I think I can speak for a large proportion of men in saying that finding the perfect female animal is pretty high up there on the list of reasons for marriage. Although, saying that, marriage is hardly the inviolable institution it used to be. Anyway, I digress... Just take a look at this beauty. She be smart, willing, eager and easily pleased. What more could a man want? I'm sure there's numerous wisecracks I could insert at this point but I'm going to be the bigger man and just let it lie.

 

Like the rest of this sordid little lot these pictures have been reimagined from actual news headlines. I fill my head with this grubby nonsense so you don't have to. Vive la revolution!

 

Available from idiom.bigcartel.com/

 

Cheers

 

id-iom

 

Title: I married the perfect female animal

Materials: Paint pen, acrylic and charcoal

Size: A4

HISTORY OF THE DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY, OUR LADY OF LIGHT (PATRONESS OF LOON, BOHOL)

 

The image of the Kasilak was reported to have been originally enthroned in a church in Butuan, Agusan del Norte on September 8, 1597. When the Moro bandits attacked the coastal villages of Mindanao, concerned Butuanons sailed north towards Bohol bringing with them the wooden statue of Our Lady. Unfortunately, the Moros were also wreaking havoc on some communities on the island. The group was determined to sail towards Cebu but the Marian devotees opted to sail towards the western rim of the island, dropping anchor in Sandingan, a tranquil island near mainland Loon.

 

Upon knowing that a well-established community existed in Napo, the group led by Rev. Fr. Pedro Lopez, S.J. brought the image to the latter where it was warmly received and enthroned. This happened in 1610. For several years, the Birhen sa Kasilak was venerated by the Loonanon faithful in this old poblacion of Loon.

 

In 1753, Fray Manuel de Elizalde of the Jesuit Mission became the first parish priest of the Parroquia de Nuestra Señora de la Luz (Our Lady of Light). In 1768, the Jesuits ceded administration of the parish to the Recollects. Years later, the image of the Kasilak was permanently enthroned in the present church of Loon which was completed around 1855.

 

The first miracle attributed to the Kasilak happened in the 18th century when a band of Moros sailed towards Napo to loot its houses of valuables. Our Lady allegedly appeared atop the steps of Inang-angan in her most radiant glory. The blinding lights radiating from her forced the intruders to sail away. Since then, countless untold miracles have been experienced by the Loonanon faithful.

 

Today, SidlaKasilak, Loon’s Festival of Lights, brings back the memory of those days when Our Lady was brought to Loon almost 400 years ago. A few days before September 8, the feast day of the town’s patroness, Loonanons stage the festival to commemorate the arrival of the image of Our Lady from Butuan.

 

The “Birhen sa Kasilak” exhorts all of us to seek the True Light, Jesus Christ, especially in these times when selfishness, corruption, indifference and deceit seem to eclipse the real essence of life and living. She also encourages everyone to pass on this Light to all families and communities so that all will live united in a much better world.

 

NATIVITY OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY (TITULAR OF THE PARISH OF LOON, BOHOL)

 

The birth of the Blessed Virgin Mary announced joy and the near approach of salvation to the lost world; therefore is this festival celebrated by the church with praise and thanksgiving. It was a mystery of sanctity, and distinguished by singular privileges. Mary was brought forth into the world, not like other children of Adam, infected with the loathsome contagion of sin, but pure, holy, beautiful, and glorious, adorned with all the most precious graces which became her who was chosen to be the Mother of God. She appeared indeed in the weak state of our mortality; but in the eyes of heaven she already transcended the highest seraph in purity, brightness, and the richest ornaments of grace. I am black, but beautiful, O ye daughters of Jerusalem. The spouse says to her much more emphatically than to other souls sanctified by his choicest graces: As the lily among thorns, so is my beloved among the daughters. Thou art all fair, and there is not a spot in thee. Man was no sooner fallen in paradise through the woman seduced by the infernal spirit, but God promised another woman whose seed should crush that serpent’s head. I will put enmities, said he to the serpent, between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel. This curse is evidently to be understood of the devil who seduced Eve, and with implacable malice sought the destruction of her posterity. It is not the real serpent that is here meant; the sense would be too low; and why should the serpent, which was not in fault, be so treated, and the true offender, the devil, who had either taken the figure of the crafty serpent, or concealed himself in that reptile, escape all punishment? The Hebrew original expresses the latter part of this prophecy as follows: It (i.e. her seed) shall crush thy head. In the birth of the Virgin Mary was the accomplishment of this solemn prediction begun.

 

To understand the great present that in her God bestowed on the world, we must consider her transcendent dignity and the singular by which she was distinguished above all other pure creatures. Her dignity is expressed by the evangelist when he says, That of her was born Jesus who is called the Christ. From this text alone is that article of the Catholic faith sufficiently evinced, that she is truly Mother of God. It is clear this is not to be understood as if she could be in any sense mother of the Divinity, the very thought whereof would imply contradiction and blasphemy, but by reason that she conceived and brought forth that Blessed Man who subsisting by the second divine person of the adorable Trinity is consequently the natural, not the adoptive Son of God, which was the Semi-Nestorian error broached by Felix and Elipandus. In the Incarnation the human nature of Christ was assumed by, and hypostatically, that is intimately and substantially, united to the person of God the Son, so that the actions done by this nature, are the actions of that Divine Person, whose assumed or appropriated nature this is. Hence we truly say with St. Paul, that we are redeemed by the blood of a God, and with the church, that God was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered and died on the cross; all which he did in that human nature which he had wonderfully taken upon him.

 

Nestorius, a man ignorant in ecclesiastical learning, but vain, opinionated, and presumptumtous a degree of extravagance, introduced a new heresy, teaching that there are in Christ two persons no less than two natures, the divine and human united, not intrinsically, but only morally, by the divinity dwelling in the humanity of Christ as in its temple. Thus the heresiarch destroyed the incarnation held two Christs, the one God, and the other man, and denied the Blessed Virgin to be the Mother of God, saying she was mother of the man Christ, whom he distinguished from the Christ who is God. The constant faith of the Catholic church teaches, on the contrary, that in Christ the divine and human nature subsist both by the same divine person, that Christ is both truly God and truly man, and that the Virgin Mary is the Mother of God by having brought forth him who is God, though he derived from her only his assumed nature of man. The errors of Nestorius were condemned in the general council of Ephesus in 431, and from the ancient tradition of the church, the title of the Mother of God was confirmed to the Virgin Mary. Socrates and St. Cyril of Alexandria prove that this epithet * was given her by the church from primitive tradition; and it occurs in the writings of the fathers who flourished before that time, as in the letter of St. Dionysius of Alexandria to Paul of Samosata, in the Alexandria, manuscript of the Bible, which, according to Grabe, was writ before the year 390, &c. So notorious and ordinary was this appellation, that, as St. Cyril of Alexandria testifies, Julian the Apostate reproached the Christians that they never ceased calling Mary Mother of God; and so clearly was Nestorius convicted in this point, as to be obliged to confess this title, though he never departed from his heretical tenets.

 

The dignity of Mother of God is the highest to which any mere creature is capable of being raised. What closer alliance could any pure creature have with the Creator of all things? What name could be more noble what prerogative more singular, or more wonderful, He who was born of the Father from all eternity, the only-begotten and consubstantial Son, Maker and Lord of all things, is born in time, and receives a being in his nature of man from Mary. “Listen and attend, O man,” cries out St. Anselm, “and be transported in an ecstasy of astonishment, contemplating this prodigy. The infinite God had one only begotten co-eternal Son; yet he would not suffer him to remain only his own, but would also have him to be made the only Son of Mary.” And St. Bernard says; “Choose which you will most admire, the most beneficent condescension of the Son, or the sublime dignity of the Mother. On each side it is a subject of wonder and astonishment; that a God should obey a woman is a humility beyond example, and that a woman commands a God, is a preeminence without a rival.” The first, which is the humiliation of him who is infinite, in itself can bear no comparison with the other, but the astonishing exaltation of Mary transcends what we could have imagined any creature capable of. No creature can be raised to what is infinite: yet the object or term of this dignity of Mary is infinite, and the dignity has a nearer and closer relation to that object than could have been imagined possible by creatures, had not omnipotence made it real. * To this transcendent dignity all graces and privileges, how great and singular soever, seem in some measure due. We admire her sanctity, her privileged virginity, all the graces with which she was adorned, and the crown with which she is exalted in glory above the cherubim; but our astonishment ceases when we reflect that she is the Mother of God. In this is every thing great and good, that can suit a mere human creature, naturally comprised.

 

To take a review of some other singular privileges of this glorious creature, we must further consider that she is both a mother and a spotless virgin. This is the wonderful prerogative of Mary alone; a privilege and honor reserved to her, which shall not be given to any other, says St. Bernard. The ancient prophets spoke of it as the distinguishing mark of the Mother of the Messiah and the world’s Redeemer, and frequently call the Christ Jehovah or the true God, as Dr. Waterland demonstrates by many passages. This was the miraculous token of the assured deliverance of mankind by the long expected Savior, which God himself was to give to the incredulous king Achaz, doubt and anxious about his present deliverance from his temporal enemies. The Lord himself shall give you a sign, said Isaias: Behold, a Virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel. This must evidently be understood of the Messiah, to whom alone many qualities and epithets in this and the following chapter can agree, though a son of the prophet mentioned afterward was also a present type of the king’s temporal deliverance. The title of Virgin must here mean one who remained such when a mother; for this circumstance is mentioned as a stupendous miracle. Jeremy also, contemplating this mystery in spirit, expressed his astonishment at this prodigy unheard of on earth, that a woman should encompass in her womb a man, the great Redeemer of the world.

 

The perpetual virginity of the Mother of God has been denied by several heretics. Ebion and Cerinthus had the insolence to advance that she had other children before Jesus; but this impious error is condemned by all who receive the holy gospel, by which it is manifest that Jesus is the first-born. In the fourth age Helvidius, and soon after him Jovinian, pretended she had other children after Christ. Jovinian, and among modern Protestants, Beza, Albertin, and Basnage, will not allow her the title of Virgin in the birth of Christ. Against these errors the Catholic church has always inviolably maintained that she was a virgin before, in, and after his birth; whence she is styled ever Virgin. This article is defended in all its points by St. Jerome, St. Epiphanius, and other fathers. St. Jerome shows that the expression of the evangelist, that Joseph knew her not till she had brought forth her first-born, no ways intimates that he knew her afterward, as no one will infer that because God says: I am till you grow old, he should then cease to be, &c. The same father proves that first-born in the sacred writings means the first son, whether any other children followed or not and that those who were called the brothers of our Lord according to the Hebrew phrase, were only cousins-german, sons of another Mary, called of Alphaeus, and of Cleophas, sister to the Blessed Virgin. He confirms the belief of her perpetual virginity from the testimony of St. Ignatius, St. Polycarp, St. Irenaeus, St. Justin, &c. St. Epiphanius further observes that no one ever named Mary without adding the title of virgin; and that, had she had other children, Jesus would not have recommended her on the cross to St. John, &c. The fathers apply to her many emblems and types of the old law and the prophets expressive of this prerogative, calling her the Eastern Gate of the Sanctuary shown to Ezechiel, through which only our Lord passed, the bush which Moses saw burning without being consumed, Gideon’s fleece continuing dry whilst the earth all around it was wet, &c. Her virginity was not only a miraculous privilege, but also a voluntary virtue, she having, by an early vow, consecrated her chastity to God, as the fathers infer from her answer to the angel. Such a privileged mother became the Son of God. The earth, defiled by the abominations of impurity, was loaded with the curses of God, who said: My spirit shall not remain in man for ever, because he is flesh. But God choosing Mary to take himself flesh of, prepared her for that dignity by her spotless virginity, and on account of that virtue said to her: The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee. It is by imitating her perfect purity according to our state, that we shall recommend ourselves to our heavenly spouse, who is the lover of chaste souls, and is called by St. Gregory Nazianzen, the virgin by excellence, and the first of virgins. In the example and patronage of Mary we have a powerful succor against the opposite most abominable and destroying vice. We can only be victorious in its most dangerous conflicts by arming ourselves with her sincere humility, perfect distrust in ourselves, constant spirit of prayer, and flight of the shadow of danger, and with the mortification of our own will, and of our senses and flesh.

 

The Virgin Mary was the most perfect model of all other virtues. St. Ambrose, in the beginning of his second book, On Virginity, exhorts virgins in particular to make her life the rule of their conduct: “Let the life and virginity of Mary,” says he “be set before you as in a looking-glass, in which is seen the pattern of chastity and virtue. The first spur to imitation is the nobility of the master. What more noble than the Mother of God! - she was a virgin in body and mind, whose candor was incapable of deceit or disguise; humble in heart; gray in words; wise in her resolutions. She spoke seldom and little; read assiduously, and placed her confidence, not in inconstant riches, but in the prayers of the poor. Being always employed with fervor, she would have no other witness of her heart but God alone, to whom she referred herself, and all things she did or possessed. She injured no one, was beneficent to all, honored her superiors, envied not equals, shunned vain-glory followed reason, ardently loved virtue. Her looks were sweet, her discourse mild, her behavior modest. Her actions had nothing unbecoming, her gait nothing of levity, her voice nothing of overbearing assurance. Her exterior was all so well regulated, that in her body was seen a picture of her mind, and an accomplished model of all virtues. Her charities knew no bounds; temperate in her diet she prolonged her fasts several days, and the most ordinary meats were her choice, not to please the taste, but to support nature. The moments which we pass in sleep, were to her a time for the sweetest exercises of devotion. It was not her custom to go out of doors, except to the temple, and this always in the company of her relations, &c. The humble and perfect virtue of Mary raised in St. Joseph the highest opinion of her sanctity as appeared when he saw her with child. “This is a testimony of the sanctity of Mary,” says St. Jerome, “that Joseph knowing her chastity, and admiring what had happened, suppresses in silence a mystery which he did not understand.” Another ancient writer improves the same remark, crying out: “O inestimable commendation of Mary! Joseph rather believed her virtue than her womb, and grace rather than nature. He thought it more possible that Mary should have conceived by miracle without a man than that she should have sinned.” Yet this sanctity of Mary, which was a subject of admiration to the highest heavenly spirits, consisted chiefly in ordinary actions, and in the purity of heart and the fervor with which she performed them. All her glory is from within! From her we learn that our spiritual perfection as to be sought in our own state and depends very much upon the manner in which we perform our ordinary actions. True virtue loves to do all things in silence and with as little show and noise as may be; it studies to avoid whatever would mend it to the eyes of men, desiring to have no other witness but him who is its rewarder and whose glory alone it seeks. A virtue which wants a trumpet to proclaim it, or, which affects only public, singular, or extraordinary actions, is to be suspected of subtle pride, vanity, and self-love.

 

To study these lessons in the life of Mary, to praise God for the graces which he has conferred upon her, and the blessings which through her he has bestowed on the world, and to recommend our necessities to so powerful an advocate, we celebrate festivals in her honor. This of her Nativity has been kept in the church with great solemnity above a thousand years. The Roman Order mentions the homilies and litany which were appointed by pope Sergius in 688 to be read upon it; and a procession is ordered to be, made on this day from St. Adrian’s church to the Liberian basilic or St. Mary Major. * In the Sacramentary of St. Gregory the Great, published by Dom Menard, particular collects or prayers are prescribed for the mass, procession, and matins on the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, with a special preface for the mass. A mass with particular collects for this festival occurs in the old Roman Sacramentary or Missal, published by cardinal Thomasius, which is judged by the learned to be the same that war used by pope Leo the Great, and some of his predecessors. This feast is mentioned by St. Ildefonsus, in the seventh century. The Greeks (as appears from the edict of the emperor Emmanuel Comnenus), the Copths in Egypt, and the other Christian churches in the East, keep with great solemnity the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin. St. Peter Damian pathetically exhorts all the faithful to celebrate it with great devotion.

 

We celebrate the anniversaries of the birthdays of earthly princes, who, on those occasions, dispense freely their favors and liberalities. How ought we to rejoice in that of the Virgin Mary, presenting to God the best homage of our praises and thanksgiving for the great mercies he has shown in her, and imploring her mediation with her Son in our behalf! We shall doubtless experience the particular effects of her compassion and goodness on a day observed by the whole church with so great devotion in her honor. Christ will not reject the supplications of his Mother, whom he was pleased to obey whilst on earth. Her love, care, and tenderness for him, and the sorrows which she felt for his sake in the state of his mortality, those breasts which gave him suck, those hands which served him, must move him to hear her; the titles and qualities which she bears the charity and graces with which she is adorned, and the crown of glory with which she is honored, must incline him readily to receive her recommendations and petitions.

 

Reprinted from the website of the Diocese of Tagbilaran

Here Be Magic

The Source’s Apprentice

 

FEAR = False Evidence Appearing Real

HOPE = Higher Order Potential Explored

LOVE = Living One Vibrant Energy

  

Who are you, what is the world, how did you get here, where are we going and why? Every child asks these questions, as do the mortally ill and those suddenly faced with unexpected change.

 

Young children (and venerable ancients) are most intimately connected to the deepest mysteries of being. All existence is a glorious mystery that inspires open minds and passionate hearts. Life begins in a rush of extraordinary emotion with an intimate embrace of the actual, immediate, visceral present and leaves deep imprints that last through the next rebirth and beyond.

 

Many newborn babes know answers to the deepest conundrums, yet quickly forget – distracted by the ongoing process of learning to wear a new body in a strangely demanding culture of drowsy domesticated primates. Most ‘modern’ people are quickly weaned from a sense of wonder to suckle on toxic waste and moribund notions in notional nations at war with themselves. What use are masters and mistresses of universal truths to soulless machines of industrious wastage – to self-styled half blind so-called ‘leaders’ who only require mindless cogs and obedient dogs that will work on their pet projects without question?

 

Eternal questions lead to cascades of answers and torrents of more questions. At some point in life all beings wonder and ponder the primal questions of life, the universe and everything. Every child knows they’re on a magical mystery tour, exploring and creating a gloriously intricate realm of intriguing riddles and sumptuous sensualities. Every freshly incarnate soul knows answers to eternal conundrums and recognises that truth must be really simple, clear and meaningful – unlike the plethora of corporate, ‘religious’ and ‘spiritual’ lies they’re fed to keep them in place in the usual fowl-brained pecking ordure.

 

People are rapidly weaned from infinite fonts of unending wisdom, fed on senseless half truths and superstitions by blithering wastrels until we’re self-caged in boxes and propped before blinding screens devoid of imagination, filled up with loony marching tunes, violent comical characters, warrior ‘ethics’, impersonal personalities and mobsters from the Id.

 

Yet every being who finds themselves living in the bosom of Gaia has the ability to flourish in a garden of freedom, art, truth and beauty – unless the divine rapture of happy revelry is beaten and brainwashed out of them by damaged control freaks. The adulteration of adulthood customarily twists each bright new spark into a carelessly forgetful servile dolt wearing uniform uniforms that suit self-styled bosses and no-one else. Yet the bright living world continues to glow and beckon with magnetic inner light, awakening inner sight and inner sense in every insightful innocent soul.

 

Even while selling, selling out or selling one’s soul, answers and questions lurk within, biding their time til the moment of wonder emerges anew – flowers that bud from slimy mud to bloom in the light of an unbranded bright new day.

 

Children know what magic is. Magic is obviously the ability to alter the fabric of ‘material reality’ at will. Adolescents and adults who quest after magical reality or ultimate truths usually encounter the teaching that magic is the ability to alter one’s level and state of consciousness at will. It transpires that these two views of magical reality are one and the same, for the world is made of mindstuff – the very same stuff you’ve made of your self.

 

We’re all the creator of the world we inhabit. We make and remake the cosmos we perceive from instant to instant in a seamless flow far quicker than any word or thought a monkey mind can shape or utter. We mould malleable mindstruff to fit about our hopes, dreams, desires and fears. The strongest, most emotively driven visions predominate, setting the course of our self-chosen destiny from moment to moment. At every instant new doors are opened and closed by decisive thoughts which come and go so swiftly they barely seem to register, ignored by minds entrained to self destruction through perpetual distraction.

 

Who won last weekend’s game? Who’ll win next week’s? Who really cares or remembers the identikit features of identical born-to-die gladiators or the meaningless trivia of daily scores? Every broadcast from the blaring, pumping, chest-thumping media is thoroughly massaged premasticated pap made to sell, sell, sell the messy message that life is hell without labels and boxes and plastic bags. The ‘news’ is a neverchanging regurgitated weather report overflowing with the meaningless mummery of falsified finance, shaggy cat stories and fishy tales about the none that got away from The System.

 

People aren’t encouraged to examine their minds – to investigate the source and route of each thought that passes through the easily distracted awareness of industrious sociable beings. In the kingdom of the blind, endless mindless busyness is promoted to a virtue and self-examination is regarded as ‘useless navel gazing’.

 

The boss will tell you that there’s plenty of time for self examination when you’re fading and tired and retired from the rat race. There’s plenty of time to be free when you’re old, weak, moribund and no longer a potential threat to the busy, dizzy status quo. Meanwhile, follow the leaders and only read parking meters – and pay through the nose for the right to exist, eat, drink and inhabit space. Do what’s expected of you and reap your reward; Work. Consume. Obey. Marry and reproduce. Die – and then begin all over again, with that alluring ‘clean slate’ – that fresh start each adult craves when they realise they’re botching Life and selling their heritage for a bowl of cold potage.

 

Turn on. Tune in. Opt out! The real world and real you awaits; waiting for you to discover your self.

 

You always get what you wish for – often when you’ve forgotten you ever wished for it – so be careful what you wish for, for wishing is magic. Each idle thought is a wilful wish when fuelled by hope or fear, love or anger or any potent emotion in the unformed ocean of eternal becoming.

 

Magic in a Holographic Fractal Multiverse

 

The cosmos is infinite, and we don’t even live in a single universe. We live in – and contain – an infinite multiverse of limitless potential.

 

Fractals and fractal imagery demonstrate the truth of an infinite cosmos shaping and shaped by each whole fragment of ultimate reality. Every part, particle, participle and person reflects and refracts the infinite whole – a fluid hologram altered by individual perspectives in a freewheeling free willed phantasmagoria of endless possibility and infinite variety in continuous communion with itself.

 

As free will is real and events are not locked into predetermined courses, there can’t be any such thing as accurate prediction – just hypnotic programs that attempt to create self-fulfilling prophecies – for all is in flux and the Book of Life is always being inscribed and rewritten as the Book of Changes. There was no single Big Bang or Creation event, for creation continues at all times in all places, everywhere and anywhen. The illusion of creation is simply the result of premillennial brainwashed minds; a dopey falsehood imagined by ‘scientists’ entrained to believe in a fantasy parental archetype – a creator god (or goddess) – by superannuated superstitions strangely exalted as ‘faiths’ or ‘religions’.

 

There is no god and no master, but truth, beauty, freedom and love are royally real. You are the creator. You are totally free – and ultimately responsible for everything! No guilt, honour, opprobrium or any other imaginary construct applies to you as a result of your creation. Mistakes are impossible in an infinite multiverse; all is research and all is Art. Yet some artistic creations are more pleasing to the senses than others and some acts far more compassionate and conscious. The holographic nature of reality assures that everyone IS everyone and that one simple ‘rule’ actually does apply to all human behaviour and discourse – the eternal Golden Rule; do as you’d be done by.

 

You create (your own) reality. How are you doing it? Self-styled creators tend to develop an exalted opinion of themselves, in the false belief they’re in charge of everyone and everything else – yet everyone is in charge of and charged by their own ongoing freeform destiny, ultimately beholden to no other yet intricately interlinked with all. Everyone is divine, a whole fractal facet of everyone and everything.

 

You magnetise reality, shaping and guiding the transitory ‘material world’ to follow the pattern of your dreaming. How are you doing it? Are you actually moulding the infinite potential of possibility itself, or are you selecting the best of all possible worlds from the myriad pre-existing choices available – or both, or neither? Are you a corpse that died at an earlier time, dreaming the ongoing world as you decompose into soil? Are you a Neo(tonous being) imagining a preprogrammed life in an artificial matrix?

 

How can you truly know the truth?

 

By examining each thought and image that enters your mind, and seeing from whence it arises. By meditating, and truly SEEING the sea of mentality through which you’re swimming until you find the still, pure centre where the true you abides, becoming the source of all creation at the centre of the cyclone, wreathed in the swirling spin of everchanging thoughtforms and myriad potential.

 

Kaleidoscopic Cosmos

 

There is another way of viewing the kaleidoscopic cosmos. Matter doesn’t exist. It’s an illusion created by apparent ‘particles’ which also don’t exist in ‘real’ terms, but are actually eddies formed by intricately interlocking standing waves. We live in a fluid fractal hologram. All patterns echo the primal form from which all other fractal versions and visions are derived; the vortex at the core of all things, the shape of the cosmos itself.

 

Every ‘electron’ and every other vortexial fragment of wholistic unity holds a holographic image of everything within its spinning skein. Every grain of a holographic image contains an image of the whole picture, and every vortex is implicately linked to all others at all levels of resolution.

 

In quantum theory an ‘electron’ is said to rotate around its axis more than once during each rotation, circling through infinite plena of potentials (other universes) before returning to the phase – the place – from which it’s observed. Thus every part of all possible universes is in potential and actual contact with every other part, at all levels of resolution – and so are you.

 

Every cloud is a fractal representation of every other cloud. All clouds are different yet similar forms, all exhibiting tendencies we recognise as ‘cloudness’. All trees are fractal representations of every other tree. Every person is a fractal representation of every other person. Every ‘universe’ is a fractal representation of every other universe, and all are intimately linked in the most fundamental ways. All forms are representation of the primordial vortex, the wellspring from which all arises.

 

Everything we perceive/conceive/receive is produced by standing waves, and standing waves are formed between complementary poles. Every thing vibrates between its core and extremities – the poles of creation – yet the extremities and core of every single thing extend forever and are linked to literally everything.

 

We live in a far greater reality than a simple single universe. The universe we perceive is a tendency that tends to maintain its apparent form and substance almost wherever we look, but if you step back from the brink of egocentric personality and really see you’ll notice differences and changes all around and within you, all the time. We are part and parcel of everything, and everything changes all the time in ways too varied to mention. Everyone is surfing through spacetimes and everyone gets exactly what they wish for with their most wilful impassioned desires.

 

Hopes and dreams – affirmations – predominate over fears and insecurities when you invest them with awareness, focus and consideration. Hopes manifest most easily when they dovetail with the dreams of other beings in a mutually reinforcing matrix. Hope for the best! Dare to dream of Paradise – for all.

 

Psychic abilities are real and available; you enact their reality all the time. Telepathy is an ongoing eternal reality; not something to be achieved, but recognised. The same applies to all psi abilities or ‘psychic powers’. Learning magic begins with the simple recognition –reknowing – that it exists, and you are already ‘doing’ it. That’s how you got here. That’s why you’re reading this.

 

.You are implicately and inextricably interwoven with the entire potential cosmos. To activate a broader awareness of all this potential you have to explore the core of your being and the limitless bounds of self. The whole whirled world is whorled from mindstuff and thou art god.

 

And myriad other beings already know this. We soar from the shoulders of giants.

photo

 

Way Out, Far In

 

To begin any magical operation draw a circle around yourself, starting in the East. Do it now. In the southern hemisphere of this spinning Earth sphere the circle of protection is drawn clockwise (looking down from above). The opposite pertains in the northern hemisphere.

 

The circle is an inviolable horizon and you are its centre. All possibilities exist between the horizon and the core. Arrange your body so your spine is erect and your breathing is full and clear – this can take a single moment or many years to achieve, depending on where you’re at and how you came to be here now...

 

by R. Ayana

Continues @ hermetic.blog.com/2012/01/04/here-be-magic/

The statue represents Diomedes with a statuette of the Palladium, a representation of the goddess Athena, in his hands. The Palladium kept in Troy were a divine pledge of the city inviolability; Diomedes and Odysseus penetrated the city and returned in the Greek camp with the stolen Palladium, thus propitiating the capture of the city.

After the fall of Troy, Diomedes was a mythical traveler in the lands of the West. Many cities in Italy claimed noble origins connected with the "Trojan Myth" because of the possession of the Palladium that Diomedes had brought with him to the Italian peninsula.

The Cumaean copy, found in the crypt under the Acropolis, bears a Greek inscription under the base mentioning a Gaius Claudius Pollio Frugianus, to whom, perhaps, the statue was the dedicate.

The creation of the original sculpture (around 430 BC) is generally attributed to the sculptor Kresilas.

 

Marble Roman statue

Height 1.77 m

I Cent. AD

From prov. Cumae

Naples, National Archaeological Museum – Inv. no. 144978.

  

The words on the wall: Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority

---

He´s done it again... "One of Those" - man of words - was on his way from sunrise to sunset on Ascension Day.

---

Tokina AT-X 24-40/f2.8 without AF

---

© 2012 r-h-b photography - all rights reserved

Libertad, meaning "freedom" in Spanish, is a monumental sculpture by Claude Quiesse. It stands at the Guillaume Mercader roundabout near the train station in Bayeux. Its location is symbolic, as it is in the center of the city's largest roundabout, close to the train station, and oriented towards the cathedral, representing values cherished by Bayeux.

The sculpture symbolizes Bayeux's liberation as the first free French city after the D-Day landings in June 1944. It also signifies the city's embrace of modernity by integrating contemporary art into the daily lives of its residents. The artist spent over a year crafting the sculpture with his sons, embodying the spirit of freedom valued by Bayeux. The sculpture's movement against the wind represents the challenges in maintaining course through trials. The armor on its face symbolizes the need to protect oneself while navigating the complex and treacherous paths to freedom. It serves as a reminder of the sacrifices made in June 1944. The sculpture's unwavering advance towards its destiny signifies the need to defend hard-won freedom, while emphasizing that freedom of thought is inviolable.

First of all, it is important to know that the Kutubiah is not built by chance at this place: indeed, there are flows of the 7 metals that criss-cross the Earth like meridians. The Kutubiah is at the crossroads of two simple gold streams, one North-South passing through Santiago, Tomar and Marrakesh. An east-west flow passes through Damascus, Gardaïa and Marrakesh. The tower is therefore a scalar wave sensor. The rest is a parallel with experiments carried out in Ireland on identical towers and in India. The metal balls are like tachyon energy sensors or organ cannons.

Physics used to teach us that space is a kind of absolute container, separate from the flow of time. In this classical or Newtonian conception, objects traveled through or remained stationary in space, which itself was not subject to change or to internal variations. The three dimensions of space were the same, always and everywhere. Galileo's observation of the moons of Jupiter would eventually lead to the fundamental assertion, so damaging to the prevailing Christian or traditional cosmology of the time, that in fact the laws down here on earth and the laws up there in the heavens are the very same. Our "space" as we experience it on earth, according to its inviolable coordinates of width, height, and depth, or the famous x, y, and z of the Cartesian coordinate system exists uniformly throughout the universe and is governed by the same rules. With the dismissal of the ether (the fifth element the celestial spheres were thought to be made of) and the adoption of an atomist theory, the physical vision of the universe was one of billiard balls colliding in a uniform and static vacuum, with things like electromagnetism and thermal energy thrown into the mix.

 

www.ibnarabisociety.org/articles/timeofscience.html

 

In this conception, time was a measure and nothing more, and was itself assumed to be constant and unchanging. One used time in frequency and velocity values, but time itself had nothing essentially to do with the nature of space and certainly nothing to do with physical objects themselves. The great paradigm shift in physics came with Einstein's special theory of relativity, which was later to be expanded upon in his general theory of relativity. In addition to showing that there is no absolute frame of reference for physical measurements, the theory also demonstrated mathematically that what we ordinarily think of as space and time are actually intertwining realities – or two aspects of the same reality. How we move through space changes how we move through time, at least depending on the point of observation. If I travel from Earth for a period of time near the speed of light and then return, a much longer period of time will have elapsed from Earth's frame of reference than will have elapsed from my own frame of reference, in some sort of space vehicle for example. Time also changes depending on how close I am to a strong gravitational field. A clock in orbit high above the earth, for example, will run slightly slower than an identical clock on the surface of the earth.

 

Now, many books have been written in the last few decades claiming that the teachings of Eastern religions such as Buddhism and the finding of modern physics, specifically quantum mechanics and relativity theory, are really the same, and much is made of the spiritual significance of this new physics.2 Though it is a topic for another forum, I believe that the perceived intersection of physics and mysticism or religion results from a sublimation of certain hypothetical assumptions of physical data on the one hand, and a denaturing of the spiritual doctrines on the other. That is to say, certain interpretations of the physical data, such as the idea that the observer influences the state vector collapse, and the notion of multiple universes arising out of the actualization of the wave function of particles, are nothing more than philosophical struggles on the part of physicists and laymen to come to grips with the data. They are not demanded by the data themselves, which is why many physicists who agree on the same data have sometimes wildly different models for accounting for those data.3 On the religious side, one comes across pat explanations of spiritual doctrines taken out of their traditional context, and Buddhism is reduced to a group of clever insights about our mind and the nature of the world.

