Blog Archives

The Salam Witch Trials Begin

28/2/2018

At the beginning of February in 1692 in the village of Salam in Massachusetts William Griggs, the village doctor, came to the conclusion that a number of girls, including the daughter of the Samuel Parris the villages preacher, were ill because they were bewitched.

By the 25th of the month Parris's servant, a slave girl who he had bought while in Boston, confessed following a beating from Parris to practicing witchcraft. By the 29th of February a complaint was made against the servant girl and she and her husband and two other women were arrested on suspicion of witchcraft.

This one accusation was the first of many, soon fingers were pointed and tall tales told, eventually, hysteria reached such great heights that it resulted in trials and executions.

The Salam Witch Trials as they have come to be known ended in the May of 1693 when those still accused were given pardons - that's over five years of terror for the people of Salam and the deaths on twenty innocent people nineteen by hanging and one by pressing.

Many place the blame for the witchcraft trials firmly at the door of the Parris household, that is Samuel Parris, his daughter and her cousin. Parris added fuel to the fire of a community in turmoil by preaching provocatively from the pulpit - ‘there was one devil among the twelve disciples so in our church God knows how many Devils there are’ he said. The actions of his daughter and her cousin were where the trouble first began, they were said to have used what is called the Venus Glass and been frightened by what that thought they saw. Perhaps they were influenced by talk of the religious practices of the servant girl's homeland - who knows?

How easy would it have been for the girls to blame the servant when their puritan father found out what they had been doing and for Parris to use witchcraft to further his religious crusade.

No one person was held responsible for what happened in Salam but history tells us that when such things as religion, superstition, intolerance, fear and community feuds come together there can be only one result.

0 Comments

Henry the Young King

25/2/2018

0 Comments

Henry II's reign would see the end of the Anarchy and claims by others to the crown of England and therefore it would be vitally important that Henry have an heir whose right to the throne was not questioned. Henry's new wife Eleanor was said to have been vocal and argumentative and their relationship somewhat ‘fiery’ but despite this Eleanor did manage to give Henry eight children, four of which were sons.

We can only wonder if, in the first months of their marriage, Eleanor was at all worried about her inability to produce male heirs. She must have had some concerns that she did not conceive a child straight away, did she think that the spectre of her marriage to Louis VII of France had come back to haunt her, after all, in all of those fifteen years she never gave the French king a son. However, Eleanor need not of worried, she would be pregnant by the Christmas of 1152 and her first child, a son would be born the following August. Eleanor must have sighed with relief, she knew that her position as wife to the future king of England was secured.

No doubt Eleanor was all the more thrilled when she gave birth to Henry's second son on the 28th February in 1155, this new child would be named Henry after his father. Tragedy struck in the April of 1156 when William, their firstborn died aged just three of a seizure leaving his fourteen-month-old brother Henry as heir to the throne.

History would refer to Henry as the 'Young King.'

Henry would grow, according to one source, into a "lovable, eloquent, handsome and gallant" young man, however, others saw him differently, there would be those who would call a "feckless and fatuous" youth. A written description of Henry tells us that he was "tall but well proportioned, broad-shouldered with a long and elegant neck, pale and freckled skin, bright and wide blue eyes, and a thick mop of the reddish-gold hair." a description that also has been applied to his younger brother Richard, later Richard I.

Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine's family are a prime example of a dysfunctional one and this lead to problems on many different levels, especially in regard to their children. Henry would join with his younger brothers Richard and Geoffrey in rebellion against their father. All the son of Henry and Eleanor have distinctive and forceful personalities, and Henry was no different he was seen as having charm and popularity but he was also seen as irresponsible.

At the age of just fifteen, and while his father still reigned, Henry was crowned king and two years following his coronation Henry married Margaret, the daughter of his mother's first husband the above named Louis VII of France and his second wife Constance of Castile. A birth of a son to the couple would secure Henry II's new Angevin dynasty, but it was not to be, Henry the Young King's son died at just three days old in 1177. Henry himself would die just six years later at the age of twenty-eight while on campaign in Limousin in France, probably of dysentery, estranged from his father. After his death, Henry II is said to have stated
"He cost me much, but I wish he had lived to cost me more"

Henry's death left his brother Richard as heir to his fathers throne.

