is obscure.
In the first half of the 13th century, the Dauphin of Viennois adopted canting arms with a dolphin. This dolphin was a stylized fish with a curved back, a large head and a trunk, and had a spiny dorsal fin. It was also frequently crowned because the dolphin was then considered as the king of fish.
In 1343, Dauphin Humbert II ceded all his possessions to one of the sons or grand-sons of the King of France and received money and a life annuit in exchange. On 16 July 1349, Charles of France, grand-son of Philip VI, became Dauphin du Viennois. Charles used a shield with quartered arms of France and the County of Viennois (D'or au dauphin d'azur, oreillé, crêté et barbé de gueules), and was progressively named the Dauphin
Beginning with Charles VI, the County was given to the eldest son of the King, who was also the putative throne heir. When the heir was not the King's son, he was not called the Dauphin. Dauphin was an abbreviation, the correct title being Premier fils de France et Dauphin du Viennois (First son of France and Dauphin of Viennois). The title of Dauphin de France, popularized during the reign of Louis XV, never existed formally.
The most famous Dauphin was Louis XVII (1785-1795), the son of Louis XVI, who mysteriously died in captivity during the Revolution. His tragic life motivated several romantic legends about him, and several impostors showed up claiming to be the Dauphin, the most famous of them being Naundorff, a watchmaker of German origin.
The word dauphin is used as a common name in French to designate the putative successor of someone of importance, especially in politics, and to nickname the team ranked second in a championship.
 More HERE.

After the mysterious death of Louis XVII in the Temple Prison, many claimants arose pretending to the identity of the son of Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette. It was long before the days of DNA testing. An American legend of the Lost Dauphin, mentioned in the novel Madame Royale, involves the saga of Eleazar Williams, retold as follows:
It was at this point that the history of Appleton became interwoven with the life of Eleazar Williams, one of the colorful figures that appear throughout America's early years. Williams was a soldier, a spy, an explorer,a linguist, an Indian leader, a Christian and one of many who claimed to be the Lost Dauphin, or the rightful heir to the throne of France. William's dream of founding a great Indian empire in the western territory led directly-- and accidentally -- to the creation of Appleton.
Eleazar Williams' ancestors have been traced back to the Deerfield Massacre of 1704. In that year, a party of Mohawk Indians and French soldiers raided the small town of Deerfield, Massachusetts, and captured more than 100 people, including the minister, John Williams, his wife, and seven children.Over the following two years, most of those captured were returned, but Eunice Williams (who was seven years old when taken), continued to live with her Indian captors. When grown Eunice married an Indian chief who took the name Williams as his own. Eleazar Williams was their great-grandson.
No one knows for sure when Eleazar Williams was born. He claimed to have no knowledge of his own life before the age of twelve or thirteen.Other sources quote him as saying that he was born in Canada about 1789. It is known, however, that in 1800 Williams was taken to live with relatives in Massachusetts, and that he attended Dartmouth College. By his own account, he served in the War of 1812 as a scout and spy for American forces on the northern border of New York. After the war, he became an Episcopal missionary and was sent to the Oneida Tribe of upper New York State. Heproved to be successful there, converting many of the Oneida to the Episcopal faith. He also translated the prayer book and hymns into the Iroquois language and revised and simplified Mohawk spelling.

With the continued growth of the country, land agents were eager to gain control of the valuable New York Indian reservations. Thomas Ogden, a key man in a powerful New York land corporation, approached Williams with the idea of persuading several tribes -- the Stockbridge, the Munsee, and the Oneida -- to move west, enabling Ogden's company to exploit the Indian's New York land. Williams liked the idea; he envisioned himself as the leader of a vast Indian empire in the unsettled wilderness. He hoped that the U.S. government would support his scheme, as a way of dealing with "the Indian problem," as it was called in those days. Secretary of War John C. Calhoun had no intention of allowing Williams to set up any kind of empire in America's western lands, but Calhoun was happy to encourage Williams in any plan that would remove the Indians from New York. In 1820, Calhoun sent a commissioner to investigate sites in the Fox RiverValley, which was then part of the Michigan Territory.

Also in 1820, with funds supplied by the Ogden Land Company, Williams led a group of Oneida Indians west to see about buying some land. In August of the following year, Williams met with the Winnebago and Menominee chiefs of the Fox River area. The chiefs have been described in some accounts as being rather reluctant to part with any of their land, but, with the support of Michigan Territorial Governor Lewis Cass, Williams persuaded the chiefs to sign a treaty surrendering some of their property. Under the terms of that treaty, Williams and the New York tribes were granted a four mile-wide strip across the Fox River, Just south of Green Bay, with Little Chute in the center. In exchange, the Menominee and Winnebago were paid with goods valued at $3,950.

Back in New York, many of the Oneida opposed the move to Wisconsin and asked the Episcopal Church to remove Williams as their religious leader. However, with the Church and the War Department backing Williams, the Oneida had little say in the matter. With no other choice, the first groups of Oneida and Stockbridge Indians began their long journey to Wisconsin. In 1822, they established a settlement at Duck Creek, about eight miles northwest of Green Bay. In the following years, more New York Indians joined the first group, and the settlement grew. With the influx of these new arrivals,many Menominee and Winnebago came to regret having sold their land.