 

Thus I want to be careful of including the findings of physics in a paper on the experience of time and non-time at a conference on Ibn al-'Arabī. I may joyously proclaim that Ibn al-'Arabī told us in the thirteenth century what physicists claim to have discovered only a few decades ago, but what happens when the scientists change their minds? After all, despite what the popular literature and movies tell us, there are enormous lacunae in physics, and for all we know the spatio-temporal conception ushered in by Einstein may one day itself be overturned by something as radically different. To give you some examples, quantum mechanics works for very small things, and relativity works for very big things, but at a certain point in between, for medium sized things, the theories become incompatible. This was the problem with Newtonian or classical physics: for many purposes the theory worked just fine, but physicists were puzzled because it did not work for all observed phenomena. Thus Newtonian equations will correctly predict how a baseball will travel through space, but it took relativity to correctly account for the orbit of the planet Mercury. Our present idea of gravity and the mass of the universe should have the universe flying apart, but since it does not actually do so, physicists posit dark matter, which accounts for 98 percent of the mass of the universe. The problem is since we cannot see or measure this dark matter, we do not know what it is, or really if it is there.

 

So why start a discussion of time at an Ibn 'Arabī Society gathering with physics? Firstly, despite the fact that classical physics is part of history as far as scientists are concerned, its world view still dominates the consciousness of the age. It is what is most typically taught in high school textbooks, and its assumptions are built into popular language about the subject. The next time you hear someone say "fundamental building blocks of matter" know that such a notion is completely classical in its origin. All our notions of mass, force, and energy are usually classical conceptions, that is to say conceptions beginning from the bifurcation of the world into measurable and subjective knowledge by Descartes, then Galileo's uniformity of the universal laws, and finally Newton's brilliant synthesis. Moreover, these ideas, together with the advent of the heliocentric model, was a major force, perhaps the most important force, in sidelining Christianity in the Western world. First the Church abdicated its claim to having knowledge of the natural world, and while it spent the next few centuries in the domain of moral and spiritual questions, scientists gradually reduced the world to physical bits, reduced man to a hyper developed animal, reduced animals to complex arrangements of atoms, and reduced consciousness to complex patterns of synaptic activity in the brain. Meanwhile the philosophers and pseudo-philosophers of scientism were busy trying to convince themselves and everyone else that truth was provided only by quantitative measurement. The rest was quality, which fell on the side of subjective feeling, and as we all were supposed to know, feelings are really just complex instincts, which somehow result from the structure of the brain, resulting from the structure of DNA, resulting from the happenstance arrangement of atoms.

 

Relativity theory and quantum mechanics overturned classical mechanics, which had itself overturned Christian cosmology. The paradigm shift ushered in by such figures as Einstein, Max Planck, and Neils Bohr is important because it destroyed the destroyer. Heliocentrism was erased, because from the point of view of relativity it is nonsense to say that the earth "goes round" the sun, as it is to say that the sun goes round the earth, because there is no fixed frame of reference to say which is going around which. The sun's gravitational field is stronger than the earth's, but the earth does pull on the sun, and because there is no absolute frame of reference anymore, then certainly it is correct to say the sun goes around the earth. Geocentrism actually comes out slightly ahead, since it at least corresponds to our experience from our frame of reference. From the point of view of science, however, we have lost both geocentrism and heliocentrism.

 

As for universal laws, we find that things do not behave the same everywhere. For example a clock seems to run at a different speed high above the earth. Light does not always travel in a straight line, but seems to bend from different points of reference, because space itself seems to bend and take on all sorts of shapes depending on the objects in it.

 

Then we discover that atoms are not mere little balls. Rather, it seems the only way we can properly describe what seems to be happening on very small scales is through various kinds of mathematical form, very unlike a little ball. The only reason scientists talk about wave-particle duality is because the measurements they get look sometimes like a particle, sometimes like a wave, but they never have nor ever will see what causes those measurements. The relationships between the "atoms" is mathematically incredibly complex and is more like threads in a tapestry than balls flying through space, but of course they are neither. The problem is further complicated by Bell's theorem, which shows entities like electrons to be connected, as far as we can tell, instantaneously even at distances too great for a light-speed communication to take place. This is important because relativity theory states that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.

 

Thus the momentousness of heliocentrism, atomist theory, uniformity of spatial laws and time was shown to be not so momentous after all, but this is lost on popular thinking. Einstein certainly earned his own fame but did not manage to steal all of Newton's thunder. The most usual understanding of the natural world is still a classical one.

 

But I already cautioned myself about too great an enthusiasm for what the new physics teaches. Indeed it may be that the current paradigm is overturned, but it seems well-nigh impossible that any such a revolution will bring us closer to the classical conception that destroyed traditional cosmology in the West. We have already pushed the limits of what we can actually observe with our own senses, which is to say anything else we observe will be the effects of experiments together with the mathematical models based on the data of those experiments. Physicists' eyes are not more powerful than our own; their insight comes through the mathematical form they derive from the data. Such mathematical models are the very stuff of physical theory.

 

The significance of this is not that it elevates one theoretical model above another, but that it throws into sharp focus the fact that any model of what happens beyond the perceptible world is as good as any other from the point of view of science, so long as it correctly predicts the data. The problem with superstring theory, hidden variable theory, many-universe theory, is that they are all mathematical models based upon the exact same body of data, and they all predict the data equally well. These models are sometimes so wildly different that any pretense to some one great scientific conception of the universe must be seen as philosophical hubris. The precision of the data themselves and the success of the accompanying mathematics in predicting the behavior of the physical world on small and large scales – indeed the most successful scientific theory to date – paradoxically serves to undercut the assumption that the only real knowledge we can have of things is through scientific measurement. What we are measuring are things we can never perceive without a measurement. Classical mechanics usually dealt with ordinary scale objects. If the real knowledge we have of a baseball is the measurements we can make of it, we are still left with an object that at least corresponds to an object we actually experience, even if that experience is merely subjective or even meaningless from the point of view of science. An electron is an entity no one has, can, or ever will experience. Even if we never perceive a unicorn in fact, we could in principle.

 

The key reversal at play is the following: we measure quantum entities, but our knowledge of them is mediated completely by our ordinary experience of the world, by our pointer-readings, as Wittgenstein once remarked. I said that the new physics paradoxically undercuts classical bifurcation because it leaves us with the troubling proposition that our true scientific knowledge depends for its very survival upon the offices of our subjective, non-scientific experience. Actually, this was the case in classical mechanics as well, but the fact that quantum entities are wholly unlike ordinary entities makes the rigid bifurcation into a subjective world of quality and an objective world of quantity all the more absurd.4

 

The situation we are left with is this. The revolution of classical mechanics suffered a counter-revolution, the new physics, which neutralized the sting delivered by the heliocentric model, uniform space and time, and the classical atomist theory. Though this counter-revolution did not put traditional cosmology back in its place, it robbed the scientist of his ability to make absolute statements about what we can know. A man might be lulled into a kind of complacency about the baseball; perhaps the knowledge provided by scientific measurement is more true and reliable than his mere experience of the thing. This may not hold up to philosophical scrutiny, but overlap between the measured baseball and a baseball as one sees it gives the whole affair an air of respectability. But when the scientist tells us that true knowledge is measuring things that we cannot see, and that the scientist cannot see either, it begins to sound too strange to be believed. And of course, it is.

 

So unlike many of the popular ideas linking the new physics to traditional metaphysics, my assertion here is simply that science has exposed the fallacy of Cartesian bifurcation and the alleged supremacy of quantitative knowledge. Science has turned on itself, or more correctly, the data has betrayed philosophical scientism and exposed its limitations. We have quite literally come back to our senses.

 

If we actually pay attention to the difference between quantitative data and physical theory, we see that science has altogether lost the destructive power to make us denigrate our senses and the ideas we form from sensory experience. We know that what the scientist says about time is a model based on observations of the world, and that any number of such models possess equal validity, and all of them are subservient to the real experience of the human subject. Choosing one model above another is not a scientific decision, but a philosophical one.

 

Time, like space, is one of the most concrete aspects of our experience of the world. It is not an abstract entity such as an electron, but a reality so close and intimate that we stumble in defining it owing to its sheer obviousness. It is a mystery that baffles due to its clarity, not its obscurity. If a physicist says that time is not what we think but is actually this or that, we can agree in part and acknowledge that the reality may have aspects of which we are not aware. However, we always possess the powerful rejoinder that no matter what the data or theory, it has been formed on the basis of the physicist's ordinary human experience of time and observations taking place within that experience. Logically, it is impossible to negate the qualitative time of our own experience without undercutting the basis of the quantitative time derived through measurement, since no observation is possible without ordinary time and ordinary space. "Reification" is the problem we get when we put our theories of quantitative time above qualitative time in our hierarchy of knowledge. I may give a mathematical description of time utilizing perhaps a symbolic or allegorical use of geometric shapes, but then become trapped in my own provisional model. Even the word "linear" in linear time is a model. We make an analogy of some property of our experience of time to the properties of a physical line in space, i.e., being continuous and existing in two directions. But time is not a line, a line is a line. Having used the image of a line to enable us to talk about time in a scientifically useful way, we get trapped by an image which has taken on a life of its own, so to speak. Then anything other than linear time begins to seem absurd, a violation of time the way a loop is a violation of a line.

 

The Cartesian bifurcation which elevates quantitative measurement and theory while denigrating the real experience of qualities is ultimately absurd, because no model can repudiate the model-maker and continue to remain meaningful. It would mean that the model-maker's knowledge of what he is making a model of is dependent upon the knowledge provided by that very model itself. A bifurcationist physicist discerns a mathematical form in the data of the world, then says that this mathematical form is more true than the very perception he used to discern that mathematical form. If by this he meant that the world manifests laws present in the Intellect or Great Spirit, we could agree, since we perceive those laws by virtue of participating in that same intellect. But that is not an idea the philosophers of scientism would be willing to entertain.

 

Let me now leave off the space-time continuum of physics and come to the soul's qualitative and lived experience of these realities we call space and time. Space and time appear to us to be two modes of extension, or in simpler terms two ways in which things are spread out in relationship to each other. Spatially things are here and there, and temporally things are before and after. In another essay I discussed at length this notion of space and time as extension, and I do not wish to duplicate that discussion here.5 My purpose here is to establish a link between space and time that is not at all based on relativity theory, but arises from our living experience. Although in the classical conception which so often dominates our minds space and time are seen as two separate and unlike things, the truth is that time is impossible without space, and space is impossible without time. I do not make this assertion from the point of view of physical science, but from within the world of the metaphysics of Ibn al-'Arabī and similar metaphysical systems.

 

Let us first ask what the world would be like if there were only space, but no time. The first thing that we would notice is that change would become impossible. Think of a group of objects existing in space, and then think of them existing in a different arrangement. In order for them to go from the first arrangement to the second one, something has to happen. They have to at the very least traverse the distances necessary to arrive at the second arrangement, but how can they do that if there is only space and no time? Something has to ontologically link the two arrangements. Even if somehow they do not traverse the distance in between, the objects are still the same objects, and the only thing allowing us to call them the same objects in the two different arrangements is a reality that allows the objects to change but retain some kind of continuity. This connecting dimension is time.

 

Let us then ask what the world would be like if there were time but no space. Since there would be no spatial extension to observe, we would somehow have to measure time with our subjective experience in the absence of height, width, and depth. How would we know that there even was a course of time? Feelings have no dimension perhaps, but what about the rest of the soul? The images in our imagination, never mind the objects of the objective world, all have spatial extension, so we would have to disallow them in a world without space. That is to say, time implies a kind of inward space in the soul – a different kind of space to be sure – that makes it meaningful to speak of before and after, a referent that is constant in the face of change.

 

Let us as an exercise try to erase the words "space" and "time" from our minds and come back at the question. We notice that in life there are things that change and things that stay the same, and often the very same things seem to change and stay the same but in different respects. The baseball is the same baseball, both in the hand of the pitcher and in the glove of the catcher, but it is not wholly the same because some things about it are different, such as its location and its relationship to the things around it. We can talk about things that are constant and changing, or static and dynamic. (In Arabic the relevant terms are qārr and ghayr al-qārr.)

 

But I do not wish to encumber myself from the beginning with technical language. For now I simply have the "constant" and the "changing". I, too, am constant and changing. I am the same person but I am always becoming this or that, experiencing all sorts of colors and sounds and shapes in addition to my emotions, and yet the constant identity abides. In the statement, "I was sad, then I found my true love, and then I was happy," the then does not split the I into parts. It does not erase the identity.

 

Such paradoxes of the many in the one, and the one in the many, really form the basis of Ibn al-'Arabī's metaphysics, and make a good point of departure for an analysis of time and non-time. At the highest level, the mystery of the many and the one is the identity between the Ultimate Reality and the many things we usually think of as being real in and of themselves. The ontological status of things in relation to the ultimate reality is a question for metaphysics, but the mystery of the many and one also plays out in cosmology, meaning the study of the world in which the puzzles of constancy and change arise.

 

At the highest level of Akbarian thought, the manyness of the divine qualities is resolved in the unity of the supreme Self. This is not a unity of "before" and "after", where I might say that all qualities are happening right now; nor is it a unity of "here" and "there", where I might say that all qualities are in one place. Rather it is a unity of being, of identity. The Creator is not another being than the Just or the All-Merciful. They are unified in what they truly are, and mysteriously the world's illusory reality disappears in the face of this essential unity.

 

Now, Akbarians do not throw away manyness, but put it in its place, and from our point of view in the world the many divine qualities and their relationships to one another are of the greatest significance. The manyness of the qualities is unreal only for the supreme Self, but for us this manyness is as real as we are, so to speak. In fact, we depend on this manyness for whatever illusory reality we possess, because it is by virtue of the divine names and qualities and their relationships that the world comes to be. How, then, does this one in the many, many in the one, play out in the world?

 

There is no shortage of ideas that Ibn al-'Arabī and his school use to describe how the divine qualities give rise to the world. Some of the most important are emanation (fayd), self-disclosure (tajallī), identification (ta'ayyun). For this talk I want to use the symbolism of light, and the divine name "Light" or al-Nūr. Mystics and philosophers have often started with light, and its symbolism is so powerful because light is both what we see and what we see by. Light is both a means and an end. If we apply the symbolism of light to all knowledge, light is both what we know and how we know. It is, moreover, a symbol that Ibn al-'Arabī and his school often used as a metaphysical basis, the same way they could use the concepts of mercy and existence.

 

The Quran says, God is the Light of the heavens and the earth (24:35). The heavens and the earth are the realm of the constant and the changing, so let us say that God is the light of the constant and the changing, making God what we know the constant and the changing by. This leaves us to ask what the constant and the changing are. Each and every thing is, ultimately, a manifestation of a name of God. God knows His endless names, and this knowledge is the realm of the immutable identities, the al-a'yan al-thabitah. Each immutable identity is a special way in which God knows God, but God's knowledge of Himself is neither before and after nor here or there. It introduces neither distance nor duration between His names.

 

But if the identities are essences or forms in the knowledge of God that are separated neither by distances nor durations, how do we get to the situation where these identities, when they are in the world, do get separated by distance and duration? In God's knowledge the identities are immutable, but in the world they are what we are calling constant and changing. They are here and there, and they are before and after. The baseball is here, not over there. Or, the baseball is here now, but it was not here earlier. This does not happen in God's knowledge. The immutable identities are different but not apart. There is an immutable identity for the pitcher and an immutable identity for the catcher, but they exist eternally in God's act of knowing, fused but not confused, to borrow Meister Eckhart's language.

 

Akbarian cosmogenesis is a two-tiered emanation, or self-disclosure which first gives rise to the immutable identities in God's knowledge, and then externalizes or existentiates them in the world. There is a way in which these two identities, one manifest and the other unmanifest, are two different things, and another way in which they are simply the same thing viewed from two different points of view. When God's light illuminates the immutable identities – which we can reword and say when God as the Light meets with God as the Knower – the result is the world. In a sense the immutable identities are dark, because as independent beings they are nothing. They are only God's knowledge of Himself. The divine light is a gift that illuminates the identities and gives them their own reality. This light allows there to be something "other than God", this phrase "other than God" being Ibn al-'Arabī's definition of the world, because by being illuminated the identities can see each other, and see themselves, and by "see" I mean "know".

 

Now, in the world this light by which we are illuminated to each other is none other than the very realities of duration and distance. What we give the name "space" is a state of affairs where the forms of things exist in a kind of relationality to each other, separated and yet existing in the same domain and thus connected in a kind of continuum. What we give the name "time" is a state of affairs where forms exist in a different kind of relationality, where even a single given thing is able to be separated from its previous state and yet still be connected to those states by virtue of its being a single thing. Thus its states also exist in a kind of continuum. God's light in static mode is space, and His light in dynamic mode is time. The identities themselves are not space and time, for the identities are pure forms in the knowledge of God, but when God casts His light upon them they enter into the dance of spatial and temporal interaction we call the world. This light enables the realities of sound, color, shape, smell, feeling, number, mass, and energy to connect and manifest the forms. Light is the vessel, both in static and dynamic mode, upon which the identities journey in between the plenary darkness of God's knowledge on the one hand and the uninhabitable darkness of pure nothingness on the other.

 

This is one possible understanding of the divine saying where God says, "Do not curse time, for I am time." By cursing time, we are in reality cursing the light of God, which is identical with Himself. It is by God giving of Himself, of His light, that our existence as beings going through changing states is even possible. But it then follows that one could also say that God is space. Islamic metaphysics does not have, to my knowledge, a classification of space as it does of time. As I am sure will be widely discussed in this conference, there is a distinction made between sarmad, dahr, and zamān, or eternity, sempiternity, and ordinary time. But if what I am saying about the divine light is true, is it not equally true to say that God is space?

 

In the bodily world the divine light shines in a certain mode, far short of all the possibilities of divine illumination. The light is relatively dim, and though I see myself and others, I cannot see much, and the wholeness and connectedness of things is largely hidden in a darkness that is yet to be illuminated. The possibilities of this world are basically limited, at least in our ordinary experience, to the usual dimensions of space and time. Akbarian metaphysics teaches that the imaginational world, the world ontologically superior to the world of bodies, is more illuminated. In that world, the rules governing the constant and the changing, or distance and duration, are not the same. Remember that the imaginational world, like the world of bodies, is still a world of extension, which is to say that it is a world of manifested forms – of shapes, colors, duration, changing states. But because it is so luminous, the possibilities for the interaction of the constant and the changing are much greater. The forms in the imaginational world are indeed not limited by bodily space and time, though there is an imaginational space and an imaginational time. Recall the saying that the bodily world in relation to the imaginational world is like a ring tossed into a vast wilderness. Rūmī declares that there is a window between hearts, meaning that we are connected to each other at the level of our souls, both across space and across time. True believers can have dreams foretelling the future, and great saints can meet in spirit if not in body. These wonders do not take place by virtue of bodily existence, but by virtue of the imaginational world, the world of souls.

 

Not only do the conditions of space and time change from bodily to imaginational existence, but they change from this world to the next, from the dunyā to the ākhirah. This is what Dāwūd al-Qaysarī means when he says that there are some divine names whose governance of the world lasts for a certain duration. That is to say, there is a certain way in which the divine light manifests the forms in our ordinary earthly life, but at the end of the world the cycle of that kind of light, of that particular divine name, will come to a close. The hereafter will then be governed by another divine name, another kind of divine light. That which is impossible here will be possible there because the divine light will illuminate ever more possibilities for the interplay of forms and identities. Space itself will be greater and more infinite, time itself will be infused with greater barakah and potential for realizing the self-disclosures of God.

 

Thus far I have been discussing the ontological status of time together with space, because I think the two are inseparable insofar as they are two modes of the divine light as far as worldly existence is concerned. But what does the reality of time mean for the spiritual journey of the soul?

 

If we take Ibn al-'Arabī's metaphysics and cosmology to their logical conclusion, I believe we can say the following. God created us as a freely given gift, simply so that we who were not could be, that we who were nothing could be living beings. But at the same time God experiences all of our pains and our joys, our stupidity and our wisdom, our fear and our courage with us in a mysterious way. Recall the hadīth where God says, "I was sick, and you did not visit Me," (Muslim 4661) and the Quranic verse "Those who hurt God and His Messenger …" (33:57). Yet for God there is no pain, stupidity, or fear, because God is not confined to the moment of suffering. He knows the whole life. God does not move down the line with us as we do, although He lives what we live. God could never suffer as we suffer because for God there is no despair, no hopelessness. Hopelessness is the most human of sufferings.

 

For God, the pain is like the pain of separation we feel at the very moment we are running to meet our beloved. We are in fact separated, and the effect of running and the distance between us is a kind of suffering, but that suffering is totally redeemed by the hope we have, the certitude, that we have in the meeting with our beloved. The pain that God experiences with us is like the pain we experience while running to our beloved. It is not really a pain at all; it is a part of the fullness of the moment. God sees in our life, when we cannot, the abundance and perfection of our destiny in a way so perfectly complete that the so-called suffering is ever blessed and redeemed in the final reunion. We are not God, though, and so for us the experience of pain is not the same, but it is what it must be for a being God created for joy. When we become more like God, we suffer more in the way God "suffers", so to speak. We gradually experience and taste how death is just a flavor of life.

 

In us, God is always running to the beloved, He lives the separation in the total light of (re)union, death in the light of life, pain in the light of total bliss. We may think that we are just stamping our feet, out of breath, running to a horizon that never seems to come closer, but we are growing still.

 

To turn a nothing into a something like God is going to have to hurt sometimes, ripping open nothingness and pulling out a god-like being strand by strand, sinew by sinew, love by love, pain by pain, stupidity by stupidity … into bliss, wisdom, wholeness, and ever greater life.

 

Think of a pebble in the shoe of the running lover. If that lover had placed all his hope in a perfect shoe, a perfect foot to go in that perfect shoe with a perfect sock, all to create a perfect fit. If he longed for it and made it his great hope, a pebble in his shoe while he was running would crush him, reduce him to anger, despair, agony, humiliation.

 

But what does a true lover care about a pebble in his shoe? Does he even feel it? Would he care? Perhaps it would make for an even fonder memory of the reunion.

 

The Quran promises that "… in Paradise the believers shall neither fear nor grieve" (2:62), meaning that the light of God will so illuminate us that we shall see the beauty of all things past and of what may come. It is in the darkness and opacity of the past, the inability to grasp the greater harmony of what happens to us, that causes the pain of grief. In grief, we suffer from the past. In fear, we suffer from the future. When God's light shows us the way, we suffer from neither. The Quran does not deny the passage of time in Paradise, only the difficulties we experience on account of it in this world. Our memory is illuminated and causes us no more trouble, and our imagination, that faculty capable of reaching out to the future, can conceive of no cause for despair or hopelessness. The ignorance built into the darkness of the world simply cannot exist in the full light of God in Paradise. It is thus that the soul transcends time, not by leaving it but by conquering it.

 

Our destiny in this world is both static and dynamic, which is to say that we are a harmony of parts and of experiences, of aspects and states. We can understand easily that beauty in the spatial sense is the presence of unity in multiplicity, which is to say, of harmony in all its forms. Music is the classic example of dynamic harmony, of a harmony that not only exists statically in a chord for example, but also dynamically, in a progression of counterpoint and in the movements of a melody.

 

If the soul can conquer time and live in it in Paradise, what about here in this world? What enables us to wake up to the harmony of our destiny in this world and the next? Surely we must acknowledge that an awakening is called for, because we do grieve and fear, groping about in the dark while falling prey to unhappiness and despair. How can we become like God and experience reunion in separation? The Sufis indeed speak of taking on the divine qualities (al-ittisāf bi-sifātillāh), and this is done through the remembrance of God, the dhikr, in all its forms. It is through the dhikr that the light of God shines brighter and brighter upon the soul, transforming and purifying it. A Sufi shaykh has said that when the traveler looks back upon his life, he will see that dhikr as a kind of golden chain passing through all its states and experiences. This means that through the remembrance, practiced faithfully, the Sufi overcomes the vicissitudes of time.

 

And this brings us finally to the dimension of non-time, which from man's point of view, both in the spiritual life and in the hereafter, is the spirit, or the heart, or the intellect. The heart or spirit or intellect is the point in man where the divine light resides and can shine down into the soul. It is the mysterious divine spark, both created and uncreated, or as some would say, neither. The spiritual life is the wedding of the soul to the spirit, not the elimination of the soul. Remember that by virtue of being made in the image of God we all possess an intrinsic dimension of light ourselves. The illumination we receive is truly just an aspect of our own nature, as Ibn al-'Arabī says so clearly in the Fusūs. In the spiritual life, in the remembrance of God, the spirit or heart acts upon the soul, illuminating it, transforming it, untying its knots, turning it clear where it was once opaque. From the point of view of time, progress is made in tying together our temporal selves with our non-temporal selves so that the former can be transfigured by the latter. When the non-time or eternity of the spirit enters fully into the soul, the Sufi becomes ibn al-waqt, newly born in each moment. Wa Allāhu a'lam.

  

Tesla continued to experiment with Ether-Akasha, and very soon, he developed a new generation of devices and equipment, but we need to make the story shorter. He discovered that he could imbibe the Ether-Akasha from the surrounding space, and to use it for different very useful works. One of the very crucial discovery was the fact that streams of Ether-Akasha, when hitting the metal object, will induce huge voltages within the lattice of the metallic structure. Of course, this is going on, on micro-level only, and it is harmless for humans. Therefore, due to such enormously high voltages, electrons will be expelled and ejected into the surrounding area, in the air actually, where they will react with atoms of oxygen, and negatively charged ions will be produced. In fact, just in one stroke, two electrons will join to the atom of oxygen, which already has six electrons in the outer shell, and now there will be eight of them. This is one very revolutionary cognition actually, because this is exactly, the principle used along with ancient pyramids. Please, it is extremely important to notice that the top of every pyramid was covered with gold; that was the so-called golden capstone. It was having exactly the same function, to radiate an enormous amount of negative ions all around, after the streams of Ether-Akasha we are surrounded with, strike into them. This principle was used extensively in Marrakesh as well along with Kutubiah. In fact, this principle becomes the main postulate of the sthapatyaveda and the vastu construction science. Indeed, this is the main purpose of the sthapatyaveda; to produce huge amount of negative ions, which will keep the house itself and the complete vastu, the entire plot, under the protection from the influence of positive ions, very bad and devastating for human health, and very devolving when we consider the level of consciousness. The story of negative ions is very important for this essay, it is not so simple, it asks for more explanations, and it will be addressed separately in an additional chapter.

  

28 Tesla continued to experiment with Ether-Akasha, and very soon, he developed a new generation of devices and equipment, but we need to make the story shorter. He discovered that he could imbibe the Ether-Akasha from the surrounding space, and to use it for different very useful works. One of the very crucial discovery was the fact that streams of Ether-Akasha, when hitting the metal object, will induce huge voltages within the lattice of the metallic structure. Of course, this is going on, on micro-level only, and it is harmless for humans. Therefore, due to such enormously high voltages, electrons will be expelled and ejected into the surrounding area, in the air actually, where they will react with atoms of oxygen, and negatively charged ions will be produced. In fact, just in one stroke, two electrons will join to the atom of oxygen, which already has six electrons in the outer shell, and now there will be eight of them. This is one very revolutionary cognition actually, because this is exactly, the principle used along with ancient pyramids. Please, it is extremely important to notice that the top of every pyramid was covered with gold; that was the so-called golden capstone. It was having exactly the same function, to radiate an enormous amount of negative ions all around, after the streams of Ether-Akasha we are surrounded with, strike into them. This principle was used extensively in Vedic India as well along with temples and private houses. In fact, this principle becomes the main postulate of the sthapatyaveda and the vastu construction science. Indeed, this is the main purpose of the sthapatyaveda; to produce huge amount of negative ions, which will keep the house itself and the complete vastu, the entire plot, under the protection from the influence of positive ions, very bad and devastating for human health, and very devolving when we consider the level of consciousness. The story of negative ions is very important for this essay, it is not so simple, it asks for more explanations, and it will be addressed separately in an additional chapter.

 

For example, just there in New York, Tesla was raising balloons filled with helium or similar gas easier than air, high in the sky. The balloon itself would have been wrapped with the foil made of aluminum. That was the active metallic material, and the very important element Tesla needed for his devices. It served as an input terminal to his much complex device actually. Tesla was using this device for taping the radiant energy, the Ether-Akasha, from the space around. It is all very complex actually, so I do not want to go deeper into this topic. Just to say that the device could have supplied the energy for heaters to heat homes, for light bulbs, and for electric motors that should have been modified a little bit for that purpose. All that Tesla had achieved already there along with his labs in New York or around.

 

This is the moment when Tesla cognized the unbounded potential of this Ether-Akasha system he just has developed. This is the moment when he learned how much more advanced this system is comparing to even his newly developed AC polyphase system. This is the moment when he abandoned all further researches on the alternating current and polyphase system. Hence, in some stage, he started the research on the high-frequency polyphase system, but that was also far behind the Ether-Akasha system he just established, and which offered wireless transmission. Therefore, unnecessary expenses for the expensive distributing system is not needed anymore. He did set up the ideal system, which could have been the basis of the Age of Enlightenment actually. Indeed, that was the technology of the Age of Enlightenment.

 

However, for his system to be complete, he still needed something more to do. His system was designed and tested in New York and the surrounding fields and lawns only. The thing is that he needed to perform an additional set of experiments and an entirely new series of checking and testing. He needed something bigger, something on an industrial scale. New York was not an appropriate terrain for this purpose anymore. After all, officials and authorities would not have allowed such “very hazardous” experiments. He did find a new terrain for his further step, and that was the Colorado Springs.

Project Colorado Springs

… was supposed to be the final testing for something even bigger, for construction of a series of pyramid-like structures, with the same basic function. Actually, each unit would have had many functions. It would be the relay in the network of the same structures, for wireless energy transmission, but at the same time, it would be the source for billions and billions of negative ions to be released in the environment so that local people would be elevated higher in consciousness. Tesla made possible that communication system would be installed along with his relay system. He predicted and prepared the radio communication through his system, but TV as well. He realized that pictures could easily be sent on distances as well. All was supposed to be much better than we have even today because Ether-Akasha is the media with inexhaustible options. Simply, his system had marvelous features, and Humanity was just one-step to the Age of Enlightenment.

 

For Tesla, Colorado Springs was a very successful project. It did cost a lot, this is true, but it was very important to set up all the parameters of his system. He chose Colorado Springs, because it is in the mountains, very high in altitude. He had used the plateau that was about 2000 meters above the sea level, and he achieved marvelous results during 1899, and 1900.

 

After that project in Colorado Springs, Tesla was ready for the new and final step, for the construction of the broadcasting tower for his wireless transmitting energy system. That was chosen to be on Long Island, near New York, and especially, near to the water. According to the previous owner of the land, it got the name …

The Wardenclyffe Project

… Indeed, Tesla needed to be close to the water just as ancient pyramids have been once upon a time. He needed to establish a very good grounding system for his broadcasting tower, and for that, he needed a terrain with plenty of underground caverns filled with water, the so-called aquafers. Just like with the real pyramids indeed. Without a good grounding system, the system would not have worked at all

 

Tesla started with the construction of the broadcasting tower in 1901, right after his very successful Colorado Springs Project. This is where we are coming to a very critical moment. As it seems, when bankers and financiers realized that he is doing something that will activate free use of energy, well, they shut down all his projects immediately. All of sudden Tesla became … persona non-grata. All contracts deals for donations, and sponsoring were broken. This is where the very hard time for Tesla began. Despite everything, as it seems, he finished his broadcasting tower; it was operational for some time, but never fully. Never according to all Tesla’s plans. Nevertheless, Tesla was doing some further experiments, very probably all until 1917, when the complete tower was deconstructed and demolished. Due to war perils, they made an official statement for doing so.