0 Comments

The Treaties of Berwick

25/2/2018

0 Comments

The town of Berwick stands on the banks of the River Tweed in Northumberland. Historically, its position proved useful as it is situated on the border between England and Scotland, and because of this it has seen its share of both war and peace. Because of its situation, its governance has been the responsibility of both countries on numerous occasions.

In 1357 a treaty was signed here, the first of five Treaties of Berwick, this particular treaty, between King Edward III of England and David II of Scotland, brought to an end Scotland's second attempt at independence.

In 1461 during the Wars of the Roses, when Henry VI's wife Margaret of Anjou had fled to Scotland she negotiated a deal with the recently widowed Mary of Guelders over the town in return for help with her Lancastrian cause. When all the papers are signed Berwick upon Tweed became part of Scotland, and it was not until the August of 1482 that Richard, Duke of Gloucester, later King Richard III retook the town and returned it to England.

A second treaty, signed in 1526, was issued in order to keep the peace between warring factions on the English/Scottish border.

A third, signed on this day in 1560 saw the completion of yet another Treaty of Berwick. This treaty was Elizabeth I's efforts to give some protection to those who practiced Protestantism in Scotland. The document was signed for and on behalf of the queen by Thomas Howard the Duke of Norfolk. The agreement was in respect of an alliance with Scottish nobles who were opposed to the regency of Mary of Guise, the widow of James V of Scotland, who had retained a French army for her protection. The treaty allowed English forces to enter Scotland and expel these French troops and it would be the first time in history that the English and Scottish fought together against a common foe rather than against each another.

There would be two more signing of treaties at Berwick, one in 1586 following an agreement between Elizabeth I and Mary of Guise's grandson King James VI and another in 1639 that ended the First Bishops War.

0 Comments

Death of Humphrey Duke of Gloucester

22/2/2018

0 Comments

On the 23rd of February in 1447 the death from a stroke, although there were suggestions that he was poisoned, of Humphrey Duke of Gloucester, the youngest son of Henry IV.

Although I am confident in writing about most events that cover the Wars of the Roses, there are still a few that I'm unsure of, namely the infighting between Beaufort family members ie Cardinal Henry Beaufort, Henry V's uncle and the illegitimate son of John of Gaunt and Henry's brothers Humphrey Duke of Gloucester. I understand the cost of this to the country but its the 'ins and outs' that I don't fully understand - yet.

Going some way, in part, to helping me with this was the 2016 BBC's production of The Hollow Crown: Henry VI Part One, in which Humphrey Duke of Gloucester was sympathetically played by Hugh Bonneville, a very good choice I think, his portrayal gives us a glimpse of the real man.

With what I mentioned in my second paragraph in mind I leave an assessment of Humphrey's life to author Matthew Lewis who writes in his blog -

"Humphrey was a well-liked figure who was popular with the common man and retained sympathy for the House of Lancaster as the government of his nephew became increasingly unpopular and out of touch with the country. The policy of eliminating those closest to the throne thrust Richard, Duke of York to prominence as Humphrey’s natural successor, caused those who had looked to Humphrey for a lead to turn their focus from the House of Lancaster and made York, not unreasonably, frightened of meeting the same fate simply by reason of his position. Perhaps paranoia was a part of the makeup of Henry VI’s mental issues even at this early stage, perhaps the Beauforts were manipulating him to improve their own prospects or perhaps it was a little of both. Whatever the reason, it backfired on Henry and the Beauforts, dragging England into a bitter and prolonged civil war."

You can read more about the Duke of Gloucester in Matthew's blog here

mattlewisauthor.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/the-fall-of-humphrey-duke-of-gloucester/

0 Comments

Execution of Henry Grey

22/2/2018

0 Comments

Just as his daughter had done only twelve days before, Henry Grey, Duke of Suffolk climbed the wooden steps of the scaffold to his execution on the 23rd February in 1554.

Unlike Jane's however, his death occurred at Tower Hill just outside the Tower of London.