Ignoring the concerns of the Indians, the U.S. government pressed on, seeking even more land concessions from the Menominee and Winnebago Tribes. At a meeting at Little Lake Buttes des Morts in August, 1827, Governor Cass negotiated a treaty that transferred almost the entire Fox River Valley from the Winnebago, the Menominee, and the former New York Indians, tothe U. S. government. This treaty upset many of the Indians involved, and led to the brief "Winnebago War" of 1827, which consisted of a few isolated raids on white settlers. Governor Cass acted quickly, sending Colonel Henry Dodge and the militia to crush the revolt. Once again the Indians were defeated.

In the mean time, things were not going well for Eleazar Williams. Still seeing himself as the leader of the New York tribes, Williams had made his home in Green Bay. He opened a school for the children of Indians and white settlers, but the school was a failure. In 1823, he married a former student, Madeleine Jourdain, a descendant of both French trappers and Menominee Indians. From her Menominee relatives, Madeleine inherited a large tract of land on the Fox River, near De Pere. It was there that Madeleine and Eleazar built a home and raised their three children.

Despite his new family responsibilities, Williams traveled extensively throughout the midwest, trying to persuade new tribes to join his planned empire. In 1830 he visited Washington, D.C., looking for government support. Instead of support, however, his plans were thoroughly rejected by the government. His dreams of an empire in ruins, Williams returned to Wisconsin to find himself unwanted there as well. In 1824, the Episcopal Church had replaced Williams as the missionary of Green Bay, and by the early 1830s most of the Indian groups, tired of his lies and schemes, refused to have any contact with him. Short on funds, and with few prospects, Williams left his family in Wisconsin and returned to New York.

In 1844, while looking for financial help, Williams contacted Amos Lawrence, an early leader in the New England textile trade and a wealthy Boston philanthropist. Amos Lawrence was willing to work out a loan agreement with Williams, but poor health forced him to turn the arrangements over to his son, Amos A.Lawrence. Mortgaging over 5,000 acres of his wife's property along the Fox River, Williams made two separate loans, one for $1,697.80, the other for $1,800. Unfortunately for Williams, his financial condition did not improve, and he was unable to buy back his wife's property. Years later he would claim that the younger Mr. Lawrence swindled him out of the land.

After that, Williams continued to drift scheme to another. No one is quite sure when he first claimed to be the Lost Dauphin of France, but an editor in Boston heard the story from Williams as early as 1839. Ever since the revolution that overthrew the French monarchy in 1789, rumors had circulated that the Dauphin, or young prince, had escaped from the revolutionary guards. Historians today believe that the Dauphin died in jail shortly after his parents, King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette,were beheaded. At the time, however, many chose to believe that the Dauphin had been smuggled out of France and taken to America. Williams was aware of his physical resemblance to the French royal family, the Bourbons, and that may explain his decision to claim that he was the Lost Dauphin. Apparently, few people at the time took him seriously.
In 1841, Williams saw a chance to bolster his claim to royal birth. In that year, Prince de Joinville was making a tour of the United States. Prince de Joinville was the younger son of Louis Phillip, the reigning King of France. Keeping his plans a secret, Williams arranged to meet the Prince while he was passing through the Great Lakes, and then to accompany him to Green Bay. Later, Williams would claim that the Prince had come to Green Bay specifically to see him. Further, Williams said that the Prince had offered him a vast estate if only Williams would renounce his claim to the throne. The Prince denied this story as soon as he heard of it, saying that his only interest in Williams was as an Indian missionary. Still, the story did not die. In July, 1849, The United States Magazineand Democratic Review carried an anonymous article stating that Williams truly was the Lost Dauphin. Only after his death was it learned that Williams apparently wrote the article himself. A few years later, in the February 1853, issue of Putnam's Magazine, J.H. Hanson, an Episcopal minister, published an article entitled "Have We A Bourbon Among Us?" That article also supported Williams' claims. Serious historians immediately refuted Hanson's speculations, but many others believed him and, for a while, Williams was something of a minor celebrity.

Despite that brief flurry of attention, Williams remained unsettled until 1850, when he accepted a position to preach to the St. Regis Indians of Hogansberg, New York. There he remained, living in quiet obscurity until his death in 1858. He was originally buried in New York, but in 1947 his remains were moved to the Holy Apostle Cemetery at Oneida, on land he had once hoped would be part of his great Indian empire. Williams' widow, Madeleine, continued to live in her house on the Fox River until her death in 1886. The papers of the Williams family are currently maintained at the Neville Museum in Green Bay. (Read more.)
Share

What Will Survive of Us is Love

From Slate:
Amor vincit omnia,” Love conquers all. Or so Virgil wrote. But does it? Does love survive dissolution of the lovers? And if so, where exactly would it be, where does all that lost love survive?

I was prompted to revisit these ancient questions anew by a long footnote about a single line in the new Complete Poems edition of Philip Larkin’s poetry. The footnote refers to “An Arundel Tomb”—widely regarded as one of Larkin’s finest poems—and contains a provocative remark about that the poem’s celebrated, controversial, closing line, the one about the true nature of immortality:
“What will survive of us is love.” (Read entire post.)
Share