 

ust to finish this story of Nikola Tesla and Ether-Akasha, which is shortened and minimized maximally, because several encyclopedic volumes would not be enough to deliver all that Tesla did on this topic. Perhaps there will be a good opportunity to focus more on Nikola Tesla because he definitely deserves our full attention. Therefore, maybe even the complete essay of mine will be devoted to Tesla very soon. However, for the moment, I will just be free to expose a few references. There is the beautiful article exposed in Atlantis Rising, January-February edition of 2007, (#61), by Jeane Manning …

Current Wars and our lost “true electric age”

… Another beautiful article from the same magazine, Atlantis Rising, from May-June edition 2012, (#93), by Phillip Coppens, under the title …

The threat to Tesla’s Legacy

 

t another article from Atlantis Rising, September-October edition of 2010, (#83) …

Nikola Tesla & the God Particle

… by Marc J. Seifer Ph.D. All articles are available through the Atlantis Rising Library, or through some other free services on the web. Today, the person who comprehended the highest knowledge on Tesla’s work is most probably …

Goran Marjanovic

 

BScE

… from the University of Nis, Serbia. Here there is one recent work of him exposed on the … Academia.edu … www.academia.edu/38109658/Nikola_Teslas_Ether_Technologie... Once again, just to summarize, Nikola Tesla did a great job in deciphering the phenomenon of electricity to the very core. Now we know that any electric or electromagnetic activity is closely connected with, and related to the Ether-Akasha. Nevertheless, why, and how it happened that we do not know about? Why don’t we teach that in the schools? How is it possible that there is no trace or clue to connect the two? However, maybe there are. Maybe we are learning about but under another name!? To document this, I will narrate the story of …

electromotive force

… and my first personal contact with it. Electromotive force is a term defined in electro science to explain why electrons, under certain conditions, are moving around within the crystalline lattice of any metallic structure. This is the very foundation of the science of electricity. I remember the days when I was a young student in a technical school in Zagreb, the school that carries the name of Nikola Tesla by the way, and the school that is devoted to mastering the electronic and electro-technic science and practical skills. This is the kind of school where the knowledge about electric and magnetic phenomena is in the main focus, and this subject is primary in the curriculum. I remember very well the first contact with the term of …

electromotive force

…

emf

… All theories in learning the basic principles in electro science will start with electromotive force actually. It is explaining why electrons are moving around, and why they are doing this and this, and not doing certain other things. Whosoever was learning something about electricity must have passed through this phase. Therefore, they will explain that electrons are moving due to the difference of potentials, what is generating a certain voltage, and what is basically true. However, behind the voltage, they say, there is the electromotive force actually. I also remember very well curiosity of all of us when hearing this story. We wanted to know more about electromotive force itself. Some colleges of mine that were always ready for discussions and polemics of any kind, they immediately raised many questions about

emf

. However, even though we had a brilliant professor who was the legend of the school actually, we could not get any profound answer to what

emf

really is. In fact, this is not the matter of professor, because he also learned it from his professors in the same dogmatic form. This is a very important moment indeed. The basic idea why electrons are moving around is turned into a dogmatic explanation so that in fact nobody knows why they are doing so. Such kind of explanation we call exactly this way …

the dogma

. Well, today, if you ask any engineer of electronic what electromotive force is, well be ready for some very funny answers and explanations. Fine, even by this dogmatic explanation, the field of electronic and the science about electricity has been booming, providing us with very sophisticated equipment and devices. Comparing to life in the 19

th

century and before, our achievements are grandiose. However, is this our maximum? Is this our climax? Are we at the pinnacle of our achievements when electric technology is in the question? Nikola Tesla discovered that the use of Ether-Akasha offers much, much more. Interestingly, we get much more power when we separate gross level electrons, and when we get pure streams of Ether-Akasha. However, this is not all. Such media already is all around us. We already are immersed in the media called Ether-Akasha, just because this is the basic tissue of the Universe itself and of the entire Creation actually. This energy is all around us, and it is free to use. It can even be used wirelessly. All that we need to do is to connect with; we just need to plug in.

 

Throughout this essay, and throughout some other essays of mine, the term …

negative ions

… was already used on many occasions. However, I think now is the time to say something more about negative ions, and their counterparts …

positive ions

. In general, every atom that loses or receives electrons in the outer shell, that atom becomes an ion. Usually, atoms try to stay electrically neutral, so that the electrically positive charge of protons in the core is equal to the charge of electrically negatively charged electrons in the shell. In fact, in electrical terms, the true counterpart of electrons in the shell, are positrons within the core of the atom. However, this is a very long story. If an atom loses an electron or electrons, it became a positive ion, because its charge has changed in favor of protons in the core of the atom, which carries the positive electric charge. For such an atom, we say that it is positively charged ion. If the atom receives electrons in the outer shell, then it becomes a negative ion because it is negatively charged. The electrons in the shell outnumber the protons in the core of the atom, the equilibrium among charges is lost, and the atom is not electrically neutral anymore, it has a negative charge. It becomes a negative ion. However, our physiology does not react equally to such positive and negative charged ions. It is proved that positive ions are influencing our body in a very bad way. When they enter the body, we call them free radicals, and they will cause the oxidation process. Due to that, they will speed up the aging process, and they will promote the growth of bad bacteria and bad microorganisms, what in the final stage can generate many diseases and health problems. Therefore, scientifically and medically it is proved that positive ions have negative effects on humans, on the level of the physiology, behavior, and wellbeing. Opposite to that, it is observed that negative ions have an extremely beneficial influence on a human body, clearness of the mind, the process of thinking, and can even elevate human consciousness to the higher level. This is to say that we want to increase the number of negative ions in the environment we live in. In addition, we want to increase the number of negative ions within our physiology as well. At the same time, we want to decrease the number of positive ions around and within our body, because, their influence is harmful. We have some natural phenomena that are known throughout history, but only recently have been scientifically validated. When winds blow over dry sandy desert, it will produce and carry with it many positive ions, which will have very bad effects on local people. Usually, it happens with the south wind. From the website …

  

www.econesthomes.com/natural-building-resources/articles/...

…

Please press „L“ to view it in the Lightbox!

Strictly speaking doctrinal knowledge is independent of the individual. But its actualization is not independent of the human capacity to act as a vehicle for it. He who possesses truth must none the less merit it although it is a free gift. Truth is immutable in itself, but in us it lives, because we live.

 

If we want truth to live in us we must live in it.

 

Knowledge only saves us on condition that it enlists all that we are, only when it is a way and when it works and transforms and wounds our nature even as the plough wounds the soil.

 

To say this is to say that intelligence and metaphysical certainty alone do not save; of themselves they do not prevent titans from falling. This is what explains the psychological and other precautions with which every tradition surrounds the gift of the doctrine.

 

When metaphysical knowledge is effective it produces love and destroys presumption. It produces love, that is to say the spontaneous directing of the will towards God and the perception of "myself" - and of God - in one's neighbour. It destroys presumption, for knowledge does not allow a man to overestimate himself or to underestimate others. By reducing to ashes all that is not God it orders all things.

 

All St. Paul says of charity concerns effective knowledge, for the latter is love, and he opposes it to theory inasmuch as theory is human concept. The Apostle desires that truth should be contemplated with our whole being and he calls this totality of contemplation "love".

 

Metaphysical knowledge is sacred. It is the right of sacred things to require of man all that he is.

 

Intelligence, since it distinguishes, perceives, as one might put it, proportions. The spiritual man integrates these proportions into his will, into his soul and into his life.

 

All defects are defects of proportion; they are errors that are lived. To be spiritual means not denying at any point with one's "being" what one affirms with one's knowledge, that is, what one accepts with the intelligence.

 

Truth lived: incorruptibility and generosity.

 

Since ignorance is all that we are and not merely our thinking, knowledge will also be all that we are to the extent to which our existential modalities are by their nature able to participate in truth.

 

Human nature contains dark elements which no intellectual certainty could, ipso facto, eliminate...

 

Pure intellectuality is as serene as a summer sky - serene with a serenity that is at once infinitely incorruptible and infinitely generous.

 

Intellectualism which "dries up the heart" has no connection with intellectuality.

 

The incorruptibility- or inviolability- of truth is bound up neither with contempt nor with avarice.

 

What is man's certainty? On the level of ideas it may be perfect, but on the level of life it but rarely pierces through illusion.

 

Everything is ephemeral and every man must die. No man is ignorant of this and no one knows it.

 

Man may have an interest that is quite illusory in accepting the most transcendent ideas and will readily believe himself to be superior to some other who, not having this interest (perhaps because he is too intelligent or too noble to have it) is sincere enough not to accept them, though he may all the same be more able to understand them than the other who accepts them. Man does not always accept truth because he understands it; often he believes he understands it because he is anxious to accept it.

 

People often discuss truths whereas they should limit themselves to discussing tastes and tendencies ...

 

Acuteness of intelligence is only a blessing when it is compensated by greatness and sweetness of the soul. It should not appear as a rupture of the equilibrium or as an excess which splits man in two. A gift of nature requires complementary qualities which allow of its harmonious manifestation; otherwise there is a risk of the lights becoming mingled with darkness.

 

----

 

Frithjof Schuon

 

----

 

Quoted in: The Essential Frithjof Schuon (edited by Seyyed Hossein Nasr)

 

----

 

image:

 

www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/38011

  

Here at the head of Loch Shiel stands this monument to the Jacobite Clansmen. Inside the enclosure a tablet bears this inscription:

Glenfinnan

"On this spot where Prince Charles Edward Stuart first raised his standard, 19th August 1745. When he made the noble and gallant attempt to recover a throne lost by his ancestors.

This column was erected by Alexander Macdonald Esquire of Glenaladale to commemorate the generous zeal. The undaunted bravery and inviolable fidelity of his forefathers, and the rest of those who fought and bled in that ardous and unfortunate enterprise.

This pillar is now alas also become the monument of it’s amiable and accomplished founder who before it was finished died in Edinburgh on 4th January 1815 at the early age of 28".

The cloud and rain added to the atmosphere of this historical location. There is a large visitor centre and it is a very popular visitor attraction. Owned and cared for by the National Trust for Scotland, www.nts.org.uk

A few years ago, early on Saturday morning, I tried to enter St Dunstan's, with no luck. It was locked fast.

 

Which was a shame, as it looked a very interesting church from the outside, and with its location, just outside the city gate on the crossing of two main roads.

 

Anyway, I logged this away in my meory banks, detirmed to go back one day. And for a change this Heritage Weekend, we returned to Canterbury not once, but twice. And on the second day was rewarded with entry to three of the city churches.

 

St Dunstan is most famous for being the final resting place of Sir Thomas More's head, in the family tomb of his wife. There is fine glass commemorating this.

 

Some minor work is being carried out at the rear of the church, so a return will be needed to see the full restored church.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Dedicated to a former Archbishop of Canterbury, St Dunstan's stands outside the city walls. There is structural evidence of the Norman period, but most of the church is fourteenth century. The west tower dates from this time and is very oddly proportioned - about twice the height that its width can really cope with. The south chapel is constructed of brick and was completed in the early sixteenth century. It contains monuments to the More family and is the burial place of St. Thomas More's head, - brought here by his daughter after his execution. The family home stood opposite the church where its brick gateway may still be seen. There are two twentieth-century windows of note in the chapel, by Lawrence Lee and John Hayward.

  

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Canterbury+2

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

St. Dunstan's is an Anglican church in Canterbury, Kent, at the junction of London Road and Whitstable Road. It is dedicated to St. Dunstan (909-988) and gives its name to the part of the city on the left bank of the River Stour. The parish has been held in plurality with others nearby at different times, in a way that is confusing and difficult to document. In 2010 the parish was joined with the parishes of the City Centre Parish in a new pastoral grouping, City Centre with St. Dunstan.

 

The church dates from the 11th century and is a grade I listed building. It was restored in 1878-80 by church architect Ewan Christian. Its association with the deaths of Thomas Becket and Thomas More make it a place of pilgrimage.

 

Dunstan was Archbishop of Canterbury from 960 to 978 and was canonised soon after his death, becoming the favourite saint of the English until he was supplanted by Thomas Becket.[2] He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral but his tomb was destroyed during the Reformation.

 

In 1174, when Henry II began his penitential pilgrimage in reparation for the murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket, he changed his clothing into sackcloth at St. Dunstan’s Church and began his pilgrimage from here to Thomas Becket's tomb at Canterbury Cathedral on foot.

 

His daughter Margaret secured the release of Thomas More's head from its spike on London Bridge and brought it back to the family tomb of her husband William Roper.[4] The Roper family lived nearby off what is now St Dunstan's Street. What remains of their home is called Roper Gate, marked with a commemorative plaque, it is all that survives of Place House. The Roper family vault is located underneath the Nicholas Chapel, to the right of the church's main altar. It was sealed in recent years, according to Anglican tradition. A large stone slab marks its location to the immediate left of the chapel's altar. Three impressive stained glass windows line the chapel, the one behind the altar depicts in brilliant detail the major events and symbols in the life of the Saint. Another of the windows commemorates the visit of Pope John Paul II to Canterbury to pray with the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury at the site of the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. The window displays the arms of the Archbishop's diocese and the Pope. Plaques mounted on the walls explain the veracity of the relic of the Saint's head, the sealing of the vault which contains it, and the life of the Saint, including a prayer he wrote.

  

St Dunstan’s has six bells, hung for change ringing in the English style, the heaviest weighing 13cwt (approx. 675 kg). Due to the unusual narrowness of the belfry, the bells are hung in a two-tier frame.

 

The fifth bell of the ring is one of the oldest Christian church bells in the world, believed to have been cast in 1325 by William le Belyetere, making it nearly 690 years old as of 2014 [5]

 

The bells were removed from the tower in 1935 so that a concrete structural beam could be fitted to the tower. At this time the bells were retuned by the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, and rehung in the present frame in 1936.

 

The bells are rung on Friday evenings for practice, and Sunday mornings for the service, by the St Dunstan’s Society of Change Ringers.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Dunstan%27s,_Canterbury

 

----------------------------------------------

 

ir Thomas More (/ˈmɔːr/; 7 February 1478 – 6 July 1535), venerated by Roman Catholics as Saint Thomas More,[1][2] was an English lawyer, social philosopher, author, statesman and noted Renaissance humanist. He was also a councillor to Henry VIII, and Lord High Chancellor of England from October 1529 to 16 May 1532.[3]

 

More opposed the Protestant Reformation, in particular the theology of Martin Luther and William Tyndale. He also wrote Utopia, published in 1516, about the political system of an imaginary ideal island nation. More opposed the King's separation from the Catholic Church, refusing to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church of England and the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. After refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy, he was convicted of treason and beheaded. Ahead of his execution, he was reported saying his famous words: "I die the King's good servant, but God's first."

 

Pope Pius XI canonised More in 1935 as a martyr. Pope John Paul II in 2000 declared him the "heavenly Patron of Statesmen and Politicians."[4] Since 1980, the Church of England has remembered More liturgically as a Reformation martyr.[5] The Soviet Union honoured him for the 'Communistic' attitude toward property rights expressed in Utopia.

 

Born in Milk Street in London, on February 7, 1478, Thomas More was the son of Sir John More,[9] a successful lawyer and later judge, and his wife Agnes (née Graunger). More was educated at St Anthony's School, then considered one of London's finest schools.[10] From 1490 to 1492, More served John Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor of England, as a household page.[11]:xvi Morton enthusiastically supported the "New Learning" (now called the Renaissance), and thought highly of the young More. Believing that More had great potential, Morton nominated him for a place at the University of Oxford (either in St. Mary's Hall or Canterbury College, both now gone).[12]:38

 

More began his studies at Oxford in 1492, and received a classical education. Studying under Thomas Linacre and William Grocyn, he became proficient in both Latin and Greek. More left Oxford after only two years—at his father's insistence—to begin legal training in London at New Inn, one of the Inns of Chancery.[11]:xvii[13] In 1496, More became a student at Lincoln's Inn, one of the Inns of Court, where he remained until 1502, when he was called to the Bar.

 

According to his friend, theologian Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, More once seriously contemplated abandoning his legal career to become a monk.[14][15] Between 1503 and 1504 More lived near the Carthusian monastery outside the walls of London and joined in the monks' spiritual exercises. Although he deeply admired their piety, More ultimately decided to remain a layman, standing for election to Parliament in 1504 and marrying the following year.[11]:xxi

 

In spite of his choice to pursue a secular career, More continued ascetical practices for the rest of his life, such as wearing a hair shirt next to his skin and occasionally engaging in flagellation.[11]:xxi A tradition of the Third Order of Saint Francis honours More as a member of that Order on their calendar of saints.

 

More married Jane Colt in 1505.[12]:118 She was 5 years younger than her husband, quiet and good-natured.[12]:119 Erasmus reported that More wanted to give his young wife a better education than she had previously received at home, and tutored her in music and literature.[12]:119 The couple had four children before Jane died in 1511: Margaret, Elizabeth, Cicely, and John.[12]:132

 

Going "against friends' advice and common custom," within thirty days More had married one of the many eligible women among his wide circle of friends.[17] He certainly expected a mother to take care of his little children and, as the view of his time considered marriage as an "economic union",[18] he chose a rich widow, Alice Harpur Middleton.[19] More is regarded not getting remarried for sexual pleasure, since Alice is much older than himself, and their marriage possibly had not been consummated.[18] The speed of the marriage was so unusual that More had to get a dispensation of the banns, which, due to his good public reputation, he easily obtained.[17] Alice More lacked Jane's docility; More's friend Andrew Ammonius derided Alice as a "hook-nosed harpy."[20] Erasmus, however, called their marriage happy.[12]:144

 

More had no children from his second marriage, although he raised Alice's daughter from her previous marriage as his own. More also became the guardian of two young girls: Anne Cresacre would eventually marry his son, John More;[12]:146 and Margaret Giggs (later Clement) would be the only member of his family to witness his execution (she died on the 35th anniversary of that execution, and her daughter married More's nephew William Rastell). An affectionate father, More wrote letters to his children whenever he was away on legal or government business, and encouraged them to write to him often.[12]:150[21]:xiv

 

More insisted upon giving his daughters the same classical education as his son, a highly unusual attitude at the time.[12]:146–47 His eldest daughter, Margaret, attracted much admiration for her erudition, especially her fluency in Greek and Latin.[12]:147 More told his daughter of his pride in her academic accomplishment in September 1522, after he showed the bishop a letter she had written:

 

When he saw from the signature that it was the letter of a lady, his surprise led him to read it more eagerly … he said he would never have believed it to be your work unless I had assured him of the fact, and he began to praise it in the highest terms … for its pure Latinity, its correctness, its erudition, and its expressions of tender affection. He took out at once from his pocket a portague [A Portuguese gold coin] … to send to you as a pledge and token of his good will towards you.[21]:152

 

More's decision to educate his daughters set an example for other noble families. Even Erasmus became much more favourable once he witnessed their accomplishments.[12]:149

 

A portrait of More and his family was painted by Holbein, but it was lost in a fire in the 18th century. More's grandson commissioned a copy, two versions of which survive.

 

In 1504 More was elected to Parliament to represent Great Yarmouth, and in 1510 began representing London.[22]

 

From 1510, More served as one of the two undersheriffs of the City of London, a position of considerable responsibility in which he earned a reputation as an honest and effective public servant. More became Master of Requests in 1514,[23] the same year in which he was appointed as a Privy Counsellor.[24] After undertaking a diplomatic mission to the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, accompanying Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal Archbishop of York, to Calais and Bruges, More was knighted and made under-treasurer of the Exchequer in 1521.[24]

 

As secretary and personal adviser to King Henry VIII, More became increasingly influential: welcoming foreign diplomats, drafting official documents, and serving as a liaison between the King and Lord Chancellor Wolsey. More later served as High Steward for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.

 

In 1523 More was elected as knight of the shire (MP) for Middlesex and, on Wolsey's recommendation, the House of Commons elected More its Speaker.[24] In 1525 More became Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, with executive and judicial responsibilities over much of northern England.

 

More supported the Catholic Church and saw the Protestant Reformation as heresy, a threat to the unity of both church and society. More believed in the theology, polemics, and ecclesiastical laws of the church, and "heard Luther's call to destroy the Catholic Church as a call to war."[25]

 

His early actions against the Reformation included aiding Wolsey in preventing Lutheran books from being imported into England, spying on and investigating suspected Protestants, especially publishers, and arresting anyone holding in his possession, transporting, or selling the books of the Protestant Reformation. More vigorously suppressed the travelling country ministers who used Tyndale's English translation of the New Testament.[citation needed] It contained controversial translations of certain words; for example, Tyndale used "senior" and "elder" rather than "priest" for the Greek "presbyteros", and some of the marginal glosses challenged Catholic doctrine.[26] It was during this time that most of his literary polemics appeared.

 

Rumours circulated during and after More's lifetime regarding ill-treatment of heretics during his time as Lord Chancellor. The popular anti-Catholic polemicist John Foxe, who "placed Protestant sufferings against the background of... the Antichrist",[27] was instrumental in publicising accusations of torture in his famous Book of Martyrs, claiming that More had often personally used violence or torture while interrogating heretics. Later authors such as Brian Moynahan and Michael Farris cite Foxe when repeating these allegations.[28] More himself denied these allegations:

 

Stories of a similar nature were current even in More's lifetime and he denied them forcefully. He admitted that he did imprison heretics in his house – 'theyr sure kepynge' – he called it – but he utterly rejected claims of torture and whipping... 'so helpe me God.'[12]:298

 

However, More writes in his "Apology" (1533) that he only applied corporal punishment to two heretics: a child who was caned in front of his family for heresy regarding the Eucharist, and a "feeble-minded" man who was whipped for disrupting prayers.[29]:404 During More's chancellorship, six people were burned at the stake for heresy; they were Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbery, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.[12]:299–306 Moynahan has argued that More was influential in the burning of Tyndale, as More's agents had long pursued him, even though this took place over a year after his own death.[30] Burning at the stake had long been a standard punishment for heresy; about thirty burnings had taken place in the century before More's elevation to Chancellor, and burning continued to be used by both Catholics and Protestants during the religious upheaval of the following decades.[31] His biographer Peter Ackroyd notes that More explicitly "approved of Burning".[12]:298

 

John Tewkesbury was a London leather seller found guilty by Bishop of London John Stokesley[32] of harbouring banned books; he was sentenced to burning for refusing to recant. More declared: he "burned as there was neuer wretche I wene better worthy."[33]

 

Modern commentators are divided over More's religious actions as Chancellor. Some biographers, including Ackroyd, have taken a relatively tolerant view of More's campaign against Protestantism by placing his actions within the turbulent religious climate of the time. Others have been more critical, such as Richard Marius, an American scholar of the Reformation, believing that persecutions were a betrayal of More's earlier humanist convictions, including More's zealous and well-documented advocacy of extermination for Protestants.[29]:386–406

 

Some Protestants take a different view. In 1980, More was added to the Church of England's calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church, despite being a fierce opponent of the English Reformation that created the Church of England. He was added jointly with John Fisher, to be commemorated every 6 July (the date of More's execution) as "Thomas More, Scholar, and John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, Reformation Martyrs, 1535".[5] Pope John Paul II honoured him by making him patron saint of statesmen and politicians in October 2000, stating: "It can be said that he demonstrated in a singular way the value of a moral conscience... even if, in his actions against heretics, he reflected the limits of the culture of his time".

 

As the conflict over supremacy between the Papacy and the King reached its apogee, More continued to remain steadfast in supporting the supremacy of the Pope as Successor of Peter over that of the King of England. In 1530, More refused to sign a letter by the leading English churchmen and aristocrats asking Pope Clement VII to annul Henry's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, and also quarrelled with Henry VIII over the heresy laws. In 1531, Henry had isolated More by purging most clergy who supported the papal stance from senior positions in the church. Parliament's reinstatement of the charge of praemunire in 1529 had made it a crime to support in public or office the claim of any authority outside the realm (such as the Papacy) to have a legal jurisdiction superior to the King's. In 1531, a royal decree required the clergy to take an oath acknowledging the King as "Supreme Head" of the Church in England. As a layperson, More did not need to take the oath and the clergy, after some initial resistance, took the oath with the addition of the clause "as far as the law of Christ allows." However, More saw he could not render the support Henry expected from his Lord Chancellor for the policy the King was developing to support the annulment of his marriage with Catherine. In 1532 he petitioned the King to relieve him of his office, alleging failing health. Henry granted his request.

 

In 1533, More refused to attend the coronation of Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. Technically, this was not an act of treason, as More had written to Henry acknowledging Anne's queenship and expressing his desire for the King's happiness and the new Queen's health.[34] Despite this, his refusal to attend was widely interpreted as a snub against Anne, and Henry took action against him.

 

Shortly thereafter, More was charged with accepting bribes, but the charges had to be dismissed for lack of any evidence. In early 1534, More was accused of conspiring with the "Holy Maid of Kent," Elizabeth Barton, a nun who had prophesied against the king's annulment, but More was able to produce a letter in which he had instructed Barton not to interfere with state matters.[citation needed]

 

On 13 April 1534, More was asked to appear before a commission and swear his allegiance to the parliamentary Act of Succession. More accepted Parliament's right to declare Anne Boleyn the legitimate Queen of England, but, holding fast to the teaching of papal supremacy, he steadfastly refused to take the oath of supremacy of the Crown in the relationship between the kingdom and the church in England. More furthermore publicly refused to uphold Henry's annulment from Catherine. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, refused the oath along with More. The oath reads:[35]

 

...By reason whereof the Bishop of Rome and See Apostolic, contrary to the great and inviolable grants of jurisdictions given by God immediately to emperors, kings and princes in succession to their heirs, hath presumed in times past to invest who should please them to inherit in other men's kingdoms and dominions, which thing we your most humble subjects, both spiritual and temporal, do most abhor and detest...

 

With his refusal to support the King's annulment, More's enemies had enough evidence to have the King arrest him on treason. Four days later, Henry had More imprisoned in the Tower of London. There More prepared a devotional Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation. While More was imprisoned in the Tower, Thomas Cromwell made several visits, urging More to take the oath, which he continued to refuse.

 

On 1 July 1535, More was tried before a panel of judges that included the new Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas Audley, as well as Anne Boleyn's father, brother, and uncle. He was charged with high treason for denying the validity of the Act of Supremacy and was tried under the following section of the Treasons Act 1534:

 

If any person or persons, after the first day of February next coming, do maliciously wish, will or desire, by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king's most royal person, the queen's, or their heirs apparent, or to deprive them or any of them of their dignity, title, or name of their royal estates …

 

That then every such person and persons so offending … shall have and suffer such pains of death and other penalties, as is limited and accustomed in cases of high treason.[36]

 

More, relying on legal precedent and the maxim "qui tacet consentire videtur" (literally, who (is) silent is seen to consent), understood that he could not be convicted as long as he did not explicitly deny that the King was Supreme Head of the Church, and he therefore refused to answer all questions regarding his opinions on the subject.

 

Thomas Cromwell, at the time the most powerful of the King's advisors, brought forth the Solicitor General, Richard Rich, to testify that More had, in his presence, denied that the King was the legitimate head of the church. This testimony was characterised by More as being extremely dubious. Witnesses Richard Southwell and Mr. Palmer both denied having heard the details of the reported conversation, and as More himself pointed out:

 

Can it therefore seem likely to your Lordships, that I should in so weighty an Affair as this, act so unadvisedly, as to trust Mr. Rich, a Man I had always so mean an Opinion of, in reference to his Truth and Honesty, … that I should only impart to Mr. Rich the Secrets of my Conscience in respect to the King's Supremacy, the particular Secrets, and only Point about which I have been so long pressed to explain my self? which I never did, nor never would reveal; when the Act was once made, either to the King himself, or any of his Privy Councillors, as is well known to your Honours, who have been sent upon no other account at several times by his Majesty to me in the Tower. I refer it to your Judgments, my Lords, whether this can seem credible to any of your Lordships.

 

The jury took only fifteen minutes, however, to find More guilty.

 

After the jury's verdict was delivered and before his sentencing, More spoke freely of his belief that "no temporal man may be the head of the spirituality". He was sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered (the usual punishment for traitors who were not the nobility), but the King commuted this to execution by decapitation. The execution took place on 6 July 1535. When he came to mount the steps to the scaffold, he is widely quoted as saying (to the officials): "I pray you, I pray you, Mr Lieutenant, see me safe up and for my coming down, I can shift for myself"; while on the scaffold he declared that he died "the king's good servant, but God's first."

 

Another comment he is believed to have made to the executioner is that his beard was completely innocent of any crime, and did not deserve the axe; he then positioned his beard so that it would not be harmed.[39] More asked that his foster/adopted daughter Margaret Clement (née Giggs) be given his headless corpse to bury.[40] She was the only member of his family to witness his execution. He was buried at the Tower of London, in the chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in an unmarked grave. His head was fixed upon a pike over London Bridge for a month, according to the normal custom for traitors. His daughter Margaret (Meg) Roper rescued it, possibly by bribery, before it could be thrown in the River Thames.[citation needed]

 

The skull is believed to rest in the Roper Vault of St Dunstan's Church, Canterbury, though some researchers[who?] have claimed it might be within the tomb he erected for More in Chelsea Old Church (see below). The evidence,[clarification needed] however, seems to be in favour of its placement in St Dunstan's, with the remains of his daughter, Margaret Roper, and her husband's family, whose vault it was.[citation needed]

 

Among other surviving relics is his hair shirt, presented for safe keeping by Margaret Clement.[41] This was long in the custody of the community of Augustinian canonesses who until 1983 lived at the convent at Abbotskerswell Priory, Devon. It is now preserved at Syon Abbey, near South Brent.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

THE CHURCH of St Bride's is justly world famous. To enter its doors is to step into 2,000 years of history, which had begun with the Romans some six centuries before the name of St Bride, daughter of an Irish prince, even emerged from legend to become associated forever with the site.

 

The story of St Bride's is inextricably woven into the history of the City of London. By the time the Great Fire of 1666 left the church in ruins, a succession of churches had existed on the site for about a millennium, and the area had already assumed its unique role in the emergence of English printing. It took nine years for St Bride's to re-appear from the ashes under the inspired direction of Christopher Wren, but for the next two-and-a-half centuries it was in the shadow of the church's unmistakeable wedding-cake spire that the rise of the British newspaper industry into the immensely-powerful Fourth Estate took place.

 

Then, in 1940, St Bride's fell victim once again to flames as German incendiary bombs reduced Wren's architectural jewel to a roofless shell. This time 17 years elapsed before rebuilding was completed, although a series of important excavations in 1953 amid the skeletal ruins, led by the medieval archaeologist Professor W. F. Grimes, came up with extraordinary results, uncovering the foundations of all six previous churches on the site.

 

Not only the nation, but the Christian world as a whole, was fascinated by the discovery.

 

Historians and religious scholars had always accepted that there had been a site of Christian worship alongside the Fleet River and close to the Lud Gate, now known as Ludgate Circus, in the heart of the ancient City of London, for about 1,000 years.

 

When the Romans established Londinium following the invasion under the emperor Claudius in 43 AD, they dug a mysterious extra-mural ditch on the site of the future church and built a house, which seems likely to have been one of the earliest sites of worship. A Roman pavement can be seen to this day on display in the much-restored crypts of the church.

 

More than four centuries were to pass before the name of St Bride became associated with the site. But that association was to last throughout subsequent recorded history.

 

Born in 453 AD, shortly after St Patrick, Bride (or St Brigid) was the daughter of a prince and a druidic slave. As a teenager with an overwhelming desire to do good to others, she gave away so many of her father's possessions - daily necessities such as milk and flour, but also jewellery and swords - that he eventually let her follow her calling and enter the religious life. In 470, she and seven other nuns founded a convent in Kildare which developed into a centre of learning and spirituality, famed for its illuminated manuscripts such as the Book of Kildare.

 

According to legend, when Bride received her blessing as abbess it was inadvertently read to her as the rite of consecration as a bishop, which could not then be rescinded. Thus Bride and her successor abbesses had authority equal to that of a bishop for the following seven centuries.

 

She was renowned throughout Christian Europe for her holiness and common sense, and was regarded as a saint during her lifetime. Ironically, in view of the part that flames were later to play in the story of the church, she shared her name with the pagan goddess of fire, who had been noted for her music, her craftsmanship and her poetry - all qualities that have been manifested in and around St Bride's over numerous generations.

 

A line from a poem attributed to her - "I long for a great lake of ale" - was also an ironic harbinger of one of the Fleet Street's preoccupations in later years.

 

She died on 1st February 525 and was buried with the remains of Ireland's two other patron saints - Patrick and Columba. This date continues to be celebrated as the Feast of St Bride.

 

In the early sixth century the first stone-walled church was built here, founded either by St Bride in person or by Celtic monks who had formed a community in London. It was rebuilt many times over the following centuries, with notable structures including those of the Middle Saxons and the Normans.

 

This period in history was characterised by the urbanisation of Europe, military expansion, and intellectual revival, aided by the conversion of the raiding Scandinavians to Christianity. The 11th, 12th and 13th centuries saw a large increase in London's population - from less than 15,000 to over 80,000.

 

By the year 1200 Britain's effective capital city was Westminster, then a small town up-river from the City of London, where the royal treasury and financial records were stored.

 

St Bride's was the first church encountered between London and Westminster. This accident of geography gave it considerable importance; in 1205, the Curia Regis, a council of landowners and ecclesiastics charged with providing legislative advice to King John, and a predecessor to today's parliament, was held in the church. St Bride's influence and its numbers of parishioners grew substantially during the medieval period. From the 13th century onwards London developed through two different seats of power and influence: Westminster became the royal capital and centre of government, while the City of London became the centre of commerce and trade - a distinction evident to this day.

 

The area between them eventually became entirely urbanised by the end of the 16th century, and it was at the beginning of that century that St Bride's developed its first links with one of the future cornerstones of British society which were to constitute its most enduring claim to fame.

 

In the year 1500 the church had impressive neighbours - the many members of the clergy who were unable to afford the high cost of living in the very centre of the medieval city, where there was greater protection from thieves. However, they possessed their own powerful insurance against burglars - the fear of excommunication, which freed them to live outside.

 

So while rich merchants huddled together in the centre for safety, the area around St. Bride's became a haven for the eminent divines who were involved in national life. Salisbury Square, Peterborough Court and Ely Place are among names which have come down through history to remind us of great houses in the vicinity.

 

Since the clergy possessed almost a monopoly of literacy in those days, they were the printers' best customers. Thus Fleet Street became the cradle of the transformation of the medieval art and mystery of printing into the most influential industry man had yet known.

 

In the early 1470s, William Caxton had learnt the recently-invented technique of printing in Cologne. He returned to London in 1476 and set up a press by Westminster Abbey. In all, he printed about 100 books, some 20 of which were translated from French or Dutch, on subjects that included history and geography, the lives of saints, fables, and instructional books (for example, on good manners and learning French). His output also included most of the works of Chaucer.

 

As a well-to-do cloth merchant, Caxton had no need to make his press commercially viable. But after he died in 1491, his apprentice Wynkyn de Worde, who acquired that press, was in different circumstances. Having no other income, printing was his livelihood. So he followed commercial principles and took his goods to the buyer, setting up England's first printing press with moveable type in the churchyard of St Bride's in 1501.