The slippery slope to Henry Grey's gruesome demise, you could argue, began in the October of 1551 when both he and John Dudley became rich and powerful at the same time, they were conferred of the titles of the Dukedom of Suffolk and Northumberland respectively the very same day. However, Suffolk's machinations began three years earlier when he hoped to obtain the marriage of his daughter Jane, by placing her in the household of the Seymour family, to the future Edward VI. Thomas Seymour's death in 1548 scuppered Grey's plans. However, an alliance with the Duke of Northumberland, who we know set these plans to action, looked like the way forward.

At the beginning of 1554, Henry Grey managed to escape death for his part in the Duke of Northumberland plans usurp Mary's throne by feigning support of the new Catholic queen, however, Grey had a deep dislike of the old religion and needed no encouragement to join Thomas Wyatt's unsuccessful rebellion. By the end of January that year all was lost, Wyatt fled to Wales and the Duke of Suffolk escaped to his estate in Warwickshire, where he was betrayed by his gamekeeper.

By the 10th of February, Henry Grey was locked in the Tower of London for the second time, was found guilty of treason on the 17th of February and the date of his execution was set for the 23rd.

At nine o'clock on the morning of that day Henry Grey had the opportunity to speak to the assembled crowd, he apologised for offending the queen and spoke other platitudes to gain his place in heaven. According to John Foxe, the historian and writer of the stories of martyrs, Grey was accompanied to Tower Hill by Hugh Weston, Mary's chaplain. Weston followed Grey up the stairs to the scaffold but Grey objected. Grey, wrote Foxe, pushed Weston down the steps and a fight ensued. Another account, I assume written by Foxe, tells us that when Grey's executioner asked for him for forgiveness, a man in the crowd interrupted. This man was owed money by Grey, he shouted to how he was to be reimbursed to which Suffolk replied,

“Alas, good fellow! I pray thee trouble me not now, but go thy way to my officers.”

If we accept that the written accounts of Jane Grey's death had been falsified and embellished in later years by so-called historians we must, therefore, take with a pinch of salt these stories of Henry Grey's death.

Henry Grey was no doubt a weak man driven by greed. Stupidity Henry Grey had in abundance, arrogance, it seems, he had a plenty too. He like John Dudley knew how to play the game, they thought that they would succeed but they didn't, they both punished for their ambitiousness with the loss their heads.

0 Comments

Jethro Tull

21/2/2018

0 Comments

It was during the reign of George III that England underwent an agricultural revolution. Men like Berkshire born Jethro Tull, who died this day in 1740*, invented new farming methods that would improve the lives of those working on the land.

Jethro Tull's plans for a career in law and politics were derailed due to ill health. Following his marriage, he moved to one of his father's farms in Oxfordshire. It was not long after this move into farming that he discovered that the old way of planting seeds was not very efficient. In the latter part of 1699 Tull worked on his ideas for a seed drill which he had perfected by 1701, before then furrows were dug by hand and the seeds were planted too close together. Tull's drill had a rotating grooved cylinder, not only did it prove to be cost-effective but it made the crop easier to weed.

Jethro Tull's other invention with the aid to improving farming methods was a new plough. This plough had special blades that cut deeply into the soil and resulted in the grass and roots being pulled up and left on the surface to dry, these newly ploughed fields can be seen up and down the country and especially on the land that surrounds my village as you can see in the last of the images below.

Thanks to Jethro Tull and other innovative and forward-thinking landowners farming output almost doubled. The increase in the use of crops grown as food for animals allowed farmers to keep more livestock and this meant more meat was produced and sold in the markets to feed the growing population, this revolution saw the introduction of not only the new systems of cropping and but also of selective breeding.

Interestingly, it has been argued that the agricultural revolution did not happen at all, that the increase in farm production was a slow progression of events beginning in the mid-sixteenth century and ending in the eighteenth.

Jethro Tull was buried on the 9th March 1740 in the village of Hungerford in Berkshire and is buried at St Bartholomew's Church in Lower Basildon where his gravestone can be found today.

Bibliography
* - Oxford Dictionary of National Biography 1924

0 Comments

William Ufford

14/2/2018

5 Comments

On the 15th February 1382, the Earldom of Suffolk fell into abeyance on the death of William Ufford when he collapsed and died whilst climbing the stairs into Parliament.

William Ufford - St Andrews Church in Wimpole Cambridgeshire

Ufford was highly regarded, he carried the royal sceptre at the coronation of ten year old Richard II, was a councillor during the king's minority and was one of Richard's men who put down the Peasants' Revolt in 1381.

William Ufford among the crowd at Richard II's coronation.

Three years after Ufford's death, part of the family estate and the Earldom of Suffolk passed to Michael de la Pole, William's cousin via sisters Catherine and Margaret Norwich, mother's to Pole and Ufford respectively. However, the vast majority of the Suffolk estate passed in accordance to Ufford's will to his sister Cecily, wife John Willoughby of Eresby in Lincolnshire.

William's father Robert, was granted the Earldom of Suffolk in its second creation in March 1337. The family take their name from their manor in Ufford in Suffolk, it being descended through the family of Peyton. The Ufford name died along with William in 1382, their bloodline however continued through three daughters.

The descendants of the de la Pole and the Willoughby families play important parts in history. Michael de la Pole's grandson William was blamed for the loss of French territories Maine and Anjou, a scapegoat who was exiled and murdered in 1450. The Willoughby's, in the form of Robert Well's, fought against Edward IV at Losecoat field in 1470 and fourteen year old Catherine Willoughbly would marry Charles Brandon.

William Ufford was buried at Campsey Priory, in Campsea Ashe, Suffolk.

5 Comments

If You Want To Get Ahead, Get A Hat.

14/2/2018

1 Comment

Cheri by French author Colette is a wonderful book, it is set in Paris in the 1920's and tells the story of a love affair between a young man and a beautiful older woman. This period is my second favourite era, if I couldn't be transported back, just for a moment, to the medieval era, then it would have to be here, a time of La Belle Epoque, the fantastic style of Art Nouveau, delicate and very feminine dresses, and of course those gorgeous hats.

Every time I watch the film I always wonder why and when we stopped wearing hats as part of our everyday apparel. In photographs of my great aunts, they are always wearing hats and both my grandmothers, in their younger days, they wore them too. We ladies like to wear a fancy hat to a wedding, but on the whole, we have the woolly hat for winter and straw one for the summer - that's it!

The answer to my question of why we no longer wear hats lies in the war years. People stopped wearing hats after the Second World War as the British public did not want reminding of the time they spent in uniform and thought that going hatless would represent a break with the past, the breaking down of the barriers of etiquette initiated a gradual decline in hat wearing. However, the non-wearing of a hat in the institutions of authority and power such as seats of government or law was still a controversial subject. In 1942 the wearing of hats in Law Courts by women was deemed as a matter of such national importance that the Lord Chancellor was forced to consult the Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls, and the President of the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty. Examples of this can be found in the records of the Bow Street Police Court, where the Chief Clerk stated that "just as there was no law requiring a prisoner to stand, so there was none making it compulsory for a woman to wear a hat in court—unless it was the principle once enunciated in the Star Chamber that magistrates were gods." and in the Liverpool quarter sessions where the recorder, said that "women could come into his court dressed as they pleased. He wished the officials there to understand that women, whether serving on juries or as witnesses, might dress as they liked in court. There was, he continued, no sort of historic or religious basis for the absurd business of telling women that in court hats must be worn."

As is the norm with the study of history the subject of religion plays its part and surprising it has its say on the subject of the hat. It is mentioned in the bible that men were expected not to wear a hat during worship but women were told to cover their heads. The medieval woman were also told what to wear on their heads. Headdresses were worn for more than just looking attractive, they were worn specifically to cover their hair. The medieval woman's hair was considered an erotic feature and it was especially important that married woman covered their hair with veils as it was legally considered a property of the husband. The medieval lady would wear the conical hat, the circlet or the snood. The male hat of the time was the hood or cowl, the large turban cap was popular but this soon morphed into a small hat with a close turned up brim. Of course, the most famous headgear was the armoured helmet, used as a protection in battle.

Apart from wearing a hat to protect one's head or to deter the lusty medieval man etiquette played a big part in the history of what we do with the hat.