 

It was a period in history when churchyards were hives of activity, boasting inns, taverns and commercial premises, and Fleet Street proved the perfect place for de Worde's new enterprise.

 

The publishers of playwrights and poets soon set up competing presses in other local churchyards, and the connection between St Bride's and world of printing and journalism was cemented. Wynkyn de Worde was buried in the church in 1535.

 

By the 17th century Fleet Street had become an irresistible attraction for the great writers and diarists of the day. A trio of Johns - Milton, Dryden and Evelyn - lived in the vicinity; Samuel Pepys was baptised at St Bride's, and Richard Lovelace buried there.

 

But then, in the space of 16 terrible months, it all changed.

 

St Bride's long connections with the colonies in America began when the parents of Virginia Dare, the first child born to English emigrants to North Carolina in August 1585, were married at the church. The event is commemorated in a touching bust of a little girl which can be found by the font in the south-west corner of the church.

 

One of the most striking features of today's St. Bride's also owes its inspiration to the church's American links. The great canopied oak reredos which enshrines the church altar is a memorial to the Pilgrim Fathers. This connection was made 35 years after Virginia Dare's birth when Edward Winslow (1595-1655) became one of the leaders of the Mayflower expedition in 1620. Winslow, who was three times elected governor of Plymouth, Massachusetts, had served as a boy apprentice in Fleet Street and would have known St Bride's well. His parents were also married there.

 

At the same time, St. Bride's parish was busily helping to populate yet another English colony. One hundred girls and boys from the Bridewell Hospital orphanage were sent to Virginia in 1619. The project was so successful that the governor requested 100 more. All the youngsters received grants of land on coming of age.

 

The Great Plague is believed to have first struck the docklands of London in April 1665, and by 6th June the parish of St Bride's was officially notified of an outbreak within its boundaries. It was also known as "the Poore's Plague," and the parish suffered terribly because of the large number of manual workers.

 

The court of Charles II, together with lawyers, merchants and doctors, fled the city, but the poor could not. St Bride's vicar, the Revd Richard Peirson, remained to witness the devastation to his parish community, including the deaths of his churchwardens.

 

Searchers of the Dead, usually old women, were paid to go out and inspect a corpse to determine cause of death. They were often bribed not to diagnose bubonic plague, as the entire household of a victim had to be locked in for 40 days, which normally resulted in all their deaths. Terrified residents sniffed nosegays to ward off malodorous airs which were thought to carry the infection. Funeral bells tolled constantly.

 

The parish distributed relief to stricken families. Watchmen were paid to guard locked houses and attend to the wants of those within. Nurses were dispatched to attend the sick. Two "bearers" were paid to carry corpses to the plague pits. The cost of all of this was partly reclaimed by the "brokers of the dead" who seized the property left in infected houses. So much was gathered that St Bride's had to rent a storehouse.

 

Many thousands of dogs and cats were culled, as they were believed to spread the pestilence. Flea-infested rats (the real culprits) were thus freed of predators, and proliferated.

 

In all the plague cost the parish of St Bride's some £581. The human cost was far worse: 2,111 people died in the parish in that fateful year. London lost 100,000, or 20% of its inhabitants.

 

Plague victims continued to die in smaller numbers until autumn the following year - which proved to be the very moment the City was consumed, literally, by a second dreadful tribulation on the heels of the first.

 

After a summer of drought, the Great Fire of London began on Sunday 2nd September 1666, and very soon the worried residents of the parish were watching in growing alarm before being put to flight two days later as the advancing flames leapt the narrow alleyways to ignite wooden houses and the often-illegal businesses many of them contained.

 

St Bride's was equipped with its own fire engine, but had failed to keep the machine "scoured, oyled and trimmed." Soldiers destroyed houses about Fleet Bridge in the vain hope that the Fleet River might stay the advance of the flames. But the relentless east wind drove the fire on: one onlooker described how it "rushed like a torrent down Ludgate Hill."

 

On Friday, Samuel Pepys made this entry in his diary:

 

September 7. - Up by five o'clock; and blessed be God!, find all well; and by water to Paul's Wharfe. Walked thence, and saw all the towne burned; and a miserable sight of Paul's church, with all the roof fallen, and the body of the quire fallen into St Fayth's; Paul's School also, Ludgate and Fleete-street, my father's house (in Salisbury Court) and the church (St Bride's), and a good part of the Temple the like.

 

Two weeks before the conflagration, a new vicar had been inducted at St Bride's. The hapless Paul Boston was to possess a church for no longer than those two weeks of his tenure, though in his will he left it £50; the silver gilt vessels bought with that bequest remain prized possessions today.

 

The destruction of the medieval St Bride's was so complete that no attempt was made to use the ruins for service, as was done at St Paul's and elsewhere. So, the big question was: would St Bride's be rebuilt?

 

In 1671 the churchwardens of St Bride's took Mr Christopher Wren (Surveyor General and Principal Architect for rebuilding the City) to dinner at the Globe Tavern. It would take another year before they could convince him of their cause, but their persistence meant that St Bride's was one of the first post-fire churches to be opened.

 

The blaze had destroyed 87 City churches. Despite Wren's belief that only 39 were necessary in such a small area, St Bride's was among the 51 to be rebuilt. The £500 required as a deposit by Guildhall to get things under way was raised in a month - a remarkable effort, given that most of the parishioners had lost homes and businesses in the disaster. Nor was this the end to the financial demands, as money remained tight. But a combination of Coal Dues, donations and loans eventually met the building's cost of £11,430 5s. 11d.

 

Joshua Marshall was the main contractor for the works. A parishioner and master mason to the king, like his father before him, Marshall was a wise choice. He also worked with Wren on Temple Bar and the Monument, while one of his assistants was the young Nicholas Hawksmoor, who was to become a renowned architect himself.

 

As today, the main material for the church was Portland stone. By September 1672, within a year of starting, the walls had reached the upper part of the cornice. The speed of progress was partly ascribed to the fact that the workmen had a hostel by the church, the Old Bell Tavern, built for them by Wren. By 1674 the main structural work was complete, and a year later the church finally reopened for worship on Sunday 19th December 1675.

 

Though it was open, it was not completed; most notably, the tower remained unfinished. In 1682 the churchwardens again approached Wren, this time about building the steeple. Work did not begin until 1701, and took two years to complete. At 234ft it was Wren's highest steeple, although after it was damaged by lightning in 1764 it was reduced to 226ft during more rebuilding.

 

Much has been written about the steeple, the most romantic tale of which is surely that of William Rich, apprenticed to a baker near Ludgate Circus. He fell in love with his master's daughter and, when he set up his own business at the end of his apprenticeship, won her father's approval for her hand in marriage.

 

Rich wished to create a spectacular cake for the wedding feast, but was unsure how, until one day he looked up at the steeple of the church in which the marriage was to be held, and inspiration hit him: a cake in layers, tiered, and diminishing as it rose. Thus began the tradition of the tiered wedding cake.

 

The year before the steeple was finished, the Daily Courant became the first regular daily newspaper to be printed in the United Kingdom, published on 11th March 1702 by Elizabeth Mallet from rooms above the White Hart pub in Fleet Street. A brass plaque to mark the 300th anniversary of this first edition was unveiled by the Prince of Wales at a special service in St Bride's on 11th March 2002.

 

Publishers and newspapers now began to spring up with some urgency; of the national papers that are still in existence, the Daily Universal Register (now The Times) was first published in 1785, and The Observer became the world's first Sunday newspaper in 1791.

 

Many renowned writers tried their hand - Daniel Defoe, for instance, founded the Daily Post.

 

As numerous regional and provincial titles were founded, they set up London offices in and around St Bride's, as did the first news agencies.

 

The vast expansion of the printing industry in Fleet Street also drew interest from intellectuals, actors and artists. Anyone who was anyone - Samuel Johnson, James Boswell, David Garrick, Samuel Richardson, Joshua Reynolds, William Hogarth, William Wordsworth and John Keats - would want to be seen in the coffee houses and inns around St Bride's.

 

Guardian (1821)

Daily Mail (1896)

Sunday Times (1822)

Daily Express (1900)

News of the World (1843)

Daily Mirror (1903)

Daily Telegraph (1855)

Sunday Mirror (1915)

The People (1881)

Sunday Express (1918)

Financial Times (1888)

Morning Star (1930)

 

With the coming of the 20th century their combined circulations were immense, and the power of press barons such as Northcliffe, Kemsley, Beaverbrook, Astor and Rothermere propelled Fleet Street into the very heart of the British power structure, often shaping news as well as reporting it.

 

Then came World War II and, in 1940, Fleet Street watched helplessly as the news exploded right at its doorstep. For St Bride's, by now enshrined as the parish church of journalism, it once again brought catastrophe.

 

The Blitz began in the early autumn as the Germans, their plan for a summer invasion thwarted, sought instead to bomb Britain's cities into submission. Guildsman John Colley, now in his 80s, recalls what it was like to be in a Grub Street at war:

 

"The nightly bombing to which London was being subjected for those last four months of 1940 made little apparent difference to the way Fleet Street went about its business. The business of producing tomorrow's newspapers was so all-consuming that there was little time to think about what was going on above; and that was true not only of those working in the great buildings housing the Nationals, but also in the basements of the scores of London offices of the big provincial papers.

 

"That isn't to say there weren't moments of sheer terror when the ominous whistle of a bomb you knew was going to land close by could be heard, but once the immediate danger was over you just got on with the job that had to be done. It was such a familiar situation that one became hardened to it.

 

"Outside, Fleet Street appeared to be its usual nightly hive of activity and got on with its job as much as circumstances would allow. News vans still dashed off to the London termini; couriers brought Government hand-outs from the Ministry of Information; messengers from picture and news agencies dodged the shrapnel and bombs as they darted from office to office; even the odd tramp made his nightly call to cadge a cuppa.

 

"With most of the newspapers gathered together in an area all around Fleet Street, the agencies - PA, Reuters, Ex Tel and the rest - sent the majority of their news through cables strung across the Street to tape machines in subscribing offices, all liable to disruption by bomb and blast - which brought more messengers delivering a hand service.

 

"Night life in the Street at that time centred around the all-night cafes - and there were many of them, all doing good business serving sustaining tea and snacks. Pubs, of course, had to keep to licensing hours, but Fleet Street's two Black and White all-night milk bars did a roaring trade serving hot soup and a great variety of milk shakes.

 

"Occasionally a fire-fighting party of three dodged from building to building, one carrying a bucket of water, one a stirrup pump and the third a hose on their way to put out an incendiary fire. Air Raid Precaution wardens made their nightly calls and public service vehicles on their way to or from an incident were up and down the Street throughout the night. All in all, there was hardly a quiet moment, either on the ground or up above."

 

Two days before this grim year ended, St Bride's luck ran out. On the night of Sunday 29th December the Luftwaffe targeted the City of London in a concentrated incendiary raid. Some 1400 fires were started; eight of Wren's churches were destroyed. St Bride's was one of them.

 

The church, locked after Evensong, suffered incendiary hits which pierced the roof, and the seasoned timbers proved perfect tinder. Some treasures were rescued from the flames, including the medieval gospel lectern which had survived the Great Fire of 1666. But most was destroyed. The famous bells melted and fell, but the steeple, despite having flames pouring from it, prevailed - testament to Wren's design.

 

Up Ludgate Hill, the Times reported, "the dome of St Paul's seemed to ride the sea of fire like a great ship lifting above the smoke and flames the inviolable ensign of the golden cross."

 

But all that lay ahead for St Bride's were years of ruined desolation until the war ended and the church's administrators were able to address the question that had faced their predecessors in 1666: How do we rebuild both the church and its congregation?

 

By the time the austere 1950s came round, services were being held on the site, some in the open air and others in the crypt chapel.

 

Rebuilding work was scheduled for 1954, thanks to the restoration fund which was a tribute to the dedication of the Rector, Revd Cyril Armitage. The chosen architect, Godfrey Allen, an authority on Wren, studied the master's original plans and produced a faithful recreation. He kept the clear glass Wren loved, but did not rebuild the galleries, instead laying out the stalls in collegiate style.

 

With rebuilding came excavation as well as restoration. In addition to the astonishing discovery of Roman remains on the site in 1953, the crypts were found to contain thousands of human remains, many of them victims of the Great Plague of 1665 and the cholera epidemic of 1854. The latter claimed 10,000 lives in the City of London, and, as a result, Parliament decreed that there should be no more burials in the City. The crypts were sealed and forgotten about.

 

One hundred years later the excavations of Professor F.W. Grimes resulted in St. Bride's possessing two almost unique series of human remains. One includes well over 200 skeletons identified by their sex and age at the time of death, thus forming a very important source of research into forensic and other forms of medicine.

 

The other series, which is estimated by some to include nearly 7,000 human remains, is in a medieval charnel house where all the bones were found in categories - thigh bone with thigh bone and so on - and laid in chequer-board pattern. This is probably evidence of a land shortage in London even that many centuries ago.

 

On 19th December 1957, on the anniversary of Wren's church being opened for worship 282 years previously, St Bride's was rededicated in the presence of the Queen and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

 

In 1962, Dewi Morgan inherited the Rector's mantle from Cyril Armitage, and throughout the 1960s and 1970s St Bride's continued its ministry to the newspaper world, hosting baptisms, weddings and memorial services as well as offering regular weekday worship for those working in the area.

 

In 1967 the church was packed for a service to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Press Association, whose offices were next door. The glass doors at the West End were a gift to mark the occasion. Through the generosity of Sir Max Aitken, Lord Beaverbrook's heir, a permanent exhibition was mounted in the crypt chronicling the history of the site and of Fleet Street, and was renewed with the help of Reuters and the Museum of London 25 years later.

 

By the early 1980s, however, all was not well in the newspaper business. For years Fleet Street had been living with chaotic industrial relations. Proprietors found the so-called Spanish practices of the print unions intolerable, while the workers rejected management attempts to introduce flexible working, no-strike clauses, new technology, and an end to the closed shop.

 

National newspapers continued to be produced by the labour-intensive linotype hot-metal method, rather than being composed electronically. Eddie Shah's regional Messenger Group had, however, benefited from the Conservative government's trade union legislation which allowed employers to de-recognise unions, enabling Shah to use an alternative workforce and new technology. Journalists could input copy directly, sweeping away arcane craft-union manning levels and cutting costs dramatically.

 

On 24th January 1986, some 6,000 newspaper workers went on strike after the breakdown of negotiations with Rupert Murdoch's News International, parent of Times Newspapers and News Group Newspapers. They were unaware that Murdoch had built and clandestinely equipped a new-technology printing plant in Wapping. When they struck, he moved his operation overnight.

 

Within months the printing dinosaur that was Fleet Street was dead. By 1989 all the national newspapers had decamped as other proprietors followed Murdoch's lead. Computers had consigned Wynkyn de Worde's revolution to history.

 

Many people at that time feared that the diaspora of the Fourth Estate might result in St Bride's losing its title of the cathedral of Fleet Street. Some even considered that the great church would lose its parishioners. Might Rupert Murdoch's vision bring about what pestilence, fire and the Luftwaffe had failed to achieve?

 

Fortunately for St Bride's, the national newspapers scattered in every direction rather than congregating in one locality, so that "Fleet Street" remains to this day a generic term for the nation's press, and the church retains its pre-eminent position in the journalistic and media constituency.

 

During the Middle East hostage crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s, it hosted all-night vigils for John McCarthy and others, and on their release in 1991 a grand service of celebration was held.

 

We have commemorated John Schofield, BBC reporter killed in Croatia in 1995; Reuters' Kerem Lawton, killed in Kosovo; Channel 4's Gaby Rado and ITN's Terry Lloyd (Iraq); BBC cameraman Simon Cumbers, murdered by Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia; and the Wall Street Journal's Daniel Pearl, murdered by Al Qaeda in Pakistan in 2002.

 

In 2003 we unveiled a memorial to all journalists who died in Iraq, and in 2006 commemorated James Brolan and Paul Douglas, CBS journalists killed in Baghdad, demonstrating St Bride's unique position in journalism throughout the world. When, earlier this year, The Times' driver in Iraq, Yasser, was killed in a bomb blast in Baghdad, it was to St Bride's that senior News International staff came to light a candle.

 

The Journalists' Altar in the North East corner also carries prayers for reporters who are missing or who have lost their lives in current conflicts.

 

Newspaper proprietors such as Lord Burnham, Lord Rothermere and Lord Hartwell have been remembered in memorial services. So have editors like Sir Edward Pickering, David Astor, Stewart Steven and Louis Kirby; the Guardian's famed woman's editor Mary Stott; the D-Day war reporter Doon Campbell; BBC figures such as Godfrey Talbot, Louis MacMillan and Leonard Miall; and Fiona MacPherson of Good Housekeeping magazine.

 

Strong and successful efforts were made by the former Rector, Canon John Oates, to bring into the church's embrace the new occupants of the now-silent newspaper offices - chiefly lawyers, accountants and investment bankers. Twenty years after the last newspaper left, the large number of memorials and carol services we hold every year are evenly split between the "old" and the "new" Fleet Street.

 

The church today has a light, open feel of symmetry; the floor is paved with black marble from Belgium and white from Italy. This is very much a living church in a modern world.

 

As a result of a successful funding appeal, new side aisles constructed of English and European oak were installed in 2004, offering significantly better views for large congregations while preserving the beautiful character of the church.

 

Out of the inferno of that hellish night in December 1940 has emerged something beautiful, which remains the spiritual heart both of the parish of St Bride's and of the journalistic community in Britain and throughout the world.

 

The church retains strong City links, has built up an enviable musical reputation, and is home to thriving Sunday congregations, as well as being a major tourist landmark. Set back from Fleet Street, only yards from the tremendous bustle of Ludgate Circus, yet seemingly existing in its own peaceful space, St Bride's is one of the most historic, vibrant and beautiful churches to be found anywhere in London.

 

www.stbrides.com/history/index.html

The Lord of the World is the true Authority on Earth and reference to Him can be found in every tradition. He is associated with the name Manu amongst the Hindus; Metatron among the Kabbalists; and Melchizedec in the Judaeo-Christian tradition. His abode is sometimes called 'Agarttha'; a place analogous to the 'Siddhashram' of the Yogis or the 'Shambhala' of the Tibetan Buddhists. The idea of Agarttha often gives rise to wild and imaginative accounts of secret underground cities and the like but in this book you can discover what this place really is and how it functions in the present time-phase.

 

The very real fact of The Lord of the World has been buried out of sight in the West or distorted by supposing that the 'Lord' is an authority solely of the material domain. The true Lord of the World unifies both material and spiritual authority in Himself and is not a satanic or even demiurgic principle. He is the very action of God on this planet.

 

The Lord of the World, by the great traditionalist, Rene Guenon, has never been published in English before. The time has come for this important work to be widely known.

 

'We must be ready for an immense event in the divine order which we are travelling towards with an accelerated speed that must astound all who watch. Awesome oracles have pronounced already that the time is now.'It's hard to think of an "occult" topic, other than Atlantis or "flying saucers" or the Bermuda Triangle, that has been the subject of more irresponsible writing and spurious research than has the vexed subject of Agartha.

For obscure but seemingly inborn psychological reasons, the idea of a sort of hidden pope coordinating all the secret activities of the world from an underground kingdom in the vastness of the Himalayas has a recurring glamour.

Starting with a 19th century traveller and romancer named Louis Jacolliot, the line of such superficial commentary slides to a reductio ad absurdum in the fantasies of "pop" mystic Robert Charroux: "There are four entrances to Agartha: one between the paws of the sphinx at Gizeh, another on the Mont-Saint Michel, a third..."

Even so deadly serious a purveyor of metaphysic wisdom as Helena Blavatsky waxes faintly ridiculous in her solemn revelations of supposed huddles with spooky "Eastern masters" such as Koot Hoomi of the "Great White Lodge." Ditto for her Theosophical Society followers, Annie Besant and Alice Bailey, together with an unknown legion of spin-offs among today's vendors of what has irreverently been called "kharma cola."

What is surprising, however, in view of this prolonged flood of fluff, is that there have been a number of sober and closely reasoned explorations of the curious lore, both ancient and modern, that has given rise to the Agartha mythos. By far the most important of these is "Le Roi du Monde," a 1927 study by the great French student of symbolism and ancient Aryan religions, Rene Guenon.

Guenon is not what we today might call a "user friendly" writer. All of his books are as short on colour and personalising touches as they are marked by rigorous economy and reduction to essentials. Because of this "density," they demand a rather high involvement by the reader, and fortunately the English edition of The Lord of the World has been graced with a fluent translation that is far superior to the pedestrian rendering of his magnum opus, The Reign of Quantity.

An example of the care that has gone into this volume may be seen in the presentation of its title. Although the literal meaning of "Roi" is "king" it was felt that "lord" would better evoke the author's idea of a simultaneous spiritual and temporal authority.

For some reason, the Agartha theme has been highly stimulating to the Gallic imagination. Guenon's book takes as its starting point the two earlier works: Mission de l'Inde by a certain Saint Yves d'Alveydre, and the better known Beasts, Men and Gods, by a French academician and political writer of this century, Ferdinand Ossendowski.

Guenon always seemed able to draw upon vast - presumably initiatic - sources of profound information into the sundry arcane topics to which he turned his attentions. He appears to have set out here to amplify Saint Yves's brief early-day account, and to clarify Ossendowski's often rather superficial observations.

Both men were travellers recounting what they had been told about a mysterious centre of power reputed to exist somewhere among the deserts and mountains of Central Asia. Saint Yves concluded that this place had inherited the authority of the universal lawgiver, Manu, a "cosmic intelligence that reflects pure spiritual light and formulates the law ("Dharma") appropriate to the conditions of our world and our cycle of existence," as Guenon puts it.

However, the Lord of the World as such is not "Manu," but rather a sort of prime minister who mediates "Dharma" into the affairs of mankind. His title, Guenon informs us, is Brahmatma, "sustainer of souls in the spirit of God." Or he also may be known as Chakravarti, which in Hindi signifies "He who makes the wheel turn." As Ossendowski was told by a lama:"The Lord of the World is in touch with the thoughts of all those who direct the destiny of mankind... He knows their intentions and their ideas. If these are pleasing to God, the Lord of the World favours them with his invisible aid. But if they are displeasing to God, He puts a check on their activities."

As for Agartha, it is a locus usually referred to as underground, or something quite specifically located in a vast network of caves. This very likely is metaphorical, since the name Agartha itself means "inaccessible" or "inviolable."

However, Ossendowski accepts the literal truth of the subterranean tradition. He reports that "a Soyot from near the Lake of Nogan Kul showed me the smoking gate that serves as the entrance," but admits elsewhere that "no one knows where this place is. One says Afghanistan, others India."

Agartha then, strictly speaking, would represent more of a condition of this supreme centre on earth than its actual location. Traditionally, the centre withdrew from accessibility about six thousand years ago, with the onset of the degenerate era of the Kali-Yuga. With this topic, Guenon begins his extraordinary symbological odyssey, taking up where the earlier writers leave off.

Guenon was profoundly steeped in the ancient Aryan literature of the Vendanta, one of whose chief tenants is that of the four ages of Yugas. These are: Krita-Yuga, Age of Bronze, and Kali-Yuga, the Age of Iron, or Dark Age.

The last terminal era of smoke, ruin and blood is under domination of the death goddess Kali, and it is marked by the final degradation and dissolution of humanity. The Hindu sages believe that the world is now approaching the very abyss of the Kali-Yuga. One of the major themes of Guenon's many books is to chart exactly how this process is coming to its dire fruition, chiefly through the spread of philosophical materialism and maniacal enshrinements of quantity over quality via modern science, technology and industry.

Only with the catastrophic end of this epoch, fast approaching in the view of Guenon, can the great cycle begin anew and Agartha and its Lord of the World reappear before mankind.

The Agartha story would remain an interesting footnote to Asian folklore were it not that the legend has so many unexpected points of contact with the chief arcana of the Western mystery tradition. It is these that Guenon, with his unique combination of immense erudition and gemlike conciseness, has brilliantly summarised within this surprisingly modest compass.

Most obvious, of course, would be the ageless theme of "inner earth" beings. This has exercised human imaginings from Orpheus in Hades through the medieval alchemists and Rosicrucians to modern enthusiasts of the "hollow earth" ideas of Richard Shaver and Raymond Bernard. The Lord of the World represents the obvious epitome, and quite possibly the real point of origin, for these.

Guenon's list of other major themes tied in one way or another to Agartha is long: the Spear of Longinus and the Holy Grail - the Arthurian legends - Monsalvat pilgrimage centre - the "Great Beast 666" - the Knights Templar - Freemasonry - Tibetan lore - the mysterious land of Tula or Thule, which was so bizarrely commemorated in the enigmatic Thule Gesellschaft (Thule Society) that gave rise to the National Socialist movement in Germany.

Indeed, the fateful swastika symbol itself, we are told, is intimately connected to the tradition as the virtual emblem of the Lord of the World:

"... This centre constitutes the fixed point known symbologically to all traditions as the "pole" or axis around which the world rotates. This combination is normally depicted as a wheel in Celtic, Chaldean, and Hindu traditions. Such is the true significance of the swastika, seen world-wide, from the Far East to the Far West, which is intrinsically the "sign of the Pole."

Guenon finds Manu and his deputy the Lord of the World reflected in the Shekinah and Metatron of Kabbalistic mysticism, the latter being similarly styled "Prince of the World," and the "celestial Pole."However, it is the shadowy figure of Melchizedek that both connects the Judeo-Christian tradition with Agartha, and brings Guenon's work right up to the present in relation to one of today's most controversial phenomena of popular psychology.

Melchizedek, the supposed ancient king of what is now Jerusalem, appears a number of times in the Old and New Testaments.

Guenon writes:

"Melchizedek, or more precisely Melki-Tsedeq, is none other than the title used by Judeo-Christian tradition to denote the function of the "Lord of the World." We have hesitated before publishing this information which explains one of the most enigmatic passages of the Hebrew Bible, but, having decided to treat the issue of the Lord of the World, concluded it could hardly he passed over in silence..."

Melki-Tsedeq is thus both king and priest. His name means "king of justice" and he is also king of Salem, that is of "Peace," so again we find "Justice" and "Peace" the fundamental attributes pertaining to the "Lord of the World."

In the 1940's, ethereal "foo fighters" reportedly dogged Allied aircraft over Germany. An obscure aviator called, Kenneth Arnold galvanised a curiously receptive world media corps, and coined an unfortunate phrase, with his story of strange aircraft "like flying saucers" in the skies near Seattle, Washington.

Since that time, the unidentified flying object phenomenon has see-sawed in the public consciousness, with periodic waves of public sightings followed by stony denials from government and intense ridicule from a small cadre on the periphery of the scientific community. Most of these latter scoffers appear not to be true working scientists, but mainly journalists with strong ties to the aerospace industry and to government-controlled space programs.

The upshot of this often ferocious debunking process has been that only a few genuine scientific researchers have had the hardihood to delve into the extremely "messy" UFO business. One of the more perceptive of those who have is the French-born mathematician and computer researcher Jacques Vallee.

After a series of books examining the UFO phenomenon from a mechanistic perspective, Vallee's thinking, like that of virtually all serious UFO students, appears to have evolved in the direction of pondering less the troubled reality of the "saucers" and more the effect that their appearances - and allied cultism - seem to be having on the public.

In his study, called Messengers of Deception, Vallee makes telling observations on how damaging the long siege of UFO hijinks has been to the public's formerly unquestioning faith in rationalism and its self-chosen priesthood, the scientific community.

There is much independent evidence that something like this is happening, and on a far broader scale than Marilyn Ferguson has examined the spectrum of opinion-molding esoteric cultism in the Western World. Her work indicates a broad decline in popular regard for the basic positivist-rationalist credo.

The implications of this for the present "pluto-technocratic" world order are serious indeed. But more to our purposes is what Ferguson reveals (and does not reveal) about the comparatively small number of guiding personalities at the top of the far-flung "Aquarian" pyramid. We are left wondering - From whom do they get their marching orders?

For Vallee, however, this is a side issue. The greater part of his unusual book if taken up with a subject that is clearly of huge perplexity to the author, because he found it interwoven with UFO matters worldwide. Eventually, it even began involving itself in his own life.

It is both a cult phenomenon, expressed in a maze of grouplets of unstable people that come and go, and beyond this, a more elusive and seemingly international coordinating centre of some kind. Its name, Vallee tells us, is the Order of Melchizedek.

His research reveals earlier Melchizedek traces in the now obsolete Roman Catholic Tridentine Mass, in the senior priesthood of the Mormon Church, and in rituals of certain elite sects of Freemasons. Vallee is let to speculate on the connections, if any.

Rene Guenon was mainly known in his day as a student of Oriental religions and of traditional philosophies. However, future readers will come to value still more his incredibly deep insights into the cosmic art of symbolism. In his Apercu sur l'Initiation, Guenon has written:

"The true basis of symbolism is, as we have said, the correspondence linking together all orders of reality, binding them one to the other, and consequently extending from the natural order as a whole to the supernatural order. By virtue of this correspondence, the whole of Nature is but a symbol."

Vallee shows an unconscious drift in this same direction that also is visible in the work of many other scientists now in this day of the "Tao of Physics" when a researcher like Murray Gell-Mann can win a Nobel Prize for applying concepts like "charm" to the increasingly bewildering vagaries of so-called subatomic particles.

Vallee's major field is computer information theory, and by the end of Messengers of Deception, he concludes that what the UFO phenomenon and its allied Melchizedekian sects really signify is, not visits by interplanetary astronauts, but a maddeningly subtle sort of "reality game" that is being played from somewhere unknown as a "control system" (his words) over the attitudes of large groups of diverse people.

The ultimate question, Vallee opines, comes down to the real nature of energy and information:

"I have always been struck...by the fact that energy and information are one and the same thing under two different aspects. Our physics professors teach us this; yet they never draw the consequences..."

If energy and information are related, why do we only have one physics, the physics of energy? Where is the physics of information? Is the old theory of Magic relevant here? Are the writings of Paracelsus with his concept of "signatures," an important source of information?

His implied answer: Yes.

To all of which, Guenon probably would have given one of those inimitable Gallic shrugs as if to say "what has taken you so long?," then parenthetically suggesting the more precise word symbolism for Vallee's information.

Practically everyone who has looked into the role of clandestine control groups behind the scenes of everyday political and social "reality" eventually has arrived at the question: Is there some central authority above the diverse Trilateralists, Zionists, Freemasons, KGB/CIAS, central banks, multinational cartels, and other furtive power blocs at work shaping our world?

Is there, to address the issue raised by this book, a living, breathing Lord of the World? Ferdinand Ossendowski had no doubt of it, recounting reports that the Brahmatma had visited Buddhist festivals in Siam and India in recent times, displaying the emblem of a golden apple surmounted by a lamb.

Unfortunately, Guenon does not categorically answer this key question himself. He appears to wish to leave us with the more implicit image of the Lord of the World as a sort of vast, panhistorical construct of diverse symbol textures.

But perhaps, as Jacques Vallee's trend of thought would suggest, there really might be some place in the world at which idea and energy inter-convert. That may be as close as we in this troubled era, with our rigidly linear mental habits, can approach to the ramparts of long-hidden Agartha.

  

www.thule-italia.net/.../The Lord of the World.doc

Director, IIT,

 

And Friends

 

I thank the Ministry of External Affairs and the IIT for giving me the opportunity

to talk of Indian and West Asia – a region in which I spent over a decade of my

career dealing with its complexities and challenges. It is interesting that I speak to

you on West Asia here in Mumbai- I don’t know how many of you are aware that Iraq was administered from the Bombay Presidency during the early part of the British period. You have only to go to the Prince of Wales Museum - Chhatrapati Vastu Sangrahalaya - to see archaeological artefacts from ancient Iraqi sites which were brought to Mumbai then. But even more, Bombay has been, and remains, the first point of contact between the peoples of the Arab world- particularly the Gulf and Iran- and India. For decades we have seen Arabs in their traditional garb walking

and lounging on Marine Drive taking the air in the monsoon season- something

which is a rarity in their land.People who hail from Pune or Bangalore are equally

familiar with Iranians who have settled generations ago. In fact when I was doing my

PhD at Mumbai University Geroge’s Restaurant was a favourite for the Biryanis and

Pullav’s it served!

I do not need to mention to this gathering that contact between the Indian

people with those of West Asia goes back to centuries - even before Islam came to

that region; neither do I need to mention that this intercourse was two-way and

primarily benign. If we gave them the zero and the numeric system, we received

knowledge of navigation and sea-faring; if the tales of the panchatantra reached

them, in the Persian translation, as the stories of kalila wa dimna , then we received

the metre and the rhyme of sufi poetry not to mention its theology. There were

similar exchanges in the field of mathematics, astrology and astronomy, and

medicine as also in craft- skills like carpet-making and brocade weaving ( zardodzi

and kinkhab). The list is long but covers religion, culture, fine arts, sciences, music

and musical instruments, dance, language and literature, and cuisine. But above all

were the travel writings of Arab way-farers like al-Beruni and others who have left us

a wealth of record on India of that time. The essential driver was trade and

commercial exchanges. But for the water that separates us we are neighbours; the

relationship has been both enriching and enduring.