It is thought that the custom of removing or tipping your hat originates from the aforementioned medieval period, knights would raise their visors or remove their helmets as a gesture of good intent and in the same vein soldiers and the male hat wearing public would also raise their hats to their superiors. It was always the done thing for a man to raise his hat when he met a lady.

Many of these fine old traditions have long since faded into obscurity, and we as a society worse off for it I think. 'Manners' writes William Horman the 16th-century headmaster at Eton and Winchester College 'maketh man.'

1 Comment

Valentines Day

12/2/2018

0 Comments

In 1797, a book was published titled The Young Man's Valentine Writer, it contained suggested sentimental verses for a lover who was unable to write his own, the forerunner of our mass-produced cards with pre-written verses that we give to the one we love on this day

The origins of Valentines day is rather obscure, but it generally thought to be Roman. Known as the festival of Lupercalia, it was a day set aside to secure fertility and keep out evil which was celebrated on February 15. In 496, considering it a pagan festival Pope Gelauius claimed it as a Christian feast day and set it to the 14th, the day we still use. There are three saints with the name Valentines that were all martyred on the 14th of February but no one quite knows which one of them is the 'real' St Valentine but historians are suggesting that the St Valentine whose day we celebrate was a priest who got himself into trouble with the second emperor Claudius in 270

A story behind the aforementioned Claudius's Valentine states that he had fallen in love with the daughter of his jailer and before he was executed sent her a letter signed "from your Valentine." This may be the first link between Valentine and the emotion of love but by the fourteenth century, according to Henry Ansgar Kelly, a modern medieval historian, it was Geoffrey Chaucer who first linked St Valentine's Day with romance when he composed a poem to honor the engagement between King Richard II and Anne of Bohemia, but the earliest surviving valentine love poem, written in the fifteenth century, was by Charles, Duke of Orleans to his wife

Today, Valentines day a commercial success story where twenty-five percent of all cards sent each year are valentines.

In the image below we can see a love note found in Anne Boleyn’s Book of Hours, where the king writes “If you remember my love in your prayers as strongly as I adore you, I shall scarcely be forgotten, for I am yours. Henry Rex forever”

0 Comments

Death of Lady Jane Grey

11/2/2018

6 Comments

Lady Jane Grey's execution took place inside the Tower of London on the 12th February 1554, her place of execution was a privilege afforded only a select few, most executions took place outside on Tower Hill. In the years between 1483 and 1941 twenty-two people were executed inside the walls of the Tower of London five of them were women and three of the five were queens, Anne Boleyn, Catherine Howard and Jane herself. The other two were Margaret, Countess of Salisbury and Jane Boleyn, Lady Rochford.

The last day of Jane's life is shrouded in myth, a myth that has been circulating for nearly two hundred years. In 1852 English antiquarian John Gough Nichols published his version the account of Jane's death in his Chronicle of Jane Grey and Queen Mary, the chronicle itself is based on an eyewitness account by an unknown person who was inside the Tower of London at the time.

John Gough Nichols had a keen interest in rare books and had enjoyed coping from texts and epitaphs as a young boy, he also accompanied his father to Royal Society and Society of Antiquaries meetings. Obviously, words were important to him, you would think then that with such a passionate love of words and history he would know what embellishing and adding untruths to ancient text could lead to. In 1834 Nichols went to see the latest work of French artist Paul Delaroche in the National Gallery, this work went by the title The Execution of Lady Jane Grey. It was this one painting that changed history and how we understand Jane's story today. There is no doubt it's a fine painting that evokes a sense of sadness in us and it must have had the same effect on Nichols, he had fallen for an ideal. Delaroche in his story of Jane Grey's last moments uses pathos to get his idea of the suffering of the French nobility across - clever that! However, to the vast majority of the viewing public, all they saw was a romanticised view of the tragic death of a young girl.