When one looks at the Asian land-mass to our West we see four separate

civilisations facing us- the Persian, the Arab, the Hebrew and the Turkish- all of them

were brought together under the Ottoman Empire which lasted 500 years and had

the widest spread of the then known world. It is interesting that while these four

cultures confronted one another, it was to India that they all aspired- through trade or

conquest or to escape from persecution in their native lands. It is even more

interesting that they do not seamlessly merge into one another at their peripherywhich

may possibly have something to do with the ethnicities and languages that go

with each culture: the Persians (or Iranians) are from Indo –Aryan stock, the Arabs

and Jews are both Semitic peoples and the Turks are themselves with a mixture of

the Mongol. Each of these cultures has had a unique historical relationship with

India.

West Asia not Middle East

It would not be out of place here to digress briefly to the controversy that runs

like a common thread on discussions on the region in India: its nomenclature. Middle

East is what it is commonly called, even though West Asia is its correct geographic

location. It is so pervasive that even the computer dictionary gives you a prompt to

capitalise M and E if you have not done it). We invariably call it West Asia. From

where we are middle east will be Bangkok! So why WEST ASIA?

The term Middle East was first used by US Admiral Mahan in 1902 to

designate his strategic concept for the land bridge connecting Africa, Asia and

Europe. As our Vice President, Hamid Ansari,, another former diplomat, has written,

the term is a misnomer and legacy of an era when points on the globe were

indentified with reference to the location of the seats of power of the European

Empire. Nehru firmly distanced himself from calling it the ‘Middle East’ as Quite apart

from its geographical position, it tended to continue a Euro-centric view of the region

along with the attitudinal baggage that it implied.

Since Independence a lot has changed in the region- especially at the political

and geo-strategic level. The oil crisis of 1974 focused the international community’s

attention on the region as never before. When one super-imposes the monumental

political developments, the world sees the ‘Middle East’ as the fulcrum of future

political and economic stability in the world. The region’s nomenclature as ‘Middle

East’ has gained widespread acceptance and even people of the region see

themselves as from the Middle East first, and then as nationals from the country they

belong. The word Middle East now bundles in it religion, culture, language and

ethnicity. The term is now often used interchangeably with West Asia. .

Defining the Region

The West Asian region breaks down conveniently into concentric circles of proximity

:

• The innermost circle comprises Afghanistan, the Gulf Cooperation

Council countries, Iran, Iraq and Yemen.

• In the next circle are the countries of the Mashreq ( West Asia)–(

Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon) - to our west and those of Central

Asia to our north-west;

• next the circle comprising Turkey, countries of the Maghreb(

Mediterranean sea-board)- Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco- and

the countries in the Horn of Africa -Djibouti, Sudan and Somalia.

It is amazing that when one surveys the Asia continent from Istanbul – its

western most extremity - one is struck by how much India has received from, and

given to, each of the cultures we encounter in between- the Arab, the Persian and

the Turkish. With each the intensity and thrust of our bilateral relations has been

different.

Contours of India’s Policy

At Independence the first three decisions on India’s foreign policy concerned

West Asia:

• our active support to the Khilafat Movement;

• India’s stand in the UN Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) in

1947 when in a dissenting note we advocated the establishment of a

federal Palestine with internal autonomy for the Jewish population;

• and the decision on how we were going to deal with the state of Israel

when it became independent in 1948.

These decisions were conditioned by India’s Partition which had left a

traumatised, yet larger, Muslim community within India than went to Pakistan. The

importance of the region, particularly Mecca and Medina in fulfilling the spiritual and

religious needs of India’s Muslim population could not be under-estimated. These

early decisions by the Government of India illustrate the counter pressures which

have always led India to search for a middle ground in its policy towards the region.

They also illustrate the considerations which come into play even today in India’s

policy towards the region.

From an early concentration on looking at the region through the Islamic

prism, Indian policy considerations have evolved in the last sixty years. The prism

has shown other dimensions of the relationship: the oil-rich countries of the Gulf,

particularly Iran and Iraq, became increasingly important for India in the 1960s and

1970s and remain so for our energy security. From the 1980s the region became a

source of employment for Indian workers, who today number 5 million and

correspondingly a source for huge remittances of about $ 20 billion annually. The

history and current status of India’s Diaspora in the Gulf is unique in that it has

become the driving force of those economies. The considerations which have guided

our policy in these years remain valid today despite the change in the political,

economic and social matrix:

• Friendly relations with the people of the region on the basis of shared

history and culture;

• equidistance in intra-regional conflicts;

• support to the Palestinian cause;

• Desire to play an effective role in the region, even as a possible

intermediary;

• in this context, management of the relations with Israel;

• oppose both exclusivist religious ideologies and religious fanaticism;

• Develop economic, trade and investment ties;

• Energy security

As Prof. Girijesh Pant has written ‘for India, West Asia is the region to

augment its power rather than to display or assert its power.’ The thrust of India’s

West Asia policy and diplomacy thus has to be geared towards mobilizing resources

- political, strategic, economic and cultural - from the region to contribute in its

emergence as global power. .while India’s recent economic success has made this

possible at the political level, Indian policy makers need to recognize that West

Asian sensitivities have been offended and hurt by aggressive US intervention

in the region. Indian policy has to be shaped in consonance with regional concerns.

This does not mean that Indian policy has to be hostage to West Asian expectations

but to underline that rise of India as a global player critically hinges upon its clout in

its immediate and extended neighbourhood. In defining India’s role we need to do so

within the geo-politics of a rising Asia.

It is important is to note that throughout this early period the India-West Asia

relationship remained one-sided. It was always India and Indians who were

dependant on the region and not so much in the reverse sense. It is only since this

Millennium that the relationship between India and West Asia has become twodimensional

on which more later, it is akin to a re-discovery of India by the countries

of West Asia.:

The Region in Crisis

Developments since 2000, the most provocative act being the 9/11 attack on

the World Trade Centre, changed the face of the region. The last ten years have

been described as ‘a bad decade’ by noted Lebanese journalist Rami. G. Khoury ..

Paradoxically, events and developments in the region had a profound influence on

the world and the way it thought of itself, yet the region could not itself rise above the

forces it unleashed.

The crisis in West Asia today can be traced to the long-term unresolved issue

of bringing about a secure and viable Palestinian state, and the short-term issue of

invasion and continuing presence of foreign forces. It has put pressure on national

sovereignty, national security and the authority of State. Yet unlike in Europe, after

fall of the Berlin Wall, centripetal rather than centrifugal forces have prevented the

region from imploding or the re-drawing of national boundaries and creation of new

states. The region presents the following challenges:

• Waning of the belief in Arab solidarity, unity and socialism which had blurred

,if not eliminated, differences of sects, beliefs and region and tribe; Change in

the social structure and mores in the region in favour of sect, tribe and

tradition; and a conscious desire to get away from western values. The

growing tension between the Sunni and Shia Muslims radiating westward

from Pakistan from which India has remained immune so far;

• The emergence of a ‘back-to-roots thinking which gives primacy to religious

belief in political matters; ;the sway of Al Qaeda and the Taliban;

• The consolidation of the state of Israel in the region, and internationally;

the unwritten edict which makes it taboo to mention Israeli nuclear

weapons while giving no quarter to Iran ( and Iraq earlier) on the

presumption that they either possess or seek to build them.

• the impotence of major players to find a way to establish an secure,

independent and viable Palestinian state causing a running sore on the

psyche of its peoples ; the dilemma of not having an honest broker to solve

the Palestinian issue coupled with growing disenchantment with US power

and ability to perform this role;

• The presence of foreign troops, in ever larger numbers, both on land

and sea- we now have US troops in bases in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Qatar,

UAE and Western navies patrolling the Gulf, in particular the Hormuz

straits

• The passing of Arab leadership from Egypt, Syria, Libya , Iraq and Tunisia in

the post-colonial period to the growing clout of non-Arab players –Iran, US,

Turkey and Israel, – in the post-secular period;

• Iran is today the biggest beneficiary of US intervention in Iraq as well as the

policies of Israel and earlier US Administrations. With its ascendency its

neighbours, many with significant Shia minorities, are concerned, particularly

Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. Iran has now proxies in Lebanon, Gaza, Syria and

Palestine;

• The importance of energy resources of West Asia as the driver of political

and economic developments in a globalizing world: differences on their

security and their ownership;

• The coming into their own of the Gulf Sheikdoms on the back of high returns

from energy , growing stash of foreign exchange reserves and low population

bases leading leveraging these resources for internal and external

investments;

• Consolidation of authoritarian governments and suppression of dissent within

the trappings of democracy; the inability and unwillingness to hand political

power to Islamic- oriented parties; at the same time, an increasing recourse to

confessional type of governance- Lebanon no longer the exception but the

model;

• The increasing desire on the part of major Arab countries-Iraq, Saudi Arabia

and Egypt to seek nuclear and missile weapon capacity both to create

equities against Israel but to offset other regional players like Iran , all within

professed adherence to the NPT straitjacket;

• The use of Terror as an instrument of political negotiation :Internationalization

of the scourge of terrorism and terrorist groups after 9/11 ; by implication a

change from opposition of such groups to their placation through co-option

and clandestine support to achieve larger goals of religion or political

dominance;

• popular frustration at the inability to change systems and promote

participative governance;

• The passing by of West Asia by the most significant development of the 21st

century- the knowledge economy; West Asia is at most a recipient, but

neither an innovator, nor a provider;

• Moribund nature of Arab and Islamic institutions – Arab League and the OIC;

while the former is regarded by Egypt as an instrument f its foreign policy,

Saudi Arabia takes a similar view of the latter. Suffice it to say that in the face

of the tremendous pressure that Islam and Arabs have been under since 9/11

the two organisations have failed to take up the challenge to project the

universality of the Arab and the benign face of Islam.

From India’s point of view India’s Gulf Security rests on three pillars: Iran, Iraq

and Saudi Arabia. These pillars have never looked as much in flux as during the last

decade. The strategic importance of the region will continue to lie in its geography

and it’s much demanded natural resource petroleum and natural gas even though

according to one estimate global dependence on West Asian oil is declining – as of

2007 the region produced fewer than 30 per cent of the world’s crude oil compared

to 40 per cent in 1974-75.

India and the Region

India has always believed that its relations with the West Asian region are sui

generis and immune from the effects of relations of other regional and global powers.

This accounts for our relative unconcern with the role of other major and regional

powers in the region. We have tended to believe that our role does not compete with

any of the great powers, and to a large extent it does not. In the last decade this

sanguine belief has received a rude shock. Issues like terrorism, money-laundering

and safety of oil lanes have imposed new imperatives. With our energy requirements

expected to grow exponentially we will come into conflict with China and the US for

the oil and gas resources of the region.

The developments which have defined the shape of the region in the recent

past have necessarily centred on US policy particularly since 2000. It is the

articulation of US policy towards Palestine, Israel, Iraq, Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia

which has set the agenda for the region in the forthcoming decades. The period has

equally seen US- India relations getting closer and diverse with the beginnings of a

global strategic partnership. It has been both an asset and a liability.

How much was India influenced by the developments in the region and did it

play any role in them? What has been India’s position on the seminal events of the

decade? How is India perceived in the region as we start the second decade of the

21st century?

The answer to some of these questions will decide whether India’s West Asia

policy has adapted with the times or suffered from cognitive disability. It is axiomatic

that ties dating from antiquity of culture and religion, commerce and economics,

politics and security, oil and gas and people-to-people bind us and make it

incumbent to maintain forward-looking relations with the countries of the region.

While Mahatma Gandhi articulated it early on, since Independence India, as

the leader of the nonaligned movement, has always been counted on for its

steadfast support of the Palestinian cause. The political capital that Jawaharlal

Nehru built for us in the region nurtures our relations to this day. People of the region

rarely forget India’s support on a host of causes dear to the people of the region.

I will illustrate this with a personal reminiscence. Soon after the fall of

Baghdad to US forces on 8 April 2003 I visited Iraq incognito to make an assessment

on the vexed question of sending Indian troops to Northern Iraq to help the US and

coalition forces . We were under relentless pressure from George Bush and Donald

Rumsfeld. I vividly recall meeting Jalal Talabani (now President of Iraq) in his

northern redoubt of Dhokan and Massoud Barzani (now President of of Iraqi

Kurdistan) in his lair in salubrious Salahaddin to get their views.. Their opening

remarks to me were identical: both quoted verbatim Nehru on the Kurdish cause in

his Glimpses of World History. A cause which subsequent Indian governments could

do nothing about. It evocatively brought out how much we had achieved in the

opening years of our nation and how much we had distanced ourselves from our

core causes. The question which arises: have we built on this legacy, adapted it or

squandered it?

With 9/11 we found that finally our continuous 20-year old refrain on crossborder

terrorism finally found a receptive audience: but it became the global war on

terror and by the end of the decade we found that the perpetrators- Pakistan- had

assumed the mantle of victims. Nevertheless our view Pakistan is the epicentre of

terrorism has become conventional wisdom today although, and once again, no one

–not even the US –was interested to bell the cat. The country remains far too

important to fighting the war against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, never

mind the terror groups it continues to nurture to continue its proxy war with us..

9/11 provoked a re-think on the Islamic ideology in much of the West Asian

region, above all, in Saudi Arabia which saw the terrorism sponsored through its

inspiration come home to roost. We found an increased willingness for the first time

on the part of the Gulf Sheikdoms to co-operate with us on counter-terrorism,

restricting flow of funds to institutions with dual agendas and defence co-operation.

The lead was given by UAE which fully assisted us in the deportation of Aftab Ansari,

the perpetrator of the attack on the American Centre in Kolkata who like Afzal Guru

and Murugan remains on death row..

In the last decade the character of our relations with the Arab world became

genuinely two-way. Till then our relations were unidirectional: it was India which

needed their political support on Kashmir and their oil and gas; and Indians who

found jobs boosting the economy with large remittances and spiritual sustenance

from the Two Holy Cities and other places of pilgrimage. As an economy moving at

the much reviled ‘Hindu rate of growth’ there was precious little that India could

fundamentally contribute to the region. The shoe was always on the other foot

notwithstanding the salience of the political factor.

If one surveys our relations with the region they fall into two broad categories:

• With West Asia and North Africa, the thrust remains primarily political

based on India’s status as a leader of the Nonaligned crowned by our

consistent support to the Palestinians. It was only in the latter half of

the decade that the economic content of our relations with Morocco,

Algeria, Tunisia, Libya became more significant ;

• With the Gulf, the thrust is mainly economic engendered by our

consistently high rates of growth since 1997. Talk of ‘strategic

economic partnerships’ became current and an FTA between the GCC

and India was gone through. The increasing realisation in these

countries that their hydrocarbon resources needed to be up valued

through long-term and stable returns made India a natural partner with

its growing market, its thirst for hydrocarbons and its highly skilled

professionals. The last decade has spurred inward investment and

resource-based projects both in situ and in India. The lead given by the

Gulf countries was taken up by Syria, Jordan, Morocco and others.

India’s economic success was the driver of this change. It was greatly

assisted by two major developments:

• India’s growing relationship with the US made India attractive as a

partner to others also, and

• secondly, the growing tension in relations between the West and West

Asia exacerbated by the impasse in the Arab-Israeli situation had a

positive influence on its relations with India. The need to tie up viable

economic and investment projects catering to the Indian market or to

Indians became the over-riding concern;.

We saw a significant improvement in the ambient tenor of our relations with

the countries of the region although Gulf Security became even more complicated.

The spawning of terror outfits which received inspiration, sanctuary and funds from

the region became a matter of major concern with the rise of terror attacks in India

culminating with the Mumbai attack of 26/11.

For India, increased attention by the major countries in West Asia was an

interesting development and took place at a time when the country was trying

to cope with the growing terrorist threat and its inability to deal with it. India’s

focus on developing beneficial economic and investment projects was only

marginally successful and foundered on the perception of an absence of

reciprocity in the relationship, particularly high-level visits. It is no surprise that

the goodwill engendered by the factors noted above was almost dissipated

given the repeated postponements of PM’s visits to region, especially to Saudi

Arabia which finally took place in March 2010.

On the whole the tenor of our relations with each of the countries in the

region was positive and there appeared less of an incentive on their part to

flog the issues of Kashmir. To some extent this was helped by two factors:

first, India decided to embark on a Dialogue relationship with the Arab League

based in Cairo which helped to clear the air on India’s nuclear policy, relations

with Israel and related issues; second, for the first time there was a move by

some OIC countries to take a more positive view of India and the success of

its secular model with the second largest Muslim community in the world.

During his visit to India Saudi King Abdullah proposed that India should be

made an Observer ruffling the placid waters of an organisation which has

primarily moved to Saudi signals. Furthermore, OIC ‘s own fixation on making

itself more relevant against the Western onslaught following repeated Al

Qaeda terror attacks put its Pakistan-inspired India baiting on the back

burner. There was also a realisation at the popular level in the region that

more than political creed, most needed was regimes which would promote

greater prosperity and participatory governance.

Having considered the general trend of our relations with the region it is

useful to focus on some of the critical points in the region in order to

understand how our relations have developed at the micro level.

 

1. The AFPAK Region

Today the region which encompasses the border between Pakistan and

Afghanistan has become the fulcrum in terms of future security in the

region and indeed internationally. Despite the expenditure of close to US $

31 billion since 2001 and the presence of 130000-140000 foreign, mainly

US troops there is no end in sight for the War In Afghanistan. Even with the

scaling down of US war aims to a single point of defeating Al Qaeda so

that it cannot attack the US homeland again, we see a losing scenario.

While cooperation with Pakistan is crucial for this goal it has blind-sided the

US on Pakistan’s sponsorship of terror against India, its pandering to the

Afghan Taliban to hold a strategic asset in that country, facilitating the regrouping

of the Taliban and its pursuit of nuclear weaponisation.

India has worked within its policy of close friendship and assistance to the

Afghan people. We are working on a project investment of USD 1.3 billion

which will go to the Afghan people. We have persisted in this despite

repeated ISI-sponsored attacks against our projects and Embassy in

Kabul. At the political level we have had to acquiesce with recent USPakistan-

Afghanistan discussions on reconciliation with elements of the

Taliban even though their coming back into government is anathema to us

given our experience of 1996. From our point of view Taliban’s implacable

hostility makes it impossible for us to do business with them.

More important, however, is the fact that its link with ISI makes it a part of

the larger issue of India-Pakistan relations. We have now re-started the

bilateral dialogue accepting that in the face of Pakistan’s terrorist agenda

against India it is still better to keep talking to them. Despite US pressure

Pakistan is not inclined to reduce its anti-Indian rhetoric or agenda.

2. Relations with Israel

The US played a pivotal role in ending Israel’s diplomatic isolation and has

stood by Israel within the UN and outside it. Despite the fact of Israeli

nuclear capability, the United States has kept mum on it and has kept the

distance between India and Pakistan on the one hand and Israel on the other.

Given its dependence on Washington for political support, technological

assistance and economic largesse, Israel’s ability to pursue any major

defence deals with the outside world, including India, depends squarely on

Washington. As Israeli defence exports to India are being conducted under

the watchful eyes of the United States, the ties between India and Israel will

also be constrained by the extent to which the US wants this engagement to

expand.

In this background, India found it relatively easier to manage its relations

with Israel. The acquisition of defence equipment and defence material vital

for the security of India’s one billion people set the bench mark for the

relationship. The relationship has diversified into industry, manufacturing,

agriculture, services and ICT. After almost two decades of diplomatic relations

these relations have acquired a ‘special’ character although it has not stopped

Israel from attempting to open relations with Pakistan. By the same token,

India has ensured that its growing relations with Israel do not dilute its

traditional support to Palestine. For the first time since the Middle East Peace

Process commenced, India was invited to the US sponsored Anaheim

Summit. Yet Israel’s penetration in India has not been without costs: first,

continuing sentiment in the Arab world that India had abandoned its strong

support of the Palestinians although the latter have themselves remained

divided; second, Mumbai 26/11 demonstrated the danger of allowing new

Jewish places of worship in India given that Shabad House was a target. The

issue for India now remains the management of this mutually beneficial

relationship.

3. Relations with Palestine

India’s support to Palestine has been stead-fast since our Independence.

We were the first to recognise the State of Palestine declared by Yassir Arafat and

have continually given the movement financial and political assistance. Our not

having relations with Israel till 1992 was in their eyes a positive factor. It was only

after the Us – sponsored Madrid Middle East Peace Process started in 1991 that we

decided to open relations with Israel. It was our contention that since the Arabs and

the Jews were talking to each other –also under the Oslo framework- there was no

reason for India to hold out. While we had stipulated that our relations will be

calibrated with progress in the Arab-Israeli process , in fact the relations have moved

regardless.

We were invited by the US to be part of the US-sponsored Peace Process at the

Anaheim Conference in 2007 which failed to give the process a major impetus. On

the other had the division in Palestine itself- between the Hamas led Gaza

administration and the Mahmood Abbas led Palestine Authority in Ramallah has not

been helpful. Gaza remains under Israeli siege and there is no headway to meeting

the concerns of Hamas. India has excellent relations with the PA and only

intermittent contact with Hamas in Gaza.

Given the current scenario it is difficult to visualise a break-through on the Arab-

Israeli front: even the balanced policy which President Obama enunciated has not

seen the light of day yet. Meanwhile Israeli settlement activity continues as also its

hard policy against the Palestinians in Gaza.

4. Relations with Iran

Iran enjoys a rare political consensus in India and since the early 1990s

every Indian Government has placed a high priority on strengthening its ties with

Tehran. India is unlikely to share Israeli apprehensions over neither Iranian

radicalism nor Israel of India’s concern over China. A number of factors such as

India’s need to counter Pakistan’s influence in the Islamic world, the increasing geopolitical

importance of Central Asia, and the need to strengthen economic and

commercial ties have led to a growing convergence in India-Iran interests in the postcold

war period.

The Iranian puzzle also brings in the American dimension that has both

positive and negative implications after four sets of US/UN sanctions the last in May

2010. India and Iran have differences of perceptions on the issue of nuclear

proliferation, gas pipelines and relations with Israel. India is keen that Iran follows its

NPT obligations and opposes its nuclear ambitions. This is true of Russia, China,

Europe and others also. At the same time we have no problem if Iran wants to assert

itself in the region. Over the past five years it is Iran which has benefited the most

from the actions of extra-regional and regional powers. Their cooperation will be

crucial in successfully tackling the problems of the region. During EAM Krishna’s visit

to Tehran in May 2010 we discussed the developments in the AfPak region in which

both have major interest. We also agreed that terror was the common challenge for

both countries.

5. Relations with Turkey

India’s relations with Turkey have again been historic with the Mughals-

Turko-Mongols - coming to India for conquest. During the Independence struggle

Mahatma Gandhi launched a campaign to support the Caliphate in Istanbul which

was under the threat of extinction under Mustafa Kamal Attaturk- the Khilafat

Movement. Funds were collected for this purpose and sent to Istanbul; but they

reached only when the Caliphate had been abolished. Ataturk, in his wisdom, used

the funds for the construction of the first building of the Turkish Parliament.

After Independence with Turkey’s membership of NATO and CENTO it

became close top Pakistan- which still remains if in no other way than sentiment.

With Turkey’s aspiration for joining the European Union it has come closer to India in

its views on terrorism and bilateralism in discussions with neighbours.

Turkey is today undergoing a transition from the secular ethos which was a

hall mark of Kemalism to a more religiously oriented polity with the ascendance of

the AKP- a moderate Islamic political party. In a way the wheel has come a full circle.

India’s relations with Turkey remain good with a strong injection of the

economic component. Turkey is today the transit for the BTC oil pipeline which

delivers Azerbaijani crude on the Mediterranean sea. Indian companies have been

involved in construction of the pipeline and Turkish companies have been looking at

infra projects in India.

Turkey has an important role in Afghanistan and provides a strong contingent as

part of NATO. It has, apart from Pakistan, the oldest links with that country.

6. Relations with Saudi Arabia

The visit to India of Saudi King Abdullah in January 2006, fifty years after the last,

signalled an important change in that country’s way of looking at India.It was

noteworthy that out of his 4-country visit to India, Pakistan, Malaysia and China, he

spent the longest in India and the shortest in Pakistan, its traditional friend. The visit

sent a powerful message to the Arab World and led to visit of other Arab leaders

from Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Syria, Egypt and others.

India, unlike China, was not able to effectively convert the opening provided by

the Saudi visit in 2006 into major projects based on their energy and other mineral

resources and on strong political support. There is no gainsaying the fact that

support from Saudi Arabia remains crucial to our concerns on Pakistan’s

machinations on Kashmir and in the OIC. Saudi support becomes even more

important as and when the US withdraws its troops from Afghanistan given the

former’s support of the Taliban; and because it our largest supplier of crude from the

Gulf. The visit this March of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh gives us an opportunity

to pick up these threads.

Under the wise King Abdullah Saudi Arabia has tried to maintain its leadership of the

Arab world despite charges of being the inspiration, if not the inspirator, of Islamicoriented

terror which eventually hit the country internally also. Whether on the

Palestine-Israeli issue, or the OIC or new openings the Saudi King has steadfastly

moved ahead. Yet the intensification of Shia -Sunni conflict in Iraq, the presence of

US troops and bases in the region and growing internal pressure on the US

Administration to make an honourable exit from Afghanistan by doing a deal with the

Afghan Taliban, Saudi Arabia’s capacity to determine the flow of events will only

increase.

Looking Ahead

It will be seen that the last decade was eventful for West Asia and the Gulf

insofar as much of what came out of there drove the reactions and policies of the

rest of the world. The US invasion of Iraq disturbed the settled relationships of the

earlier era and brought ethnic and religious conflict fore-ground bringing new players

in the region other than the US- Turkey and Iran. Yet in the larger movement of

technology, finance, innovation and enterprise the world passed it by. While the last

decade brought a degree of respite from the highly political content of its

relationship, India did not keep up the flow of interaction at high political levels.

India’s increasing acceptance as an emerging global power was seen as

compensation enough possibly to the detriment of our long term interests. India’s

initiatives in the region were more bilateral aimed at enhancing our energy security

and the security of our borders. International concerns besetting the region had a

relatively lower salience in our policy and we remained content to watch

developments from the sidelines.

India still has considerable political capital in West Asia built up over the Nehru

years. The re-defining of this capital would be challenge of our West Asian policy in

the years to come. In defining an Indian role in West Asia a number of

considerations not directly in the realm of foreign policy come into play. The

immutable considerations - all domestic - that have weighed heavily on our policy are

the presence of the second largest Muslim community in the world; the dependence

of our country on West Asia’s energy resources (60 per cent of our hydrocarbon

needs); and the remittances from the Indian Diaspora in the Gulf. These will continue

to determine the parameters of our policy in the future also. To this have to be added

new determinants: India’s economic success which has created a growing market for

energy and other natural resources from West Asia and a secure destination for its

investment; India’s role in a rejuvenated group of developing countries alike IBSA

and BRIC; India as a paradigm for democratic and cultural pluralism; and India’s firm

opposition to terrorism in any form.

The future looks equally uncertain for the region in the background of

projected withdrawal of US and Western forces from Iraq and Afghanistan. The

reconstruction of these devastated countries, and the region itself, will have both

challenges and opportunities. India still has the best credentials in the region not

having been identified with the negative developments of the last decade. Despite

last year’s global financial crisis our economy looks poised to maintain its growth

trajectory at a time when the Gulf and West Asia is still reeling. The moment is

opportune for a new opening to the region. Prime Minister’s visit to Saudi Arabia sent

a positive message in the region on which we need to capitalise.

Let me list some cardinal points which could determine India’s policy on West

Asia

• India will always support secular, democratic and plural societies in West

Asia while finding a modus vivendi to do business with the parties in power in

order to maintain its traditional friendship with the countries of the region. Its

continuing interest in the Palestine issue must be translated into constructive

engagement.

• India’s primary goal has to be the safeguarding of the security in the Gulf, and

to this end, enhancing its relations with Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran in a nonzero

sum approach. It would mean developing cooperative maritime security

and counter-terror arrangements with all the Gulf countries. It would also

require close contact with these countries in combating terrorism and the

linked nexus of arms smuggling, money laundering and drugs.

• India’s relations with Israel have acquired a depth and diversity which cannot

be rolled back. This has happened because Israel has been able to meet

crucial Indian needs in the field of defence, agriculture and technology. The

relation has to be seen in the context of the imperative of any Indian

government to assure the security of one billion people. Our experience has

shown, as in Kargil that despite usurious costs Israel has shown itself to be a

reliable partner. India does not need to be defensive on this score especially

since the importance of this relationship cuts across party lines. It is a

situation which needs advocacy both within the country and the region.

• India by the weight of its historical relations with and its current economic

success has to carve a role leveraging its growing market and talent pool and

the natural and financial resources of the region. While the Gulf countries,

including Iraq and Iran are the most susceptible to this approach, it is equally

possible with countries like Egypt and the other countries in the Maghreb like

Libya and Morocco. Maximising economic and trade interaction will provide

the ballast for closer and more balanced overall relations .As stated above

the rise of India hinges on its clout in its proximate neighbourhood.

• India’s goal will be to develop a two-dimensional relation with the countries of

the region. Recent indications of West Asian countries ‘looking East’ towards

India need to be capitalized upon. India’s future lies in its increasing

recognition as a rising Asian economic power.

• India’s model of a secular and democratic polity and its commitment to

ensuring minority rights has a great attraction in today’s West Asia where

religious and cultural differences amongst the diverse ethnicities have been

exposed. In this context, India needs to develop a new channel of interaction

through civil society organizations as a means to foster exchange of views on

common social and economic problems. Some trends in this direction with

Saudi Arabia and Iran are already noticeable. Development of cultural

relations will have to be a major plank of India’s policy towards West Asia.

• India will have to carefully calibrate its relations with the region in such a way

that its policy parameters remain inviolable amidst pressures of its growing

relations with the Great Powers particularly the US. A regular dialogue with

the US and EU on developments in West Asia would provide a tool to

understand the parameters on both sides.

• A number of minorities in the region like the Kurds who have found a voice, in

the churning that the region has undergone, hold India in high esteem. A

subsidiary goal of Indian policy in the region has to be to encourage these

communities within the framework of the constitutional structure in the

countries in which they live.

Foreign policy decisions in the coming years will have consequences for

peace and harmony in our multi-cultural, multi-religious country. . We should do what

we can to strength the forces of stability and moderation in the region.

Let me end on a lighter note by coming back to our cultural links- in particular

cuisine. Much of the cuisine of the Arab world has its roots in the Ottoman cuisine

considering they were part of that empire for 500 years. Different parts of the Arab

world specialised in different components of Turkish cuisine – while the Lebanese

excelled in salads, the Syrians became the masters of filo-pastry and desserts, and

the Iraqis of grills, the couzi whole lamb pullav is universal to the Arab world. A lot of

this cuisine also travelled to India with the Turko-Mongols. Next time you order a

Shami Kebab remind yourself that it comes from Damascus, which in Arabic is called

balad as-sham; but strangely they don’t make this dish in Syria. They instead make a

dish called kebab hindi which is nothing like the shami kebab!

Thank You

i

Rajendra Abhyankar is Chairman Kunzru Centre for Defence Study and Research, Pune. A former diplomat he

was Indian Ambassador in Syria, Turkey and Azerbaijan and was Secretary (East) in MEA. From 2006 to 2008 he

was Director, Centre for West Asian Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.

RESIDENCE OF DE FOREST SKINNER.

 

Date: 1898

Source Type: Photograph

Publisher, Printer, Photographer: Headlight Engraving Company

Postmark: Not Applicable

Collection: Steven R. Shook

Remark: DeForest Leslie Skinner resided at 208 North Washington Street in Valparaiso, Porter County, Indiana. This house still stands in 2020.

 

The following biographical sketch of DeForest L. Skinner was published in the Lewis Publishing Company's 1912 history of Porter County, Indiana.

 

DEFOREST L. SKINNER. Of the late DeForest L. Skinner it may well he said that he coveted success but scorned to gain it save through industry and honest means. He acquired wealth without fraud or deceit, and the results of his life are full of inspiration and incentive. He was a dominating factor in connection with the material and civic development of the city of Valparaiso, which represented his home during virtually his entire adult life, and his influence also proved potent in the general advancement of his home county and the development and progress of northern Indiana as a whole. No shadow rests on any portion of his career now that he has been called from the scenes and labors of this mortal life, and his name merits enduring place on the roll of the really representative men of the fine old Hoosier state. His success, and it was great, was achieved through his connection with legitimate financial and other business enterprises; his character was the positive expression of a strong and noble nature; and his course was ever guided and governed by inviolable principles of integrity and honor, so that he eminently merited the confidence and esteem so uniformly reposed in him by his fellow men. Simple and unostentatious in his self-respecting and tolerant individuality, his influence was a dynamic power for good in all of the relations of life, and his broad mentality and mature judgment gave him prominence in public affairs and in the management and control of business activities of broad scope and importance. Not too often and not through the agency of too many vehicles can be recorded the life history of one who lived so honorable and useful a life as did Mr. Skinner, and this history of Porter county would stultify its legitimacy were their failure to incorporate within its pages at least a brief review of the career of this honored and influential citizen, whose death occurred at his home in Valparaiso, on the 21st of February, 1902.

 

DeForest Leslie Skinner was born in Hardwick Caledonia county, Vermont, on the 1st of November, 1835, and was a scion of a family of English lineage, that was founded in America in the early colonial epoch of our national history. He was a son of John R. and Emily Ward (Reid) Skinner, the former of whom was born at Bakersfield, Franklin county, Vermont, and the latter of whom was born at Townshend, Windham county, that state, on the 27th of March, 1806, their marriage having been solemnized on the 20th of June, 1830. John R. Skinner studied law at St. Albans, Vermont, and was admitted to the bar of his native state when but twenty-two years of age. He became one of the representative lawyers of the old Green Mountain commonwealth but finally decided to cast in his fortune with the progressive west. In 1846 he immigrated with his family to Indiana and became one of the pioneers of Porter county. He established his home in Valparaiso, which was then a mere village, and here engaged in the practice of his profession, in which he achieved marked prestige, but he was not long permitted to continue his labors, as he died in the year 1849, secure in the high regard of all who knew him and recognized as a man of sterling character and fine intellectual and professional powers. He served in various positions of public trust, both in Vermont and after his removal to Indiana. He was but forty-one years of age at the time of his death, and his wife, a woman of noble and gentle character, survived him by nearly two score of years, she having passed the closing years of her life in the home of her son DeForest L., of this memoir, in Valparaiso, where she answered death's inexorable summons on the 18th of December, 1885, about four months prior to her eightieth birthday anniversary. Of the six children four survived the loved mother, and of the number only two are now living. Mrs. Skinner was a daughter of Elkanah and Patty (Rawson) Reid, the latter of whom was a daughter of Edward Rawson, who was a scion of a distinguished English family and who immigrated to America in 1636. He soon became a prominent figure in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, where he filled many offices of public trust. At a meeting of the commissioners of the united colonies at New Haven, in September, 1651, Edward Rawson was chosen steward and agent "for receiving and disposing of such goods and commodities as should be sent to this country by the corporation in England for the propagation of the Gospel among the Indians in New England." Mrs. Skinner was a woman of fine intellectual and literary ability, and her gracious personality gained to her the affectionate regard of all who came within the sphere of her gentle influence, so that her name and memory are revered in the community in which she so long maintained her home and of which she was one of the most venerable pioneer women at the time when she passed to the life eternal. She was a most devout and zealous member of the Methodist Episcopal church and her hand and heart ever responded to the call of suffering and distress. Hollis R., one of the sons, was in the employ of the great house of Field, Leiter & Company (now Marshall Field & Company), of Chicago, for a number of years before his death. He died in 1873 at the age of thirty-three years. Henry, the youngest son, tendered his services in defense of the Union at the inception of the Civil war, for "which he enlisted when seventeen years of age. He became captain of Company B, Sixty-third Indiana Volunteer Infantry, and the history of this gallant regiment constitutes the record of his military career, which was one of long and arduous service. At the close of the war he too entered the employ of Field, Leiter & Company, but he died at the early age of twenty-two years.

 

DeForest L. Skinner gained his early educational discipline in the schools of his native state, but his advantages in the academic sense were necessarily limited, so that the broad and accurate information that designated his symmetrical mentality in later years stood as the result of self application and the lessons learned under the direction of that wisest of all headmasters, experience. He was a lad of eleven years at the time of the family removal to Indiana and save for one year, 1864, passed in the territory of Idaho, he continued to reside in Valparaiso during the remainder of his long and useful life. Soon after the family home had been established in Valparaiso Mr. Skinner secured employment in a mercantile store, and at the age of eighteen years he was found engaged in independent business. For many years he was associated with the late Michael Harrold in the retail grocery trade, under the firm name of Skinner & Harrold. This partnership was dissolved in 1878, and during the remainder of his life Mr. Skinner devoted his attention almost entirely to his banking and other capitalistic interests, which grew to be of wide scope and varied order.

 

In 1889 Mr. Skinner became one of the organizers of the State Dank of Valparaiso. And of this substantial institution he continued a director until his death. Prior to this, in 1874, Mr. Skinner had become identified with banking interests in Valparaiso, where, it may be noted, he served for six years as station agent of the Fort Wayne Railroad. On the 16th of January, 1878, he was elected president of the First National Bank of Valparaiso, and upon the expiration of the charter of this institution he became president of its successor, the First National Bank of Porter County, of which executive office he continued president from the time of its organization, in 1882, until his death, twenty years later. It may consistently be stated in this connection that this institution, which was long a staunch conservator of the financial and industrial interests of Porter County, was succeeded, upon the expiration of its charter, in May, 1902, by the present Valparaiso National Bank, of which he would have become president but for the fact that his death occurred about four months prior to the change. His only surviving son, Leslie R. Skinner, is a member of the directorate of the Valparaiso National Bank. For a number of years prior to his demise Mr. Skinner had served as a director of the Chicago & Grand Trunk Railroad Company, and in this office he was succeeded by his son, who thus became one of the youngest railroad directors in the United States.

 

From a tribute paid to the memory of Mr. Skinner by William E. Pinney, who had been his long-time friend and a business associate, are taken the following pertinent extracts, which are well worthy of perpetuation:

 

"I wish to mention as a characteristic quality of Mr. Skinner his skill in the diplomacy of business. He could discern, without close and prolonged acquaintance, the traits of character indicating honesty and dishonesty, and he made very few mistakes in giving credit. He was a good judge of securities, and in the course of his business life seldom resorted to the courts for the enforcement of contracts. He was able to work his way out of financial difficulties without loss to himself and his associates, with good feeling on the part of all interested persons, in the rather frequent cases in which he found that his desire to give financial aid, prompted by friendship or seeming need, had led him beyond a conservative point. I also wish to mention the tender side of Mr. Skinner's name. He appreciated all evidences of gratitude which came from those whom he helped through kindness. He was not disposed to contention and strife, and he exercised a pacific influence in business affairs, when differences seemed likely to arise, and warded off disturbing controversies. He was a man of great and varied information, and every conversation with him to some extent expanded the mental view of his companion therein and carried to such companion enduring impressions of his congeniality and native ability. Mr. Skinner was fertile in argument and in conversation was able to present his views in original and pleasant ways with convincing power. He was a good student of government and laws and understood the theories of both. He would have been a great lawyer if he had taken the law as his profession. His mind seemed to be moulded for the study of law and government, and as either a lawyer or politician of the higher class he might have won national fame and honors."

 

Known as one of the ablest financiers in northern Indiana and honored as a man of sterling attributes of character, Mr. Skinner's death called forth many commendatory comments in the press of this and adjoining states and all these utterances were tributes to his worth as a man, as a loyal and public-spirited citizen, and as an influential factor in productive activities. Within the compass of an article of this circumscribed order it is, of course, impossible to reproduce these tributes, but the following estimate, which appeared in the Indianapolis Independent, has a personal or intimate touch that makes its insertion altogether consistent:

 

"The death of DeForest L. Skinner, president of the First National Bank, Valparaiso, removes another of those strong characters that have placed indelibly upon northern Indiana the stamp of their sturdy honesty and determination of purpose. While every inch a business man, DeForest Skinner made and retained strong friendships. He was loyal to the section of the state in which he resided, and his friends and admirers there were numbered by the thousands. Years ago the editor of this paper first met DeForest Skinner, when both were in the prime of life, and the friendship then cemented has never been broken. As one of our exchanges puts it, he 'was of the salt of the earth.' Although, like the oak before the tempest's blast, he has bowed his head to the inevitable, the influences of his upright life will live on. The world is ever better for the lives of such men as DeForest Skinner; the world would be poorer, indeed, for his death were it not that the works and memories of good men do live after them."

 

The death of Mr. Skinner was the result of a stroke of apoplexy, and when the news of his passing became known the entire community mourned with a sense of deep personal bereavement, the while the city and the county in which he had so long maintained his home realized to the full that they had lost one of their most loyal and valuable citizens. In addition to his widow and three of their children Mr. Skinner was survived by three sisters -- Mrs. James Spencer, of Monticello, Indiana; Mrs. Celestia Dell, of Logan, Montana; and Mrs. Mariette Pierce, of Detroit, Minnesota.

 

In the midst of the many responsibilities and exactions of a particularly active business career, Mr. Skinner found time to devote much attention to the general interests of the community and to serve in various offices of public trust, his acceptance of the same having always been prompted by his high sense of civic loyalty and duty. For many years he was one of the most influential members of the Democratic party in Indiana and a prominent figure in its councils. He was a delegate to the Democratic national convention of 1880, in Cincinnati, and to that of 1888, in the city of St. Louis. His broad and well fortified convictions relative to governmental and economic affairs led him to reject the free-silver heresies exemplified by the Democratic party in the platform of 1896, and, with the characteristic courage that had ever designated the man, he withdrew from the party that had so long held his allegiance and gave his support to the Republican presidential candidate, the late lamented William McKinley. Thereafter he continued to De arrayed with the Republican party until the close of his life. From 1874 to 1878 Mr. Skinner represented the home district comprising Porter and Lake counties in the state senate, in which body he made an admirable record for careful, faithful and judicious service. He was renominated for the senate in 1882, but was defeated by a small majority, as the political complexion of the district had become strongly Republican in the interim. In 1882 Governor Porter appointed Mr. Skinner a member of the board of commissioners to which was delegated the work of providing for the construction of three additional state hospitals for the insane -- those at Evansville, Richmond and Logansport. He served on this, board contemporaneously with Governors Porter, Gray and Hovey, and later Governor Chase appointed him a member of the board of trustees of the state normal school at Terre Haute, an office which he felt constrained to decline. He received from Governor Matthews appointment as representative of Indiana at the world's congress of bankers held in connection with the World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago in 1893.

 

Were indulgence in words of respect and eulogy permitted to extend to the compass of expressions on the part of the citizens of Porter county there could be set no limit, for the name and character and services of Mr. Skinner are there remembered with all of pride and appreciation.

 

It is deemed but consonant, however, to reproduce in this memoir the resolutions adopted at the time of his death by the board of directors of the First National Bank of Porter County:

 

"Whereas, It has pleased God to take from us our esteemed and honored fellow member and president of the board, DeForest L. Skinner, and,

 

"Whereas, the cordial and pleasant relations which for nearly twenty years he held with the board, both as a director and as president thereof, makes it fitting that we should spread upon record our feelings of appreciation of his services and regret for his loss, therefore be it

 

"Resolved, That the board of directors of the First National Bank of Porter County will treasure in grateful remembrance the sterling business qualities, the integrity and acumen ever manifested by our late president and fellow member in the work of this board.

 

"Resolved, That the death of our honored fellow citizen creates a vacancy in the board not easily filled, and that his fellow members fully realize and greatly deplore the loss occasioned not only to themselves but likewise to the members of his family and to the public in general.

 

"Resolved, that we express our regrets and extend our sincere sympathy to the bereaved relatives and friends of the decedent and hope that even in the sorrow of their affliction they may find consolation in the knowledge that the worth of his private qualities, his standing as a citizen, and the value of his public services are fully appreciated.

 

"Resolved, That a copy of these resolutions be not only spread on record but likewise sent to the family of our deceased president, and published in each of the daily papers of the city."

 

From a Valparaiso paper are taken the following brief statements: "The death of Mr. Skinner removes one of Valparaiso's vigorous and progressive citizens. He did much to advance the interests of the city, where he spent nearly his entire life, and he will be greatly missed, for he enjoyed the entire confidence of the people of Porter county." Mr. Skinner found his greatest solace and pleasure in the gracious precincts of his home, whose every relation was ideal, and the only fraternal organization with which he was identified was the Valparaiso lodge of the Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks, with which he became affiliated only a short time before his death. He was liberal in the support of all measures and enterprises tending to advance the general progress and prosperity of his home city and county and here his real-estate holdings were large, as were also his financial interests, which were such as to make him one of the wealthiest men of the county. His success was the direct result of his own ability and efforts, and he left the heritage of a name untouched by shadow of wrong or injustice.

 

Concerning the domestic relations of Mr. Skinner it cannot be wished to give other than brief data in this review, as these things are not to be surveyed and commented upon in such a way as to invade the sacred precincts of the home in which his interests and affections were centered and in which his noble character showed forth most benignantly. In 1861 was solemnized the marriage of Mr. Skinner to Miss Rachel Maxwell, who was born in Wayne county, Indiana, and who was a representative of one of the honored pioneer families of that county. Mrs. Skinner survived her honored husband. She was venerated as a woman of most gentle, kindly and gracious personality. Of the seven children four did not attain to years of maturity, and the three surviving are: Maude, who is the wife of Dr. H. M. Evans, of Valparaiso; Fannie, who is the wife of J. H. McGill, of this city; and Leslie R., who has assumed charge of the large family estate and who is well upholding the high prestige of the honored name which he bears.

 

Sources:

Bumstead & Company. 1905. Bumstead's Valparaiso City and Porter County Business Directory, Including Rural Routes. Chicago, Illinois: Radtke Brothers. 421 p. [see p. 139]

 

Grand Trunk Railway. 1898. Headlight: Sights and Scenes Along the Grand Trunk Railway: Valparaiso, Ind.. Volume 3, Number, 6, Page 20.

 

Lewis Publishing Company. 1912. History of Porter County, Indiana: A Narrative Account of its Historical Progress, its People and its Principal Interests. Chicago, Illinois: Lewis Publishing Company. 881 p. [see pp. 363-368]

 

Copyright 2020. Some rights reserved. The associated text may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission of Steven R. Shook.

Libertad, meaning "freedom" in Spanish, is a monumental sculpture by Claude Quiesse. It stands at the Guillaume Mercader roundabout near the train station in Bayeux. Its location is symbolic, as it is in the center of the city's largest roundabout, close to the train station, and oriented towards the cathedral, representing values cherished by Bayeux.

The sculpture symbolizes Bayeux's liberation as the first free French city after the D-Day landings in June 1944. It also signifies the city's embrace of modernity by integrating contemporary art into the daily lives of its residents. The artist spent over a year crafting the sculpture with his sons, embodying the spirit of freedom valued by Bayeux. The sculpture's movement against the wind represents the challenges in maintaining course through trials. The armor on its face symbolizes the need to protect oneself while navigating the complex and treacherous paths to freedom. It serves as a reminder of the sacrifices made in June 1944. The sculpture's unwavering advance towards its destiny signifies the need to defend hard-won freedom, while emphasizing that freedom of thought is inviolable.

RESIDENCE OF HON. DeFOE SKINNER, VALPARAISO.

 

Date: 1895

Source Type: Photograph

Publisher, Printer, Photographer: Lee and Lee

Postmark: Not Applicable

Collection: Steven R. Shook

Remark: DeForest Leslie Skinner resided at 208 North Washington Street in Valparaiso, Porter County, Indiana. This house still stands in 2021.

 

The following biographical sketch of DeForest L. Skinner is published in the Lewis Publishing Company 1912 History of Porter County, Indiana: A Narrative Account of its Historical Progress, its People and its Principal Interests.

 

DEFOREST L. SKINNER. Of the late DeForest L. Skinner it may well he said that he coveted success but scorned to gain it save through industry and honest means. He acquired wealth without fraud or deceit, and the results of his life are full of inspiration and incentive. He was a dominating factor in connection with the material and civic development of the city of Valparaiso, which represented his home during virtually his entire adult life, and his influence also proved potent in the general advancement of his home county and the development and progress of northern Indiana as a whole. No shadow rests on any portion of his career now that he has been called from the scenes and labors of this mortal life, and his name merits enduring place on the roll of the really representative men of the fine old Hoosier state. His success, and it was great, was achieved through his connection with legitimate financial and other business enterprises; his character was the positive expression of a strong and noble nature; and his course was ever guided and governed by inviolable principles of integrity and honor, so that he eminently merited the confidence and esteem so uniformly reposed in him by his fellow men. Simple and unostentatious in his self-respecting and tolerant individuality, his influence was a dynamic power for good in all of the relations of life, and his broad mentality and mature judgment gave him prominence in public affairs and in the management and control of business activities of broad scope and importance. Not too often and not through the agency of too many vehicles can be recorded the life history of one who lived so honorable and useful a life as did Mr. Skinner, and this history of Porter county would stultify its legitimacy were their failure to incorporate within its pages at least a brief review of the career of this honored and influential citizen, whose death occurred at his home in Valparaiso, on the 21st of February, 1902.

 

DeForest Leslie Skinner was born in Hardwick Caledonia county, Vermont, on the 1st of November, 1835, and was a scion of a family of English lineage, that was founded in America in the early colonial epoch of our national history. He was a son of John R. and Emily Ward (Reid) Skinner, the former of whom was born at Bakersfield, Franklin county, Vermont, and the latter of whom was born at Townshend, Windham county, that state, on the 27th of March, 1806, their marriage having been solemnized on the 20th of June, 1830. John R. Skinner studied law at St. Albans, Vermont, and was admitted to the bar of his native state when but twenty-two years of age. He became one of the representative lawyers of the old Green Mountain commonwealth but finally decided to cast in his fortune with the progressive west. In 1846 he immigrated with his family to Indiana and became one of the pioneers of Porter county. He established his home in Valparaiso, which was then a mere village, and here engaged in the practice of his profession, in which he achieved marked prestige, but he was not long permitted to continue his labors, as he died in the year 1849, secure in the high regard of all who knew him and recognized as a man of sterling character and fine intellectual and professional powers. He served in various positions of public trust, both in Vermont and after his removal to Indiana. He was but forty-one years of age at the time of his death, and his wife, a woman of noble and gentle character, survived him by nearly two score of years, she having passed the closing years of her life in the home of her son DeForest L., of this memoir, in Valparaiso, where she answered death's inexorable summons on the 18th of December, 1885, about four months prior to her eightieth birthday anniversary. Of the six children four survived the loved mother, and of the number only two are now living. Mrs. Skinner was a daughter of Elkanah and Patty (Rawson) Reid, the latter of whom was a daughter of Edward Rawson, who was a scion of a distinguished English family and who immigrated to America in 1636. He soon became a prominent figure in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, where he filled many offices of public trust. At a meeting of the commissioners of the united colonies at New Haven, in September, 1651, Edward Rawson was chosen steward and agent "for receiving and disposing of such goods and commodities as should be sent to this country by the corporation in England for the propagation of the Gospel among the Indians in New England." Mrs. Skinner was a woman of fine intellectual and literary ability, and her gracious personality gained to her the affectionate regard of all who came within the sphere of her gentle influence, so that her name and memory are revered in the community in which she so long maintained her home and of which she was one of the most venerable pioneer women at the time when she passed to the life eternal. She was a most devout and zealous member of the Methodist Episcopal church and her hand and heart ever responded to the call of suffering and distress. Hollis R., one of the sons, was in the employ of the great house of Field, Leiter & Company (now Marshall Field & Company), of Chicago, for a number of years before his death. He died in 1873 at the age of thirty-three years. Henry, the youngest son, tendered his services in defense of the Union at the inception of the Civil war, for "which he enlisted when seventeen years of age. He became captain of Company B, Sixty-third Indiana Volunteer Infantry, and the history of this gallant regiment constitutes the record of his military career, which was one of long and arduous service. At the close of the war he too entered the employ of Field, Leiter & Company, but he died at the early age of twenty-two years.

 

DeForest L. Skinner gained his early educational discipline in the schools of his native state, but his advantages in the academic sense were necessarily limited, so that the broad and accurate information that designated his symmetrical mentality in later years stood as the result of self application and the lessons learned under the direction of that wisest of all headmasters, experience. He was a lad of eleven years at the time of the family removal to Indiana and save for one year, 1864, passed in the territory of Idaho, he continued to reside in Valparaiso during the remainder of his long and useful life. Soon after the family home had been established in Valparaiso Mr. Skinner secured employment in a mercantile store, and at the age of eighteen years he was found engaged in independent business. For many years he was associated with the late Michael Harrold in the retail grocery trade, under the firm name of Skinner & Harrold. This partnership was dissolved in 1878, and during the remainder of his life Mr. Skinner devoted his attention almost entirely to his banking and other capitalistic interests, which grew to be of wide scope and varied order.

 

In 1889 Mr. Skinner became one of the organizers of the State Dank of Valparaiso. And of this substantial institution he continued a director until his death. Prior to this, in 1874, Mr. Skinner had become identified with banking interests in Valparaiso, where, it may be noted, he served for six years as station agent of the Fort Wayne Railroad. On the 16th of January, 1878, he was elected president of the First National Bank of Valparaiso, and upon the expiration of the charter of this institution he became president of its successor, the First National Bank of Porter County, of which executive office he continued president from the time of its organization, in 1882, until his death, twenty years later. It may consistently be stated in this connection that this institution, which was long a staunch conservator of the financial and industrial interests of Porter County, was succeeded, upon the expiration of its charter, in May, 1902, by the present Valparaiso National Bank, of which he would have become president but for the fact that his death occurred about four months prior to the change. His only surviving son, Leslie R. Skinner, is a member of the directorate of the Valparaiso National Bank. For a number of years prior to his demise Mr. Skinner had served as a director of the Chicago & Grand Trunk Railroad Company, and in this office he was succeeded by his son, who thus became one of the youngest railroad directors in the United States.

 

From a tribute paid to the memory of Mr. Skinner by William E. Pinney, who had been his long-time friend and a business associate, are taken the following pertinent extracts, which are well worthy of perpetuation:

 

"I wish to mention as a characteristic quality of Mr. Skinner his skill in the diplomacy of business. He could discern, without close and prolonged acquaintance, the traits of character indicating honesty and dishonesty, and he made very few mistakes in giving credit. He was a good judge of securities, and in the course of his business life seldom resorted to the courts for the enforcement of contracts. He was able to work his way out of financial difficulties without loss to himself and his associates, with good feeling on the part of all interested persons, in the rather frequent cases in which he found that his desire to give financial aid, prompted by friendship or seeming need, had led him beyond a conservative point. I also wish to mention the tender side of Mr. Skinner's name. He appreciated all evidences of gratitude which came from those whom he helped through kindness. He was not disposed to contention and strife, and he exercised a pacific influence in business affairs, when differences seemed likely to arise, and warded off disturbing controversies. He was a man of great and varied information, and every conversation with him to some extent expanded the mental view of his companion therein and carried to such companion enduring impressions of his congeniality and native ability. Mr. Skinner was fertile in argument and in conversation was able to present his views in original and pleasant ways with convincing power. He was a good student of government and laws and understood the theories of both. He would have been a great lawyer if he had taken the law as his profession. His mind seemed to be moulded for the study of law and government, and as either a lawyer or politician of the higher class he might have won national fame and honors."

 

Known as one of the ablest financiers in northern Indiana and honored as a man of sterling attributes of character, Mr. Skinner's death called forth many commendatory comments in the press of this and adjoining states and all these utterances were tributes to his worth as a man, as a loyal and public-spirited citizen, and as an influential factor in productive activities. Within the compass of an article of this circumscribed order it is, of course, impossible to reproduce these tributes, but the following estimate, which appeared in the Indianapolis Independent, has a personal or intimate touch that makes its insertion altogether consistent:

 

"The death of DeForest L. Skinner, president of the First National Bank, Valparaiso, removes another of those strong characters that have placed indelibly upon northern Indiana the stamp of their sturdy honesty and determination of purpose. While every inch a business man, DeForest Skinner made and retained strong friendships. He was loyal to the section of the state in which he resided, and his friends and admirers there were numbered by the thousands. Years ago the editor of this paper first met DeForest Skinner, when both were in the prime of life, and the friendship then cemented has never been broken. As one of our exchanges puts it, he 'was of the salt of the earth.' Although, like the oak before the tempest's blast, he has bowed his head to the inevitable, the influences of his upright life will live on. The world is ever better for the lives of such men as DeForest Skinner; the world would be poorer, indeed, for his death were it not that the works and memories of good men do live after them."

 

The death of Mr. Skinner was the result of a stroke of apoplexy, and when the news of his passing became known the entire community mourned with a sense of deep personal bereavement, the while the city and the county in which he had so long maintained his home realized to the full that they had lost one of their most loyal and valuable citizens. In addition to his widow and three of their children Mr. Skinner was survived by three sisters -- Mrs. James Spencer, of Monticello, Indiana; Mrs. Celestia Dell, of Logan, Montana; and Mrs. Mariette Pierce, of Detroit, Minnesota.

 

In the midst of the many responsibilities and exactions of a particularly active business career, Mr. Skinner found time to devote much attention to the general interests of the community and to serve in various offices of public trust, his acceptance of the same having always been prompted by his high sense of civic loyalty and duty. For many years he was one of the most influential members of the Democratic party in Indiana and a prominent figure in its councils. He was a delegate to the Democratic national convention of 1880, in Cincinnati, and to that of 1888, in the city of St. Louis. His broad and well fortified convictions relative to governmental and economic affairs led him to reject the free-silver heresies exemplified by the Democratic party in the platform of 1896, and, with the characteristic courage that had ever designated the man, he withdrew from the party that had so long held his allegiance and gave his support to the Republican presidential candidate, the late lamented William McKinley. Thereafter he continued to De arrayed with the Republican party until the close of his life. From 1874 to 1878 Mr. Skinner represented the home district comprising Porter and Lake counties in the state senate, in which body he made an admirable record for careful, faithful and judicious service. He was renominated for the senate in 1882, but was defeated by a small majority, as the political complexion of the district had become strongly Republican in the interim. In 1882 Governor Porter appointed Mr. Skinner a member of the board of commissioners to which was delegated the work of providing for the construction of three additional state hospitals for the insane -- those at Evansville, Richmond and Logansport. He served on this, board contemporaneously with Governors Porter, Gray and Hovey, and later Governor Chase appointed him a member of the board of trustees of the state normal school at Terre Haute, an office which he felt constrained to decline. He received from Governor Matthews appointment as representative of Indiana at the world's congress of bankers held in connection with the World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago in 1893.

 

Were indulgence in words of respect and eulogy permitted to extend to the compass of expressions on the part of the citizens of Porter county there could be set no limit, for the name and character and services of Mr. Skinner are there remembered with all of pride and appreciation.

 

It is deemed but consonant, however, to reproduce in this memoir the resolutions adopted at the time of his death by the board of directors of the First National Bank of Porter County:

 

"Whereas, It has pleased God to take from us our esteemed and honored fellow member and president of the board, DeForest L. Skinner, and,

 

"Whereas, the cordial and pleasant relations which for nearly twenty years he held with the board, both as a director and as president thereof, makes it fitting that we should spread upon record our feelings of appreciation of his services and regret for his loss, therefore be it

 

"Resolved, That the board of directors of the First National Bank of Porter County will treasure in grateful remembrance the sterling business qualities, the integrity and acumen ever manifested by our late president and fellow member in the work of this board.

 

"Resolved, That the death of our honored fellow citizen creates a vacancy in the board not easily filled, and that his fellow members fully realize and greatly deplore the loss occasioned not only to themselves but likewise to the members of his family and to the public in general.

 

"Resolved, that we express our regrets and extend our sincere sympathy to the bereaved relatives and friends of the decedent and hope that even in the sorrow of their affliction they may find consolation in the knowledge that the worth of his private qualities, his standing as a citizen, and the value of his public services are fully appreciated.

 

"Resolved, That a copy of these resolutions be not only spread on record but likewise sent to the family of our deceased president, and published in each of the daily papers of the city."

 

From a Valparaiso paper are taken the following brief statements: "The death of Mr. Skinner removes one of Valparaiso's vigorous and progressive citizens. He did much to advance the interests of the city, where he spent nearly his entire life, and he will be greatly missed, for he enjoyed the entire confidence of the people of Porter county." Mr. Skinner found his greatest solace and pleasure in the gracious precincts of his home, whose every relation was ideal, and the only fraternal organization with which he was identified was the Valparaiso lodge of the Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks, with which he became affiliated only a short time before his death. He was liberal in the support of all measures and enterprises tending to advance the general progress and prosperity of his home city and county and here his real-estate holdings were large, as were also his financial interests, which were such as to make him one of the wealthiest men of the county. His success was the direct result of his own ability and efforts, and he left the heritage of a name untouched by shadow of wrong or injustice.

 

Concerning the domestic relations of Mr. Skinner it cannot be wished to give other than brief data in this review, as these things are not to be surveyed and commented upon in such a way as to invade the sacred precincts of the home in which his interests and affections were centered and in which his noble character showed forth most benignantly. In 1861 was solemnized the marriage of Mr. Skinner to Miss Rachel Maxwell, who was born in Wayne county, Indiana, and who was a representative of one of the honored pioneer families of that county. Mrs. Skinner survived her honored husband. She was venerated as a woman of most gentle, kindly and gracious personality. Of the seven children four did not attain to years of maturity, and the three surviving are: Maude, who is the wife of Dr. H. M. Evans, of Valparaiso; Fannie, who is the wife of J. H. McGill, of this city; and Leslie R., who has assumed charge of the large family estate and who is well upholding the high prestige of the honored name which he bears.

 

Sources:

Bumstead & Company. 1905. Bumstead's Valparaiso City and Porter County Business Directory, Including Rural Routes. Chicago, Illinois: Radtke Brothers. 421 p. [see p. 139]

 

Lee and Lee. 1895. Lee and Lee's Atlas of Porter County, Indiana. Chicago, Illinois: Lee and Lee. 81 p.

 

Lewis Publishing Company. 1912. History of Porter County, Indiana: A Narrative Account of its Historical Progress, its People and its Principal Interests. Chicago, Illinois: Lewis Publishing Company. 881 p. [see pp. 363-368]

 

Copyright 2020. Some rights reserved. The associated text may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission of Steven R. Shook.

Is a country in Western Asia, bordering Lebanon and the Mediterranean Sea to the west, Turkey to the north, Iraq to the east, Jordan to the south, and Israel to the southwest.

The name Syria formerly comprised the entire region of the Levant, while the modern state encompasses the site of several ancient kingdoms and empires, including the Eblan civilization of the third millennium BC. In the Islamic era, its capital city, Damascus, was the seat of the Umayyad Empire and a provincial capital of the Mamluk Empire. Damascus is widely regarded as one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world.

Modern Syria was created as a French mandate and attained independence in April 1946, as a parliamentary republic. The post-independence period was rocky, and a large number of military coups and coup attempts shook the country in the period 1949-1970. Syria has been under Emergency Law since 1962, effectively suspending most constitutional protections for citizens, and its system of government is considered non-democratic.

The country has been governed by the Baath Party since 1963, although actual power is concentrated to the presidency and a narrow grouping of military and political strongmen. Syria's current president is Bashar al-Assad, who won a referendum on extending his presidency for second term, garnering 97.62 percent of votes in 2007 and is the son of Hafez al-Assad, who held office from 1970 until his death in 2000. Syria has played a major regional role, particularly through its central role in the Arab conflict with Israel, which since 1967 has been in possession of the Golan Heights, and by active involvement in Lebanese and Palestinian affairs.

The population is mainly Sunni Muslim, but with significant Alawite, Shia, Christian and Druze minorities. Since the 1960s, Alawite military officers have tended to dominate the country's politics. Ethnically, some 80% of the population is Arab, and the state is ruled by the Baath Party according to Arab nationalist principles, while approximately 20% belong to the Kurdish, Armenian, Assyrian, Turkmen, and Circassians minorities.

 

History

Please go to

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Syria

 

Geography

Please go to

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_Syria

 

Other info

flags

 

Oficial Name:

الجمهوريّة العربيّة السّوريّة

Al-jumhuriyah al-'Arabiyah as-Suriya

 

Independence:

First declaration September 19361

- Second declaration January 1, 1944

- Recognized April 17, 1946

 

Area:

185.180km2

 

Inhabitants:

18.690.000

 

Languages:

Adyghe [ady] 25,000 in Syria. Alternate names: West Circassian, Adygey. Classification: North Caucasian, West Caucasian, Circassian

More information.

 

Arabic, Levantine Bedawi Spoken [avl] 70,000 in Syria. Southwest corner, Hawran Region, from the border to within 20 miles of Damascus. Alternate names: Bedawi. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic

More information.

 

Arabic, Mesopotamian Spoken [acm] 1,800,000 in Syria. Eastern Syria. Alternate names: North Syrian Arabic, Furati, Mesopotamian Gelet Arabic. Dialects: Euphrates Cluster. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic

More information.

 

Arabic, Najdi Spoken [ars] 500,000 in Syria. Population includes 100,000 North Najdi, 100,000 Central Najdi (1995). Syrian desert. Alternate names: Bedawi. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic

More information.

 

Arabic, North Levantine Spoken [apc] 8,800,000 in Syria (1991). Population includes 6,000,000 in Lebanese-Central Syrian, 1,000,000 in North Syrian. Population total all countries: 14,309,537. Also spoken in Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Belize, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, French Guiana, Israel, Jamaica, Lebanon, Mali, Puerto Rico, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey (Asia). Alternate names: Levantine Arabic, North Levantine Arabic, Lebanese-Syrian Arabic, Syro-Lebanese Arabic. Dialects: There is an urban standard dialect based on Damascus speech. Beiruti dialect is well accepted here. Aleppo dialect shows Mesopotamian (North Syrian) influence. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic

More information.

 

Arabic, North Mesopotamian Spoken [ayp] 300,000 in Syria (1992). Far eastern Syria. Alternate names: Moslawi, Syro-Mesopotamian Arabic, Mesopotamian Qeltu Arabic. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic

More information.

 

Arabic, Standard [arb] Middle East, North Africa. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic

More information.

 

Armenian [hye] 320,000 in Syria (1993). Alternate names: Haieren, Somkhuri, Ermenice, Armjanski. Dialects: Western Armenian. Classification: Indo-European, Armenian

More information.