Paul Delaroche used other English historical victims as cloaked references to the French Revolution, his victims were Charles I and Thomas Wentworth. Another example of Deloroche getting his point across is his 1831 artwork The Children of Edward, which he took inspiration from Shakespeare The Life and Death of Richard the Third, a story he knew to have some truths. With this in mind, he was able to make a comparison of the deaths of the two English princes to draw attention to the mysterious deaths of Louis XVII of France. Delaroche always denied any reference to the revolution in his works, but why would a French artist produce work based on the deaths of English victims of tyranny, if it was not to represent his own. Twenty years later, when Nichols wrote his Chronicles of Jane Grey and Queen Mary the memory of Deloroche's painting must have still been as vivid as the day he saw it, why else would he feel impelled to embellish the story and put words into the mouth the dying Jane Grey that she did not utter. In his chronicle he writes:

'First, when she mounted the scaffold, she said to the people standing thereabout " Good people, I come hither to die, and by law, I am condemned to do the same. The fact and the deed, against the queen highness, was unlawful and the consenting thereto by me, but touching the procurement and desire thereof by me or on my half, I do wash my hands thereof in innocence...Then the hangman kneels down and asked her forgiveness who she forgave most willingly. Then he willed her to stand upon the straw which doing she saw the block and said "I pray, dispatch me quickly" and kneeling down saying "will you take it off before I lay me down?" and the hangman answered "No, madam" She tied the handkerchief about her eyes and feeling for the block said "What shall I do? Where is it?" One of the standers-by guided her unto she lay her head down upon the block and stretched forth her body and said "Lord, into thy hands I commend my spirit" and so it ended.'

Compare this to the original written account of the aforementioned eyewitness present in the tower on the day of Jane's death.

'Jane, we are told, is nothing at all abashed neither with the fear of her own death, neither with the sight of the dead carcass of her husband. She came forth, the leftenant leading her in the same gown wherein she was araigned. Neither her eyes anything moistened with tears although the two gentlewomen, Mistress Tilney and Mistress Ellen wonderfully wept. Jane carried a book in her hand whereon she prayed all the way to the said scaffold"

Another source writes

'She conducted herself at her execution with the greatest fortitude and godliness.'

Jane was the daughter of Henry Grey, Duke of Suffolk and Francis Brandon, she was also the pawn of her father in law, John Dudley, the Duke of Northumberland whose actions cost her her life, and she is only really remembered in history for two things, firstly as the queen who reigned for just nine days and secondly, the aforementioned manner in which she died.

During the first few months of 1553, Edward VI under the influence of Dudley, had made an amendment to his Devise for the Succession in which he disinherited his half-sisters Mary and Elizabeth and named Jane his heir. By the May of that year and as part of his master plan Northumberland arranged the marriage of his son Guildford to Jane. Two months later, the boy king was dead and Jane was proclaimed queen and in a surprising act of defiance refused to allow Guildford to be named king, therefore scuppering Northumberland's plans to control both Jane, Guildford and England. Soon after events took a downturn with surprising speed. By July Jane was deposed, by November she had been tried and found guilty and by the beginning of February she was awaiting the day of her execution.

It would seem that the masses were not aghast by the death of this queen, for they knew little of her, the traitorous acts of Northumberland and the failed Wyatt revolt saw to it that Jane's sad tale quickly faded into obscurity.

What we should now remember about Jane is that she was an intelligent and feisty girl who left a lasting impression, notably on John Feckenham the Catholic priest Queen Mary sent to convert her and that she was one of many Tudor women whose wants and needs were overridden by the actions of the self-serving Tudor man. She was not the first to die because of the ambition of others, and she would not be the last.

An interesting side note on Jane's death is the death of Richard Morgan the judge who condemned her, he, by all accounts, died tormented by guilt two years later -

"touching the condemnation of this lady Iane, here is to be noted, that the Iudge morgan who gaue the sentence of condemnation against her, shortly after hee had condemned her, fell mad, and in hys rauing cryed out continually to haue the Lady Iane taken away from him, and so ended hys lyfe.

This account appears in John Foxes Actes and Monuments another appears in Holinshed's Chronicle. Jane's death made her a Protestant martyr, and there can be no better way to brand the Catholic religion as evil than to point out the horrible death those who do not follow the new true faith.

Jane Grey was buried along with her husband in the Chapel of St Peter ad Vincula.

Their grave is not marked.

6 Comments

<<Previous

Archives

Categories