 

Assyrian Neo-Aramaic [aii] 30,000 in Syria (1995). Ethnic population: 700,000. Over 30 villages on the banks of the Khabur River, northern Syria. Alternate names: Lishana Aturaya, Suret, Sureth, Suryaya Swadaya, Assyrian, Neo-Syriac, Assyriski, Aisorski. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Eastern, Central, Northeastern

More information.

 

Azerbaijani, South [azb] 30,000 in Syria (1961 census). Homs and Hama. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani

More information.

 

Domari [rmt] 10,000 in Syria (1961). Turkey to India; Nawar is in Palestine, Syria, and Egypt; Kurbat in Syria and western Iran; Helebi in Egypt and Libya; Karachi in north Turkey, the Caucasus of Russia; and north Iran; Domaki and Wogri-Boli in India; Barake in Syria; Luli and Maznoug in Uzbekistan; other groups in Iran; Churi-Wali in Afghanistan. Alternate names: Middle Eastern Romani, Tsigene, Gypsy, Nawar, Kurbat, Barake. Dialects: Nawar, Kurbati, Beirut, Nablos, Barake. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, Central zone, Dom

More information.

 

Kurdish, Northern [kmr] 938,000 in Syria (1993). Northern Syria: Northern Cizire (Qamishlok), Kurd-Dagh (Ciyayê Kurdî, Afrin), Ain-Arab, Allepo, Damascus. Alternate names: Kurmanji, Kurmancî, Kurdi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish

More information.

 

Lomavren [rmi] Alternate names: Armenian Bosha, Arnebuab Bisa, Bosha, Bosa. Classification: Mixed Language, Armenian-Romani

More information.

 

Turoyo [tru] 7,000 in Syria (1994). Ethnic population: 20,000 (1994). Alternate names: Suryoyo, Syryoyo, Turani. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Eastern, Central, Northwestern

More information.

 

Western Neo-Aramaic [amw] 15,000 (1996 Maalula Home Page, Internet). Population includes 8,000 in Maaloula. Qalamoun Mountains, 30 miles north of Damascus. Villages of Ma`lula, Bakh`a, and Jubb `Adin. Only in Syria. Alternate names: Maalula, Siryon, Loghtha Siryanoytha, Neo-Western Aramaic. Dialects: Ma`lula (Maalula, Maaloula, Ma`lu:la), Bakh`a (Bax`a), Jub-`adin (Jubb `Adi:n). Little dialect variation. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Western

More information.

  

Extinct languages

Mlahsö [lhs] Extinct. Qamishli town. Originally in Mlahsó and `Ansha villages, Diyarbakir Province, Turkey. Alternate names: Suryoyo. Dialects: Close to Turoyo. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Eastern, Central, Northwestern

 

Capital city:

Damascus

 

Meaning country name:

From the ancient Greek name for the ancient state of Assyria, although the original heartland of ancient Assyria actually lies in modern Iraq. Before the Greeks, the area of the modern state of Syria had the name Aram, after which the Aramaic language, a former lingua franca of the Middle East still spoken in a few villages there today, takes its name.

 

Description Flag:

The current flag of Syria (Arabic: علم سوريا) was re-adopted in 1980. It is also the flag of the former United Arab Republic.

The colors of the flag are traditional Pan-Arab colors, also seen on the flags of Yemen, Egypt, Sudan, and Iraq. The two stars represent Egypt and Syria, the two participating nations in the United Arab Republic. The green is thought to be the color of the Rashidun or Fatimid, white the color of the Umayyads, black the color of Abbasids and red the color of the blood of martyrs, although it is thought that red was the color of the Hashemite dynasty and it was added after Sharif Hussayn of Hijaz agreed to join the Arab revolt of 1916.

 

Coat of arms:

This symbol of the Coat of arms of Syria (Arabic: شعار سوريا) is the Syrian Hawk or hawk of Qureish; it was adopted during the union with Egypt, and before it, there was the Syrian eagle of Saladin.

 

Motto:

"Too stars Republic"

 

National Anthem: Homat el Dyar

 

Arabic

حـماةَ الـديارِ عليكمْ سـلامْ

أبَتْ أنْ تـذِلَّ النفـوسُ الكرامْ

عـرينُ العروبةِ بيتٌ حَـرام

وعرشُ الشّموسِ حِمَىً لا يُضَامْ

ربوعُ الشّـآمِ بـروجُ العَـلا

تُحاكي السّـماءَ بعـالي السَّـنا

فأرضٌ زهتْ بالشّموسِ الوِضَا

سَـماءٌ لَعَمـرُكَ أو كالسَّـما

 

رفيـفُ الأماني وخَفـقُ الفؤادْ

عـلى عَـلَمٍ ضَمَّ شَـمْلَ البلادْ

أما فيهِ منْ كُـلِّ عـينٍ سَـوادْ

ومِـن دمِ كـلِّ شَـهيدٍ مِـدادْ؟

نفـوسٌ أبـاةٌ ومـاضٍ مجيـدْ

وروحُ الأضاحي رقيبٌ عَـتيدْ

فمِـنّا الوليـدُ و مِـنّا الرّشـيدْ

فلـمْ لا نَسُـودُ ولِمْ لا نشـيد؟

 

Latin transliteration

 

Humat al diari aleikum salam

Abat an tazila al nufusu al kiram

Arinu al urubati beyton haram

Wa Aarshu al shumusi himan la yudam

Robughu al shami buruju al Aala

Tohaki al suma'a bia'ali alsana

Fa ardon zahat bilshumusi al widaa'a

Samaon limaroka aw kal sama

Rafifu alamani wakhafku alfuad

Aala aalamen damma shamla al bilad

Ama fihi min kuli ainen sawad

Wa min dami kuli shahiden midad

Noufuson ubaton wa madin magid

Wa rouhu al adahi rakibon atid

Fa minna al walidu wa minna al rashid

Fa lem la nasudu wa lem la nasheed

 

English translation

 

Defenders of our home,

Peace be upon you;

The proud spirits had

refused to subdue.

The lion-abode of Arabism,

A hallowed sanctuary;

The seat of the stars,

An inviolable preserve.

Our hopes and our hearts,

Are entwined with the flag,

Which unites our country..

 

Internet Page: www.mofa.gov.sy

www.syriatourism.org

 

Syria in diferent languages

 

eng | cym | fao | ina | lat | nor | pol | sme: Syria

arg | ast | bre | cos | eus | glg | ibo | ita | lld | mlg | oci | roh | ron | rup | scn | spa | sqi | tsn: Siria

bam | hat | mos: Siri

cat | por | tet: Síria

deu | ltz | nds: Syrien / Syrien

fra | jnf | nrm: Syrie

hrv | lit | slv: Sirija

nbl | xho | zul: iSiriya

dan | swe: Syrien

dje | zza: Suriya

dsb | hsb: Syriska

frp | fur: Sirie

gag | kaa: Siriya / Сирия

kin | run: Siriya

lim | nld: Syrië

afr: Sirië

aze: Suriya / Сурија; Şam / Шам

bos: Sirija / Сирија

ces: Sýrie

cor: Surri

crh: Suriye / Сурие

csb: Syrëjô

epo: Sirio

est: Süüria

fin: Syyria

fry: Syrje

gla: Siria; An t-Siria

gle: An tSiria / An tSiria

glv: Yn Teer

hau: Sham

haw: Suria

hun: Szíria

ind: Suriah / سوريه; Syria / سيريا

isl: Sýrland

jav: Suriah

kab: Surya / ⵙⵓⵔⵢⴰ

kmr: Şam / Шам / شام; Sûrî / Сури / سووری

kur: Sûriya / سووریا; Sûriye / سووریه

lav: Sīrija

lin: Sirí

mlt: Sirja

mol: Siria / Сирия

mri: Hīria

msa: Syria / سيريا; Syams / شامس

que: Sirya

rmy: Siriya / सिरिया

slk: Sýria

slo: Siuria / Сиуриа

smg: Sėrėjė

som: Suuriya; Siiriya

srd: Sìria

swa: Syria; Shamu

szl: Syrja

tgl: Sirya

ton: Sīlia

tuk: Siriýa / Сирия

tur: Suriye

uzb: Suriya / Сурия; Shom / Шом

vie: Xi-ri

vol: Süriyän

vor: Süüriä

wln: Sireye

wol: Siiri

chu: Сѵрія (Sȳrīja); Сѹрія (Surīja)

abq | alt | bul | kir | kjh | kom | krc | kum | rus | tyv | udm: Сирия (Sirija)

chv | mon | oss: Сири (Siri)

ady | ava: Шам (Šam)

abk: Шьамтәыла (Š'amtʷəla)

bak: Сирия / Siriya

bel: Сірыя / Siryja; Сырыя / Syryja

che: Сири (Siri); Шема (Šema)

chm: Сирий (Sirij)

kaz: Сирия / Sïrïya / سيريا

kbd: Сирие (Sirie)

lbe: Шамул (Šamul)

mkd: Сирија (Sirija)

srp: Сирија / Sirija

tat: Сүрия / Süriä

tgk: Сурия / سوریه / Surija; Шом / شام / Şom

ukr: Сірія (Sirija)

ara: سورية (Sūrīyâ); سوريا (Sūrīyā); الشأم (aš-Šaʾm); الشام (aš-Šām)

ckb: سووریا / Sûrya

fas: سوریه / Suriye; شام / Šâm

prs: سوریه (Sūrīyâ)

pus: سوريه (Sūriyâ); سوريا (Sūriyā)

uig: سۇرىيە / Suriye / Сурийә; سۈرىيە / Süriye / Сүрийә

urd: سوریا (Sūriyā); سیریا (Sīriyā); شام (Šām)

div: ސީރިއާ (Sīri'ā)

syr: ܣܘܪܝܐ (Sūriyā)

heb: סוריה (Sûryah)

lad: סיריה / Siria

yid: סיריִיע (Siriye)

amh: ሶርያ (Sorya)

cop-sah: Ⲥⲩⲣⲓⲁ (Syria)

cop-boh: Ⲥⲩⲣⲓⲁ̄ (Syrià)

ell: Συρία (Syría)

hye: Սիրիա (Siria)

kat: სირია (Siria)

hin: सीरिया (Sīriyā); सिरिया (Siriyā); सूरिया (Sūriyā); शाम (Šām)

nep: शाम (Šām)

ben: সিরিয়া (Siriyā)

pan: ਸੀਰੀਆ (Sīrīā); ਸ਼ਾਮ (Šām)

kan: ಸಿರಿಯ (Siriya)

mal: സിറിയ (Siṟiya)

tam: சிரியா (Čiriyā)

tel: సిరియా (Siriyā)

zho: 叙利亞/叙利亚 (Xùlìyà)

yue: 叙利亞/叙利亚 (Jeuihleihnga)

jpn: シリア (Shiria)

kor: 시리아 (Siria)

bod: སི་རི་ཡ་ (Si.ri.ya.); ཞུ་ལི་ཡ་ (Žu.li.ya.)

mya: ဆီးရီးယား (Sʰìẏìyà)

tha: ซีเรีย (Sīriya)

lao: ຊີຣີ (Sīlī)

khm: ស៊ីរី (Sīrī); ស៊ីរីយ៉ា (Sīrīyā)

 

You can follow me also on Getty | 500 px | Deviant Art

 

Here is my virtual tour through the city - portfotolio.net/jup3nep/album/72157631887823501

 

Harem (pronounced [haˈɾem], Turkish, from Arabic: حرم‎ ḥaram "forbidden place; sacrosanct, sanctum", related to حريم ḥarīm, "a sacred inviolable place; female members of the family" and حرام ḥarām, "forbidden; sacred") refers to the sphere of women in what is usually a polygynous household and their enclosed quarters which are forbidden to men. It originated in the Near East and is typically associated in the Western world with the Ottoman Empire. For the South Asian equivalent, see purdah and zenana.

 

The word harem is strictly applicable to Muslim households only, but the system was common, more or less, to most ancient Oriental communities, especially where polygamy was permitted.

 

The Imperial Harem of the Ottoman sultan, which was also called seraglio in the West, typically housed several dozen women, including wives. It also housed the Sultan's mother, daughters and other female relatives, as well as eunuchs and slave servant girls to serve the aforementioned women. During the later periods, the sons of the Sultan also lived in the Harem until they were 16 years old, when it was considered appropriate for them to appear in the public and administrative areas of the palace. The Topkapı Harem was, in some senses, merely the private living quarters of the Sultan and his family, within the palace complex. Some women of Ottoman harem, especially wives, mothers and sisters of sultans played very important political roles in Ottoman history, and in times it was said that the empire was ruled from harem. Hürrem Sultan (wife of Süleyman The Magnificent, mother of Selim II) and Kösem Sultan (mother of Murad IV) were the two most powerful women in Ottoman history.

 

Moulay Ismail, Alaouite sultan of Morocco from 1672 to 1727, is said to have fathered a total of 525 sons and 342 daughters by 1703 and achieved a 700th son in 1721. He had over 500 concubines.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harem

  

The Topkapı Palace (Turkish: Topkapı Sarayı or in Ottoman Turkish: طوپقپو سرايى) is a large palace in Istanbul, Turkey, that was the primary residence of the Ottoman Sultans for approximately 400 years (1465-1856) of their 624-year reign.

 

As well as a royal residence, the palace was a setting for state occasions and royal entertainments. It is now a major tourist attraction and contains important holy relics of the Muslim world, including Muhammed's cloak and sword. The Topkapı Palace is among the monuments contained within the "Historic Areas of Istanbul", which became a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1985, and is described in Criterion iv as "the best example[s] of ensembles of palaces [...] of the Ottoman period."

 

Construction began in 1459, ordered by Sultan Mehmed II, the conqueror of Byzantine Constantinople. The palace complex consists of four main courtyards and many smaller buildings. At its peak, the palace was home to as many as 4,000 people, and covered a large area with a long shoreline. The complex was expanded over the centuries, with major renovations after the 1509 earthquake and the 1665 fire. The palace contained mosques, a hospital, bakeries, and a mint. The name translates as "Cannon gate Palace" from a nearby gate which has since been destroyed.

 

From the end of the 17th century the Topkapı Palace gradually lost its importance as the Sultans preferred to spend more time in their new palaces along the Bosporus. In 1856, Sultan Abdül Mecid I decided to move the court to the newly built Dolmabahçe Palace, the first European-style palace in the city. Some functions, such as the imperial treasury, the library, and the mint were retained in the Topkapı Palace.

 

Following the end of the Ottoman Empire in 1921, the Topkapı Palace was transformed by a government decree dated April 3, 1924 into a museum of the imperial era. The Topkapı Palace Museum is administered by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. The palace complex has hundreds of rooms and chambers, but only the most important are accessible to the public today. The complex is guarded by officials of the ministry as well as armed guards of the Turkish military. The palace includes many fine examples of Ottoman architecture. It contains large collections of porcelain, robes, weapons, shields, armor, Ottoman miniatures, Islamic calligraphic manuscripts and murals, as well as a display of Ottoman treasures and jewelry.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topkap%C4%B1_Palace

 

Today on eBay we have 'I married the perfect female animal' check it out! (Click blue link to follow to eBay)

 

I think I can speak for a large proportion of men in saying that finding the perfect female animal is pretty high up there on the list of reasons for marriage. Although, saying that, marriage is hardly the inviolable institution it used to be. Anyway, I digress... Just take a look at this beauty. She be smart, willing, eager and easily pleased. What more could a man want? I'm sure there's numerous wisecracks I could insert at this point but I'm going to be the bigger man and just let it lie.

 

This picture have been reimagined from an actual news headline. I fill my head with this grubby nonsense so you don't have to. Vive la revolution!

 

Cheers

 

id-iom

 

Title: I married the perfect female animal

Materials: Paint pen, acrylic and charcoal

Size: A4

THE CHURCH of St Bride's is justly world famous. To enter its doors is to step into 2,000 years of history, which had begun with the Romans some six centuries before the name of St Bride, daughter of an Irish prince, even emerged from legend to become associated forever with the site.

 

The story of St Bride's is inextricably woven into the history of the City of London. By the time the Great Fire of 1666 left the church in ruins, a succession of churches had existed on the site for about a millennium, and the area had already assumed its unique role in the emergence of English printing. It took nine years for St Bride's to re-appear from the ashes under the inspired direction of Christopher Wren, but for the next two-and-a-half centuries it was in the shadow of the church's unmistakeable wedding-cake spire that the rise of the British newspaper industry into the immensely-powerful Fourth Estate took place.

 

Then, in 1940, St Bride's fell victim once again to flames as German incendiary bombs reduced Wren's architectural jewel to a roofless shell. This time 17 years elapsed before rebuilding was completed, although a series of important excavations in 1953 amid the skeletal ruins, led by the medieval archaeologist Professor W. F. Grimes, came up with extraordinary results, uncovering the foundations of all six previous churches on the site.

 

Not only the nation, but the Christian world as a whole, was fascinated by the discovery.

 

Historians and religious scholars had always accepted that there had been a site of Christian worship alongside the Fleet River and close to the Lud Gate, now known as Ludgate Circus, in the heart of the ancient City of London, for about 1,000 years.

 

When the Romans established Londinium following the invasion under the emperor Claudius in 43 AD, they dug a mysterious extra-mural ditch on the site of the future church and built a house, which seems likely to have been one of the earliest sites of worship. A Roman pavement can be seen to this day on display in the much-restored crypts of the church.

 

More than four centuries were to pass before the name of St Bride became associated with the site. But that association was to last throughout subsequent recorded history.

 

Born in 453 AD, shortly after St Patrick, Bride (or St Brigid) was the daughter of a prince and a druidic slave. As a teenager with an overwhelming desire to do good to others, she gave away so many of her father's possessions - daily necessities such as milk and flour, but also jewellery and swords - that he eventually let her follow her calling and enter the religious life. In 470, she and seven other nuns founded a convent in Kildare which developed into a centre of learning and spirituality, famed for its illuminated manuscripts such as the Book of Kildare.

 

According to legend, when Bride received her blessing as abbess it was inadvertently read to her as the rite of consecration as a bishop, which could not then be rescinded. Thus Bride and her successor abbesses had authority equal to that of a bishop for the following seven centuries.

 

She was renowned throughout Christian Europe for her holiness and common sense, and was regarded as a saint during her lifetime. Ironically, in view of the part that flames were later to play in the story of the church, she shared her name with the pagan goddess of fire, who had been noted for her music, her craftsmanship and her poetry - all qualities that have been manifested in and around St Bride's over numerous generations.

 

A line from a poem attributed to her - "I long for a great lake of ale" - was also an ironic harbinger of one of the Fleet Street's preoccupations in later years.

 

She died on 1st February 525 and was buried with the remains of Ireland's two other patron saints - Patrick and Columba. This date continues to be celebrated as the Feast of St Bride.

 

In the early sixth century the first stone-walled church was built here, founded either by St Bride in person or by Celtic monks who had formed a community in London. It was rebuilt many times over the following centuries, with notable structures including those of the Middle Saxons and the Normans.

 

This period in history was characterised by the urbanisation of Europe, military expansion, and intellectual revival, aided by the conversion of the raiding Scandinavians to Christianity. The 11th, 12th and 13th centuries saw a large increase in London's population - from less than 15,000 to over 80,000.

 

By the year 1200 Britain's effective capital city was Westminster, then a small town up-river from the City of London, where the royal treasury and financial records were stored.

 

St Bride's was the first church encountered between London and Westminster. This accident of geography gave it considerable importance; in 1205, the Curia Regis, a council of landowners and ecclesiastics charged with providing legislative advice to King John, and a predecessor to today's parliament, was held in the church. St Bride's influence and its numbers of parishioners grew substantially during the medieval period. From the 13th century onwards London developed through two different seats of power and influence: Westminster became the royal capital and centre of government, while the City of London became the centre of commerce and trade - a distinction evident to this day.

 

The area between them eventually became entirely urbanised by the end of the 16th century, and it was at the beginning of that century that St Bride's developed its first links with one of the future cornerstones of British society which were to constitute its most enduring claim to fame.

 

In the year 1500 the church had impressive neighbours - the many members of the clergy who were unable to afford the high cost of living in the very centre of the medieval city, where there was greater protection from thieves. However, they possessed their own powerful insurance against burglars - the fear of excommunication, which freed them to live outside.

 

So while rich merchants huddled together in the centre for safety, the area around St. Bride's became a haven for the eminent divines who were involved in national life. Salisbury Square, Peterborough Court and Ely Place are among names which have come down through history to remind us of great houses in the vicinity.

 

Since the clergy possessed almost a monopoly of literacy in those days, they were the printers' best customers. Thus Fleet Street became the cradle of the transformation of the medieval art and mystery of printing into the most influential industry man had yet known.

 

In the early 1470s, William Caxton had learnt the recently-invented technique of printing in Cologne. He returned to London in 1476 and set up a press by Westminster Abbey. In all, he printed about 100 books, some 20 of which were translated from French or Dutch, on subjects that included history and geography, the lives of saints, fables, and instructional books (for example, on good manners and learning French). His output also included most of the works of Chaucer.

 

As a well-to-do cloth merchant, Caxton had no need to make his press commercially viable. But after he died in 1491, his apprentice Wynkyn de Worde, who acquired that press, was in different circumstances. Having no other income, printing was his livelihood. So he followed commercial principles and took his goods to the buyer, setting up England's first printing press with moveable type in the churchyard of St Bride's in 1501.

 

It was a period in history when churchyards were hives of activity, boasting inns, taverns and commercial premises, and Fleet Street proved the perfect place for de Worde's new enterprise.

 

The publishers of playwrights and poets soon set up competing presses in other local churchyards, and the connection between St Bride's and world of printing and journalism was cemented. Wynkyn de Worde was buried in the church in 1535.

 

By the 17th century Fleet Street had become an irresistible attraction for the great writers and diarists of the day. A trio of Johns - Milton, Dryden and Evelyn - lived in the vicinity; Samuel Pepys was baptised at St Bride's, and Richard Lovelace buried there.

 

But then, in the space of 16 terrible months, it all changed.

 

St Bride's long connections with the colonies in America began when the parents of Virginia Dare, the first child born to English emigrants to North Carolina in August 1585, were married at the church. The event is commemorated in a touching bust of a little girl which can be found by the font in the south-west corner of the church.

 

One of the most striking features of today's St. Bride's also owes its inspiration to the church's American links. The great canopied oak reredos which enshrines the church altar is a memorial to the Pilgrim Fathers. This connection was made 35 years after Virginia Dare's birth when Edward Winslow (1595-1655) became one of the leaders of the Mayflower expedition in 1620. Winslow, who was three times elected governor of Plymouth, Massachusetts, had served as a boy apprentice in Fleet Street and would have known St Bride's well. His parents were also married there.

 

At the same time, St. Bride's parish was busily helping to populate yet another English colony. One hundred girls and boys from the Bridewell Hospital orphanage were sent to Virginia in 1619. The project was so successful that the governor requested 100 more. All the youngsters received grants of land on coming of age.

 

The Great Plague is believed to have first struck the docklands of London in April 1665, and by 6th June the parish of St Bride's was officially notified of an outbreak within its boundaries. It was also known as "the Poore's Plague," and the parish suffered terribly because of the large number of manual workers.

 

The court of Charles II, together with lawyers, merchants and doctors, fled the city, but the poor could not. St Bride's vicar, the Revd Richard Peirson, remained to witness the devastation to his parish community, including the deaths of his churchwardens.

 

Searchers of the Dead, usually old women, were paid to go out and inspect a corpse to determine cause of death. They were often bribed not to diagnose bubonic plague, as the entire household of a victim had to be locked in for 40 days, which normally resulted in all their deaths. Terrified residents sniffed nosegays to ward off malodorous airs which were thought to carry the infection. Funeral bells tolled constantly.

 

The parish distributed relief to stricken families. Watchmen were paid to guard locked houses and attend to the wants of those within. Nurses were dispatched to attend the sick. Two "bearers" were paid to carry corpses to the plague pits. The cost of all of this was partly reclaimed by the "brokers of the dead" who seized the property left in infected houses. So much was gathered that St Bride's had to rent a storehouse.

 

Many thousands of dogs and cats were culled, as they were believed to spread the pestilence. Flea-infested rats (the real culprits) were thus freed of predators, and proliferated.

 

In all the plague cost the parish of St Bride's some £581. The human cost was far worse: 2,111 people died in the parish in that fateful year. London lost 100,000, or 20% of its inhabitants.

 

Plague victims continued to die in smaller numbers until autumn the following year - which proved to be the very moment the City was consumed, literally, by a second dreadful tribulation on the heels of the first.

 

After a summer of drought, the Great Fire of London began on Sunday 2nd September 1666, and very soon the worried residents of the parish were watching in growing alarm before being put to flight two days later as the advancing flames leapt the narrow alleyways to ignite wooden houses and the often-illegal businesses many of them contained.

 

St Bride's was equipped with its own fire engine, but had failed to keep the machine "scoured, oyled and trimmed." Soldiers destroyed houses about Fleet Bridge in the vain hope that the Fleet River might stay the advance of the flames. But the relentless east wind drove the fire on: one onlooker described how it "rushed like a torrent down Ludgate Hill."

 

On Friday, Samuel Pepys made this entry in his diary:

 

September 7. - Up by five o'clock; and blessed be God!, find all well; and by water to Paul's Wharfe. Walked thence, and saw all the towne burned; and a miserable sight of Paul's church, with all the roof fallen, and the body of the quire fallen into St Fayth's; Paul's School also, Ludgate and Fleete-street, my father's house (in Salisbury Court) and the church (St Bride's), and a good part of the Temple the like.

 

Two weeks before the conflagration, a new vicar had been inducted at St Bride's. The hapless Paul Boston was to possess a church for no longer than those two weeks of his tenure, though in his will he left it £50; the silver gilt vessels bought with that bequest remain prized possessions today.

 

The destruction of the medieval St Bride's was so complete that no attempt was made to use the ruins for service, as was done at St Paul's and elsewhere. So, the big question was: would St Bride's be rebuilt?

 

In 1671 the churchwardens of St Bride's took Mr Christopher Wren (Surveyor General and Principal Architect for rebuilding the City) to dinner at the Globe Tavern. It would take another year before they could convince him of their cause, but their persistence meant that St Bride's was one of the first post-fire churches to be opened.

 

The blaze had destroyed 87 City churches. Despite Wren's belief that only 39 were necessary in such a small area, St Bride's was among the 51 to be rebuilt. The £500 required as a deposit by Guildhall to get things under way was raised in a month - a remarkable effort, given that most of the parishioners had lost homes and businesses in the disaster. Nor was this the end to the financial demands, as money remained tight. But a combination of Coal Dues, donations and loans eventually met the building's cost of £11,430 5s. 11d.

 

Joshua Marshall was the main contractor for the works. A parishioner and master mason to the king, like his father before him, Marshall was a wise choice. He also worked with Wren on Temple Bar and the Monument, while one of his assistants was the young Nicholas Hawksmoor, who was to become a renowned architect himself.

 

As today, the main material for the church was Portland stone. By September 1672, within a year of starting, the walls had reached the upper part of the cornice. The speed of progress was partly ascribed to the fact that the workmen had a hostel by the church, the Old Bell Tavern, built for them by Wren. By 1674 the main structural work was complete, and a year later the church finally reopened for worship on Sunday 19th December 1675.

 

Though it was open, it was not completed; most notably, the tower remained unfinished. In 1682 the churchwardens again approached Wren, this time about building the steeple. Work did not begin until 1701, and took two years to complete. At 234ft it was Wren's highest steeple, although after it was damaged by lightning in 1764 it was reduced to 226ft during more rebuilding.

 

Much has been written about the steeple, the most romantic tale of which is surely that of William Rich, apprenticed to a baker near Ludgate Circus. He fell in love with his master's daughter and, when he set up his own business at the end of his apprenticeship, won her father's approval for her hand in marriage.

 

Rich wished to create a spectacular cake for the wedding feast, but was unsure how, until one day he looked up at the steeple of the church in which the marriage was to be held, and inspiration hit him: a cake in layers, tiered, and diminishing as it rose. Thus began the tradition of the tiered wedding cake.

 

The year before the steeple was finished, the Daily Courant became the first regular daily newspaper to be printed in the United Kingdom, published on 11th March 1702 by Elizabeth Mallet from rooms above the White Hart pub in Fleet Street. A brass plaque to mark the 300th anniversary of this first edition was unveiled by the Prince of Wales at a special service in St Bride's on 11th March 2002.

 

Publishers and newspapers now began to spring up with some urgency; of the national papers that are still in existence, the Daily Universal Register (now The Times) was first published in 1785, and The Observer became the world's first Sunday newspaper in 1791.

 

Many renowned writers tried their hand - Daniel Defoe, for instance, founded the Daily Post.

 

As numerous regional and provincial titles were founded, they set up London offices in and around St Bride's, as did the first news agencies.

 

The vast expansion of the printing industry in Fleet Street also drew interest from intellectuals, actors and artists. Anyone who was anyone - Samuel Johnson, James Boswell, David Garrick, Samuel Richardson, Joshua Reynolds, William Hogarth, William Wordsworth and John Keats - would want to be seen in the coffee houses and inns around St Bride's.

 

Guardian (1821)

Daily Mail (1896)

Sunday Times (1822)

Daily Express (1900)

News of the World (1843)

Daily Mirror (1903)

Daily Telegraph (1855)

Sunday Mirror (1915)

The People (1881)

Sunday Express (1918)

Financial Times (1888)

Morning Star (1930)

 

With the coming of the 20th century their combined circulations were immense, and the power of press barons such as Northcliffe, Kemsley, Beaverbrook, Astor and Rothermere propelled Fleet Street into the very heart of the British power structure, often shaping news as well as reporting it.

 

Then came World War II and, in 1940, Fleet Street watched helplessly as the news exploded right at its doorstep. For St Bride's, by now enshrined as the parish church of journalism, it once again brought catastrophe.

 

The Blitz began in the early autumn as the Germans, their plan for a summer invasion thwarted, sought instead to bomb Britain's cities into submission. Guildsman John Colley, now in his 80s, recalls what it was like to be in a Grub Street at war:

 

"The nightly bombing to which London was being subjected for those last four months of 1940 made little apparent difference to the way Fleet Street went about its business. The business of producing tomorrow's newspapers was so all-consuming that there was little time to think about what was going on above; and that was true not only of those working in the great buildings housing the Nationals, but also in the basements of the scores of London offices of the big provincial papers.

 

"That isn't to say there weren't moments of sheer terror when the ominous whistle of a bomb you knew was going to land close by could be heard, but once the immediate danger was over you just got on with the job that had to be done. It was such a familiar situation that one became hardened to it.

 

"Outside, Fleet Street appeared to be its usual nightly hive of activity and got on with its job as much as circumstances would allow. News vans still dashed off to the London termini; couriers brought Government hand-outs from the Ministry of Information; messengers from picture and news agencies dodged the shrapnel and bombs as they darted from office to office; even the odd tramp made his nightly call to cadge a cuppa.

 

"With most of the newspapers gathered together in an area all around Fleet Street, the agencies - PA, Reuters, Ex Tel and the rest - sent the majority of their news through cables strung across the Street to tape machines in subscribing offices, all liable to disruption by bomb and blast - which brought more messengers delivering a hand service.

 

"Night life in the Street at that time centred around the all-night cafes - and there were many of them, all doing good business serving sustaining tea and snacks. Pubs, of course, had to keep to licensing hours, but Fleet Street's two Black and White all-night milk bars did a roaring trade serving hot soup and a great variety of milk shakes.

 

"Occasionally a fire-fighting party of three dodged from building to building, one carrying a bucket of water, one a stirrup pump and the third a hose on their way to put out an incendiary fire. Air Raid Precaution wardens made their nightly calls and public service vehicles on their way to or from an incident were up and down the Street throughout the night. All in all, there was hardly a quiet moment, either on the ground or up above."

 

Two days before this grim year ended, St Bride's luck ran out. On the night of Sunday 29th December the Luftwaffe targeted the City of London in a concentrated incendiary raid. Some 1400 fires were started; eight of Wren's churches were destroyed. St Bride's was one of them.

 

The church, locked after Evensong, suffered incendiary hits which pierced the roof, and the seasoned timbers proved perfect tinder. Some treasures were rescued from the flames, including the medieval gospel lectern which had survived the Great Fire of 1666. But most was destroyed. The famous bells melted and fell, but the steeple, despite having flames pouring from it, prevailed - testament to Wren's design.

 

Up Ludgate Hill, the Times reported, "the dome of St Paul's seemed to ride the sea of fire like a great ship lifting above the smoke and flames the inviolable ensign of the golden cross."

 

But all that lay ahead for St Bride's were years of ruined desolation until the war ended and the church's administrators were able to address the question that had faced their predecessors in 1666: How do we rebuild both the church and its congregation?

 

By the time the austere 1950s came round, services were being held on the site, some in the open air and others in the crypt chapel.

 

Rebuilding work was scheduled for 1954, thanks to the restoration fund which was a tribute to the dedication of the Rector, Revd Cyril Armitage. The chosen architect, Godfrey Allen, an authority on Wren, studied the master's original plans and produced a faithful recreation. He kept the clear glass Wren loved, but did not rebuild the galleries, instead laying out the stalls in collegiate style.

 

With rebuilding came excavation as well as restoration. In addition to the astonishing discovery of Roman remains on the site in 1953, the crypts were found to contain thousands of human remains, many of them victims of the Great Plague of 1665 and the cholera epidemic of 1854. The latter claimed 10,000 lives in the City of London, and, as a result, Parliament decreed that there should be no more burials in the City. The crypts were sealed and forgotten about.

 

One hundred years later the excavations of Professor F.W. Grimes resulted in St. Bride's possessing two almost unique series of human remains. One includes well over 200 skeletons identified by their sex and age at the time of death, thus forming a very important source of research into forensic and other forms of medicine.

 

The other series, which is estimated by some to include nearly 7,000 human remains, is in a medieval charnel house where all the bones were found in categories - thigh bone with thigh bone and so on - and laid in chequer-board pattern. This is probably evidence of a land shortage in London even that many centuries ago.

 

On 19th December 1957, on the anniversary of Wren's church being opened for worship 282 years previously, St Bride's was rededicated in the presence of the Queen and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

 

In 1962, Dewi Morgan inherited the Rector's mantle from Cyril Armitage, and throughout the 1960s and 1970s St Bride's continued its ministry to the newspaper world, hosting baptisms, weddings and memorial services as well as offering regular weekday worship for those working in the area.

 

In 1967 the church was packed for a service to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Press Association, whose offices were next door. The glass doors at the West End were a gift to mark the occasion. Through the generosity of Sir Max Aitken, Lord Beaverbrook's heir, a permanent exhibition was mounted in the crypt chronicling the history of the site and of Fleet Street, and was renewed with the help of Reuters and the Museum of London 25 years later.

 

By the early 1980s, however, all was not well in the newspaper business. For years Fleet Street had been living with chaotic industrial relations. Proprietors found the so-called Spanish practices of the print unions intolerable, while the workers rejected management attempts to introduce flexible working, no-strike clauses, new technology, and an end to the closed shop.

 

National newspapers continued to be produced by the labour-intensive linotype hot-metal method, rather than being composed electronically. Eddie Shah's regional Messenger Group had, however, benefited from the Conservative government's trade union legislation which allowed employers to de-recognise unions, enabling Shah to use an alternative workforce and new technology. Journalists could input copy directly, sweeping away arcane craft-union manning levels and cutting costs dramatically.

 

On 24th January 1986, some 6,000 newspaper workers went on strike after the breakdown of negotiations with Rupert Murdoch's News International, parent of Times Newspapers and News Group Newspapers. They were unaware that Murdoch had built and clandestinely equipped a new-technology printing plant in Wapping. When they struck, he moved his operation overnight.

 

Within months the printing dinosaur that was Fleet Street was dead. By 1989 all the national newspapers had decamped as other proprietors followed Murdoch's lead. Computers had consigned Wynkyn de Worde's revolution to history.

 

Many people at that time feared that the diaspora of the Fourth Estate might result in St Bride's losing its title of the cathedral of Fleet Street. Some even considered that the great church would lose its parishioners. Might Rupert Murdoch's vision bring about what pestilence, fire and the Luftwaffe had failed to achieve?

 

Fortunately for St Bride's, the national newspapers scattered in every direction rather than congregating in one locality, so that "Fleet Street" remains to this day a generic term for the nation's press, and the church retains its pre-eminent position in the journalistic and media constituency.

 

During the Middle East hostage crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s, it hosted all-night vigils for John McCarthy and others, and on their release in 1991 a grand service of celebration was held.

 

We have commemorated John Schofield, BBC reporter killed in Croatia in 1995; Reuters' Kerem Lawton, killed in Kosovo; Channel 4's Gaby Rado and ITN's Terry Lloyd (Iraq); BBC cameraman Simon Cumbers, murdered by Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia; and the Wall Street Journal's Daniel Pearl, murdered by Al Qaeda in Pakistan in 2002.

 

In 2003 we unveiled a memorial to all journalists who died in Iraq, and in 2006 commemorated James Brolan and Paul Douglas, CBS journalists killed in Baghdad, demonstrating St Bride's unique position in journalism throughout the world. When, earlier this year, The Times' driver in Iraq, Yasser, was killed in a bomb blast in Baghdad, it was to St Bride's that senior News International staff came to light a candle.

 

The Journalists' Altar in the North East corner also carries prayers for reporters who are missing or who have lost their lives in current conflicts.

 

Newspaper proprietors such as Lord Burnham, Lord Rothermere and Lord Hartwell have been remembered in memorial services. So have editors like Sir Edward Pickering, David Astor, Stewart Steven and Louis Kirby; the Guardian's famed woman's editor Mary Stott; the D-Day war reporter Doon Campbell; BBC figures such as Godfrey Talbot, Louis MacMillan and Leonard Miall; and Fiona MacPherson of Good Housekeeping magazine.

 

Strong and successful efforts were made by the former Rector, Canon John Oates, to bring into the church's embrace the new occupants of the now-silent newspaper offices - chiefly lawyers, accountants and investment bankers. Twenty years after the last newspaper left, the large number of memorials and carol services we hold every year are evenly split between the "old" and the "new" Fleet Street.

 

The church today has a light, open feel of symmetry; the floor is paved with black marble from Belgium and white from Italy. This is very much a living church in a modern world.

 

As a result of a successful funding appeal, new side aisles constructed of English and European oak were installed in 2004, offering significantly better views for large congregations while preserving the beautiful character of the church.

 

Out of the inferno of that hellish night in December 1940 has emerged something beautiful, which remains the spiritual heart both of the parish of St Bride's and of the journalistic community in Britain and throughout the world.

 

The church retains strong City links, has built up an enviable musical reputation, and is home to thriving Sunday congregations, as well as being a major tourist landmark. Set back from Fleet Street, only yards from the tremendous bustle of Ludgate Circus, yet seemingly existing in its own peaceful space, St Bride's is one of the most historic, vibrant and beautiful churches to be found anywhere in London.

 

www.stbrides.com/history/index.html

On behalf of a some model, at the request of the IMG model agency, AFD groups immediately cease and refrain from any unauthorized use and sale of the name, image and likeness of the model, which is an intrusion into inviolability, discredit, humiliation, embarrassment and possibly irreparable harm to the commercial interests of the model.

A few years ago, early on Saturday morning, I tried to enter St Dunstan's, with no luck. It was locked fast.

 

Which was a shame, as it looked a very interesting church from the outside, and with its location, just outside the city gate on the crossing of two main roads.

 

Anyway, I logged this away in my meory banks, detirmed to go back one day. And for a change this Heritage Weekend, we returned to Canterbury not once, but twice. And on the second day was rewarded with entry to three of the city churches.

 

St Dunstan is most famous for being the final resting place of Sir Thomas More's head, in the family tomb of his wife. There is fine glass commemorating this.

 

Some minor work is being carried out at the rear of the church, so a return will be needed to see the full restored church.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Dedicated to a former Archbishop of Canterbury, St Dunstan's stands outside the city walls. There is structural evidence of the Norman period, but most of the church is fourteenth century. The west tower dates from this time and is very oddly proportioned - about twice the height that its width can really cope with. The south chapel is constructed of brick and was completed in the early sixteenth century. It contains monuments to the More family and is the burial place of St. Thomas More's head, - brought here by his daughter after his execution. The family home stood opposite the church where its brick gateway may still be seen. There are two twentieth-century windows of note in the chapel, by Lawrence Lee and John Hayward.

  

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Canterbury+2

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

St. Dunstan's is an Anglican church in Canterbury, Kent, at the junction of London Road and Whitstable Road. It is dedicated to St. Dunstan (909-988) and gives its name to the part of the city on the left bank of the River Stour. The parish has been held in plurality with others nearby at different times, in a way that is confusing and difficult to document. In 2010 the parish was joined with the parishes of the City Centre Parish in a new pastoral grouping, City Centre with St. Dunstan.

 

The church dates from the 11th century and is a grade I listed building. It was restored in 1878-80 by church architect Ewan Christian. Its association with the deaths of Thomas Becket and Thomas More make it a place of pilgrimage.

 

Dunstan was Archbishop of Canterbury from 960 to 978 and was canonised soon after his death, becoming the favourite saint of the English until he was supplanted by Thomas Becket.[2] He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral but his tomb was destroyed during the Reformation.

 

In 1174, when Henry II began his penitential pilgrimage in reparation for the murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket, he changed his clothing into sackcloth at St. Dunstan’s Church and began his pilgrimage from here to Thomas Becket's tomb at Canterbury Cathedral on foot.

 

His daughter Margaret secured the release of Thomas More's head from its spike on London Bridge and brought it back to the family tomb of her husband William Roper.[4] The Roper family lived nearby off what is now St Dunstan's Street. What remains of their home is called Roper Gate, marked with a commemorative plaque, it is all that survives of Place House. The Roper family vault is located underneath the Nicholas Chapel, to the right of the church's main altar. It was sealed in recent years, according to Anglican tradition. A large stone slab marks its location to the immediate left of the chapel's altar. Three impressive stained glass windows line the chapel, the one behind the altar depicts in brilliant detail the major events and symbols in the life of the Saint. Another of the windows commemorates the visit of Pope John Paul II to Canterbury to pray with the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury at the site of the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. The window displays the arms of the Archbishop's diocese and the Pope. Plaques mounted on the walls explain the veracity of the relic of the Saint's head, the sealing of the vault which contains it, and the life of the Saint, including a prayer he wrote.

  

St Dunstan’s has six bells, hung for change ringing in the English style, the heaviest weighing 13cwt (approx. 675 kg). Due to the unusual narrowness of the belfry, the bells are hung in a two-tier frame.

 

The fifth bell of the ring is one of the oldest Christian church bells in the world, believed to have been cast in 1325 by William le Belyetere, making it nearly 690 years old as of 2014 [5]

 

The bells were removed from the tower in 1935 so that a concrete structural beam could be fitted to the tower. At this time the bells were retuned by the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, and rehung in the present frame in 1936.

 

The bells are rung on Friday evenings for practice, and Sunday mornings for the service, by the St Dunstan’s Society of Change Ringers.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Dunstan%27s,_Canterbury

 

----------------------------------------------

 

ir Thomas More (/ˈmɔːr/; 7 February 1478 – 6 July 1535), venerated by Roman Catholics as Saint Thomas More,[1][2] was an English lawyer, social philosopher, author, statesman and noted Renaissance humanist. He was also a councillor to Henry VIII, and Lord High Chancellor of England from October 1529 to 16 May 1532.[3]

 

More opposed the Protestant Reformation, in particular the theology of Martin Luther and William Tyndale. He also wrote Utopia, published in 1516, about the political system of an imaginary ideal island nation. More opposed the King's separation from the Catholic Church, refusing to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church of England and the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. After refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy, he was convicted of treason and beheaded. Ahead of his execution, he was reported saying his famous words: "I die the King's good servant, but God's first."

 

Pope Pius XI canonised More in 1935 as a martyr. Pope John Paul II in 2000 declared him the "heavenly Patron of Statesmen and Politicians."[4] Since 1980, the Church of England has remembered More liturgically as a Reformation martyr.[5] The Soviet Union honoured him for the 'Communistic' attitude toward property rights expressed in Utopia.

 

Born in Milk Street in London, on February 7, 1478, Thomas More was the son of Sir John More,[9] a successful lawyer and later judge, and his wife Agnes (née Graunger). More was educated at St Anthony's School, then considered one of London's finest schools.[10] From 1490 to 1492, More served John Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor of England, as a household page.[11]:xvi Morton enthusiastically supported the "New Learning" (now called the Renaissance), and thought highly of the young More. Believing that More had great potential, Morton nominated him for a place at the University of Oxford (either in St. Mary's Hall or Canterbury College, both now gone).[12]:38

 

More began his studies at Oxford in 1492, and received a classical education. Studying under Thomas Linacre and William Grocyn, he became proficient in both Latin and Greek. More left Oxford after only two years—at his father's insistence—to begin legal training in London at New Inn, one of the Inns of Chancery.[11]:xvii[13] In 1496, More became a student at Lincoln's Inn, one of the Inns of Court, where he remained until 1502, when he was called to the Bar.

 

According to his friend, theologian Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, More once seriously contemplated abandoning his legal career to become a monk.[14][15] Between 1503 and 1504 More lived near the Carthusian monastery outside the walls of London and joined in the monks' spiritual exercises. Although he deeply admired their piety, More ultimately decided to remain a layman, standing for election to Parliament in 1504 and marrying the following year.[11]:xxi

 

In spite of his choice to pursue a secular career, More continued ascetical practices for the rest of his life, such as wearing a hair shirt next to his skin and occasionally engaging in flagellation.[11]:xxi A tradition of the Third Order of Saint Francis honours More as a member of that Order on their calendar of saints.

 

More married Jane Colt in 1505.[12]:118 She was 5 years younger than her husband, quiet and good-natured.[12]:119 Erasmus reported that More wanted to give his young wife a better education than she had previously received at home, and tutored her in music and literature.[12]:119 The couple had four children before Jane died in 1511: Margaret, Elizabeth, Cicely, and John.[12]:132

 

Going "against friends' advice and common custom," within thirty days More had married one of the many eligible women among his wide circle of friends.[17] He certainly expected a mother to take care of his little children and, as the view of his time considered marriage as an "economic union",[18] he chose a rich widow, Alice Harpur Middleton.[19] More is regarded not getting remarried for sexual pleasure, since Alice is much older than himself, and their marriage possibly had not been consummated.[18] The speed of the marriage was so unusual that More had to get a dispensation of the banns, which, due to his good public reputation, he easily obtained.[17] Alice More lacked Jane's docility; More's friend Andrew Ammonius derided Alice as a "hook-nosed harpy."[20] Erasmus, however, called their marriage happy.[12]:144

 

More had no children from his second marriage, although he raised Alice's daughter from her previous marriage as his own. More also became the guardian of two young girls: Anne Cresacre would eventually marry his son, John More;[12]:146 and Margaret Giggs (later Clement) would be the only member of his family to witness his execution (she died on the 35th anniversary of that execution, and her daughter married More's nephew William Rastell). An affectionate father, More wrote letters to his children whenever he was away on legal or government business, and encouraged them to write to him often.[12]:150[21]:xiv

 

More insisted upon giving his daughters the same classical education as his son, a highly unusual attitude at the time.[12]:146–47 His eldest daughter, Margaret, attracted much admiration for her erudition, especially her fluency in Greek and Latin.[12]:147 More told his daughter of his pride in her academic accomplishment in September 1522, after he showed the bishop a letter she had written:

 

When he saw from the signature that it was the letter of a lady, his surprise led him to read it more eagerly … he said he would never have believed it to be your work unless I had assured him of the fact, and he began to praise it in the highest terms … for its pure Latinity, its correctness, its erudition, and its expressions of tender affection. He took out at once from his pocket a portague [A Portuguese gold coin] … to send to you as a pledge and token of his good will towards you.[21]:152

 

More's decision to educate his daughters set an example for other noble families. Even Erasmus became much more favourable once he witnessed their accomplishments.[12]:149

 

A portrait of More and his family was painted by Holbein, but it was lost in a fire in the 18th century. More's grandson commissioned a copy, two versions of which survive.

 

In 1504 More was elected to Parliament to represent Great Yarmouth, and in 1510 began representing London.[22]

 

From 1510, More served as one of the two undersheriffs of the City of London, a position of considerable responsibility in which he earned a reputation as an honest and effective public servant. More became Master of Requests in 1514,[23] the same year in which he was appointed as a Privy Counsellor.[24] After undertaking a diplomatic mission to the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, accompanying Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal Archbishop of York, to Calais and Bruges, More was knighted and made under-treasurer of the Exchequer in 1521.[24]

 

As secretary and personal adviser to King Henry VIII, More became increasingly influential: welcoming foreign diplomats, drafting official documents, and serving as a liaison between the King and Lord Chancellor Wolsey. More later served as High Steward for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.

 

In 1523 More was elected as knight of the shire (MP) for Middlesex and, on Wolsey's recommendation, the House of Commons elected More its Speaker.[24] In 1525 More became Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, with executive and judicial responsibilities over much of northern England.

 

More supported the Catholic Church and saw the Protestant Reformation as heresy, a threat to the unity of both church and society. More believed in the theology, polemics, and ecclesiastical laws of the church, and "heard Luther's call to destroy the Catholic Church as a call to war."[25]

 

His early actions against the Reformation included aiding Wolsey in preventing Lutheran books from being imported into England, spying on and investigating suspected Protestants, especially publishers, and arresting anyone holding in his possession, transporting, or selling the books of the Protestant Reformation. More vigorously suppressed the travelling country ministers who used Tyndale's English translation of the New Testament.[citation needed] It contained controversial translations of certain words; for example, Tyndale used "senior" and "elder" rather than "priest" for the Greek "presbyteros", and some of the marginal glosses challenged Catholic doctrine.[26] It was during this time that most of his literary polemics appeared.

 

Rumours circulated during and after More's lifetime regarding ill-treatment of heretics during his time as Lord Chancellor. The popular anti-Catholic polemicist John Foxe, who "placed Protestant sufferings against the background of... the Antichrist",[27] was instrumental in publicising accusations of torture in his famous Book of Martyrs, claiming that More had often personally used violence or torture while interrogating heretics. Later authors such as Brian Moynahan and Michael Farris cite Foxe when repeating these allegations.[28] More himself denied these allegations:

 

Stories of a similar nature were current even in More's lifetime and he denied them forcefully. He admitted that he did imprison heretics in his house – 'theyr sure kepynge' – he called it – but he utterly rejected claims of torture and whipping... 'so helpe me God.'[12]:298

 

However, More writes in his "Apology" (1533) that he only applied corporal punishment to two heretics: a child who was caned in front of his family for heresy regarding the Eucharist, and a "feeble-minded" man who was whipped for disrupting prayers.[29]:404 During More's chancellorship, six people were burned at the stake for heresy; they were Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbery, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.[12]:299–306 Moynahan has argued that More was influential in the burning of Tyndale, as More's agents had long pursued him, even though this took place over a year after his own death.[30] Burning at the stake had long been a standard punishment for heresy; about thirty burnings had taken place in the century before More's elevation to Chancellor, and burning continued to be used by both Catholics and Protestants during the religious upheaval of the following decades.[31] His biographer Peter Ackroyd notes that More explicitly "approved of Burning".[12]:298

 

John Tewkesbury was a London leather seller found guilty by Bishop of London John Stokesley[32] of harbouring banned books; he was sentenced to burning for refusing to recant. More declared: he "burned as there was neuer wretche I wene better worthy."[33]

 

Modern commentators are divided over More's religious actions as Chancellor. Some biographers, including Ackroyd, have taken a relatively tolerant view of More's campaign against Protestantism by placing his actions within the turbulent religious climate of the time. Others have been more critical, such as Richard Marius, an American scholar of the Reformation, believing that persecutions were a betrayal of More's earlier humanist convictions, including More's zealous and well-documented advocacy of extermination for Protestants.[29]:386–406

 

Some Protestants take a different view. In 1980, More was added to the Church of England's calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church, despite being a fierce opponent of the English Reformation that created the Church of England. He was added jointly with John Fisher, to be commemorated every 6 July (the date of More's execution) as "Thomas More, Scholar, and John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, Reformation Martyrs, 1535".[5] Pope John Paul II honoured him by making him patron saint of statesmen and politicians in October 2000, stating: "It can be said that he demonstrated in a singular way the value of a moral conscience... even if, in his actions against heretics, he reflected the limits of the culture of his time".

 

As the conflict over supremacy between the Papacy and the King reached its apogee, More continued to remain steadfast in supporting the supremacy of the Pope as Successor of Peter over that of the King of England. In 1530, More refused to sign a letter by the leading English churchmen and aristocrats asking Pope Clement VII to annul Henry's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, and also quarrelled with Henry VIII over the heresy laws. In 1531, Henry had isolated More by purging most clergy who supported the papal stance from senior positions in the church. Parliament's reinstatement of the charge of praemunire in 1529 had made it a crime to support in public or office the claim of any authority outside the realm (such as the Papacy) to have a legal jurisdiction superior to the King's. In 1531, a royal decree required the clergy to take an oath acknowledging the King as "Supreme Head" of the Church in England. As a layperson, More did not need to take the oath and the clergy, after some initial resistance, took the oath with the addition of the clause "as far as the law of Christ allows." However, More saw he could not render the support Henry expected from his Lord Chancellor for the policy the King was developing to support the annulment of his marriage with Catherine. In 1532 he petitioned the King to relieve him of his office, alleging failing health. Henry granted his request.

 

In 1533, More refused to attend the coronation of Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. Technically, this was not an act of treason, as More had written to Henry acknowledging Anne's queenship and expressing his desire for the King's happiness and the new Queen's health.[34] Despite this, his refusal to attend was widely interpreted as a snub against Anne, and Henry took action against him.

 

Shortly thereafter, More was charged with accepting bribes, but the charges had to be dismissed for lack of any evidence. In early 1534, More was accused of conspiring with the "Holy Maid of Kent," Elizabeth Barton, a nun who had prophesied against the king's annulment, but More was able to produce a letter in which he had instructed Barton not to interfere with state matters.[citation needed]

 

On 13 April 1534, More was asked to appear before a commission and swear his allegiance to the parliamentary Act of Succession. More accepted Parliament's right to declare Anne Boleyn the legitimate Queen of England, but, holding fast to the teaching of papal supremacy, he steadfastly refused to take the oath of supremacy of the Crown in the relationship between the kingdom and the church in England. More furthermore publicly refused to uphold Henry's annulment from Catherine. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, refused the oath along with More. The oath reads:[35]

 

...By reason whereof the Bishop of Rome and See Apostolic, contrary to the great and inviolable grants of jurisdictions given by God immediately to emperors, kings and princes in succession to their heirs, hath presumed in times past to invest who should please them to inherit in other men's kingdoms and dominions, which thing we your most humble subjects, both spiritual and temporal, do most abhor and detest...

 

With his refusal to support the King's annulment, More's enemies had enough evidence to have the King arrest him on treason. Four days later, Henry had More imprisoned in the Tower of London. There More prepared a devotional Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation. While More was imprisoned in the Tower, Thomas Cromwell made several visits, urging More to take the oath, which he continued to refuse.

 

On 1 July 1535, More was tried before a panel of judges that included the new Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas Audley, as well as Anne Boleyn's father, brother, and uncle. He was charged with high treason for denying the validity of the Act of Supremacy and was tried under the following section of the Treasons Act 1534:

 

If any person or persons, after the first day of February next coming, do maliciously wish, will or desire, by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king's most royal person, the queen's, or their heirs apparent, or to deprive them or any of them of their dignity, title, or name of their royal estates …

 

That then every such person and persons so offending … shall have and suffer such pains of death and other penalties, as is limited and accustomed in cases of high treason.[36]

 

More, relying on legal precedent and the maxim "qui tacet consentire videtur" (literally, who (is) silent is seen to consent), understood that he could not be convicted as long as he did not explicitly deny that the King was Supreme Head of the Church, and he therefore refused to answer all questions regarding his opinions on the subject.

 

Thomas Cromwell, at the time the most powerful of the King's advisors, brought forth the Solicitor General, Richard Rich, to testify that More had, in his presence, denied that the King was the legitimate head of the church. This testimony was characterised by More as being extremely dubious. Witnesses Richard Southwell and Mr. Palmer both denied having heard the details of the reported conversation, and as More himself pointed out:

 

Can it therefore seem likely to your Lordships, that I should in so weighty an Affair as this, act so unadvisedly, as to trust Mr. Rich, a Man I had always so mean an Opinion of, in reference to his Truth and Honesty, … that I should only impart to Mr. Rich the Secrets of my Conscience in respect to the King's Supremacy, the particular Secrets, and only Point about which I have been so long pressed to explain my self? which I never did, nor never would reveal; when the Act was once made, either to the King himself, or any of his Privy Councillors, as is well known to your Honours, who have been sent upon no other account at several times by his Majesty to me in the Tower. I refer it to your Judgments, my Lords, whether this can seem credible to any of your Lordships.

 

The jury took only fifteen minutes, however, to find More guilty.

 

After the jury's verdict was delivered and before his sentencing, More spoke freely of his belief that "no temporal man may be the head of the spirituality". He was sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered (the usual punishment for traitors who were not the nobility), but the King commuted this to execution by decapitation. The execution took place on 6 July 1535. When he came to mount the steps to the scaffold, he is widely quoted as saying (to the officials): "I pray you, I pray you, Mr Lieutenant, see me safe up and for my coming down, I can shift for myself"; while on the scaffold he declared that he died "the king's good servant, but God's first."

 

Another comment he is believed to have made to the executioner is that his beard was completely innocent of any crime, and did not deserve the axe; he then positioned his beard so that it would not be harmed.[39] More asked that his foster/adopted daughter Margaret Clement (née Giggs) be given his headless corpse to bury.[40] She was the only member of his family to witness his execution. He was buried at the Tower of London, in the chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in an unmarked grave. His head was fixed upon a pike over London Bridge for a month, according to the normal custom for traitors. His daughter Margaret (Meg) Roper rescued it, possibly by bribery, before it could be thrown in the River Thames.[citation needed]

 

The skull is believed to rest in the Roper Vault of St Dunstan's Church, Canterbury, though some researchers[who?] have claimed it might be within the tomb he erected for More in Chelsea Old Church (see below). The evidence,[clarification needed] however, seems to be in favour of its placement in St Dunstan's, with the remains of his daughter, Margaret Roper, and her husband's family, whose vault it was.[citation needed]

 

Among other surviving relics is his hair shirt, presented for safe keeping by Margaret Clement.[41] This was long in the custody of the community of Augustinian canonesses who until 1983 lived at the convent at Abbotskerswell Priory, Devon. It is now preserved at Syon Abbey, near South Brent.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

This is the site of the martyrdom of the Archbishop of Canterbury, St Thomas Becket.

 

"Thomas Becket was born in 1118 of a merchant family. He studied in London and Paris, entered the service of Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury, became Lord Chancellor under King Henry II in 1155, and in 1162 Archbishop of Canterbury. Till then a submissive courtier, he now initiated a fearless struggle against the king for the freedom of the Church and the inviolability of ecclesiastical property, occasioning his imprisonment, exile, and finally martyrdom (December 29, 1170). Canonization came quickly (1173); in 1539 King Henry VIII ordered his remains burned."

oublies49.over-blog.com/2015/01/sinistre-villa.html

Here is my virtual tour through the city - portfotolio.net/jup3nep/album/72157631887823501

 

Harem (pronounced [haˈɾem], Turkish, from Arabic: حرم‎ ḥaram "forbidden place; sacrosanct, sanctum", related to حريم ḥarīm, "a sacred inviolable place; female members of the family" and حرام ḥarām, "forbidden; sacred") refers to the sphere of women in what is usually a polygynous household and their enclosed quarters which are forbidden to men. It originated in the Near East and is typically associated in the Western world with the Ottoman Empire. For the South Asian equivalent, see purdah and zenana.

 

The word harem is strictly applicable to Muslim households only, but the system was common, more or less, to most ancient Oriental communities, especially where polygamy was permitted.

 

The Imperial Harem of the Ottoman sultan, which was also called seraglio in the West, typically housed several dozen women, including wives. It also housed the Sultan's mother, daughters and other female relatives, as well as eunuchs and slave servant girls to serve the aforementioned women. During the later periods, the sons of the Sultan also lived in the Harem until they were 16 years old, when it was considered appropriate for them to appear in the public and administrative areas of the palace. The Topkapı Harem was, in some senses, merely the private living quarters of the Sultan and his family, within the palace complex. Some women of Ottoman harem, especially wives, mothers and sisters of sultans played very important political roles in Ottoman history, and in times it was said that the empire was ruled from harem. Hürrem Sultan (wife of Süleyman The Magnificent, mother of Selim II) and Kösem Sultan (mother of Murad IV) were the two most powerful women in Ottoman history.

 

Moulay Ismail, Alaouite sultan of Morocco from 1672 to 1727, is said to have fathered a total of 525 sons and 342 daughters by 1703 and achieved a 700th son in 1721. He had over 500 concubines.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harem

 

The Topkapı Palace (Turkish: Topkapı Sarayı or in Ottoman Turkish: طوپقپو سرايى) is a large palace in Istanbul, Turkey, that was the primary residence of the Ottoman Sultans for approximately 400 years (1465-1856) of their 624-year reign.

 

As well as a royal residence, the palace was a setting for state occasions and royal entertainments. It is now a major tourist attraction and contains important holy relics of the Muslim world, including Muhammed's cloak and sword. The Topkapı Palace is among the monuments contained within the "Historic Areas of Istanbul", which became a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1985, and is described in Criterion iv as "the best example[s] of ensembles of palaces [...] of the Ottoman period."

 

Construction began in 1459, ordered by Sultan Mehmed II, the conqueror of Byzantine Constantinople. The palace complex consists of four main courtyards and many smaller buildings. At its peak, the palace was home to as many as 4,000 people, and covered a large area with a long shoreline. The complex was expanded over the centuries, with major renovations after the 1509 earthquake and the 1665 fire. The palace contained mosques, a hospital, bakeries, and a mint. The name translates as "Cannon gate Palace" from a nearby gate which has since been destroyed.

 

From the end of the 17th century the Topkapı Palace gradually lost its importance as the Sultans preferred to spend more time in their new palaces along the Bosporus. In 1856, Sultan Abdül Mecid I decided to move the court to the newly built Dolmabahçe Palace, the first European-style palace in the city. Some functions, such as the imperial treasury, the library, and the mint were retained in the Topkapı Palace.

 

Following the end of the Ottoman Empire in 1921, the Topkapı Palace was transformed by a government decree dated April 3, 1924 into a museum of the imperial era. The Topkapı Palace Museum is administered by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. The palace complex has hundreds of rooms and chambers, but only the most important are accessible to the public today. The complex is guarded by officials of the ministry as well as armed guards of the Turkish military. The palace includes many fine examples of Ottoman architecture. It contains large collections of porcelain, robes, weapons, shields, armor, Ottoman miniatures, Islamic calligraphic manuscripts and murals, as well as a display of Ottoman treasures and jewelry.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topkap%C4%B1_Palace

  

“This Is Water: Some Thoughts, Delivered on a Significant Occasion, about Living a Compassionate Life” ―David Foster Wallace, 2009

 

“Because here's something else that's weird but true: in the day-to-day trenches of adult life, there is actually no such thing as atheism. There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship. And the compelling reason for maybe choosing some sort of god or spiritual-type thing to worship--be it JC or Allah, be it YHWH or the Wiccan Mother Goddess, or the Four Noble Truths, or some inviolable set of ethical principles--is that pretty much anything else you worship will eat you alive. If you worship money and things, if they are where you tap real meaning in life, then you will never have enough, never feel you have enough. It's the truth. Worship your body and beauty and sexual allure and you will always feel ugly. And when time and age start showing, you will die a million deaths before they finally grieve you. On one level, we all know this stuff already. It's been codified as myths, proverbs, clichés, epigrams, parables; the skeleton of every great story. The whole trick is keeping the truth up front in daily consciousness.

 

Worship power, you will end up feeling weak and afraid, and you will need ever more power over others to numb you to your own fear. Worship your intellect, being seen as smart, you will end up feeling stupid, a fraud, always on the verge of being found out. But the insidious thing about these forms of worship is not that they're evil or sinful, it's that they're unconscious. They are default settings.

 

They're the kind of worship you just gradually slip into, day after day, getting more and more selective about what you see and how you measure value without ever being fully aware that that's what you're doing.”

When people lay eyes on the Imerovigli Skaros they may think it's just another natural volcanic "sculpture". However, those familiar with the island's history know that up there, on this small piece of land, once stood an inviolable castle, with the public and private buildings of the island's medieval capital.

 

article horizontal

 

Skaros is the most important attraction in Imerovigli, an impressive rock seen also from Fira. The fortified settlement was presented for the first time in 1421 by the traveller and map maker Boundelmonti. Travellers of the 17th century report that its natural position rendered it impregnable to attacs. The only accurate surviving image of the Imerovigli Skaros is a pencil sketch belonging to Thomas Hope, housed at the Benaki Museum, Athens.

On top of the conic rock, one can see the fortified hub of the settlement, which was connected to the rest of the island via a movable wooden bridge. It was densely populated and had a labyrinth like path system.

As it appears on Skaros there were two castles. The older one, called Epano Kastro (Upper Castle, or Roka) was a fortified citadel on the top of the rock. The more recent one was called Kato Kastro (lower castle), but it suffered from the falling fragments of the rock above.

The older castle was built by Venetian Jacopo Barozzi, to whom Santorini was handed over in 1207. He and his noblemen used it as headquarters and residence. Space economy was what counted most in organising the settlement. The villagers exploited the very limited space to the utmost. Structures were packed tight, built in direct contact to one another. The basic building material was stone, which also served defence purposes.

Kato Kastro was built in the 17th century and people made use of the building materials from the castle of Roka to erect their houses. In 1642, part of the castle was set aside to build the bishop's residence. It was inhabited by Westerners, Catholics and, later on, Orthodox. There were the administration building, the residences of noblemen, the cathedral, churches, and monasteries. The Gyzi family founded here the monastery of Aghios Nikolaos (Saint Nicholas).

People started to abandon Skaros in the early 17th century; by the end of the 18th century the transfer was completed. They moved to Fira whice became the new capital of the island. Among the reasons why Skaros was deserted were the hard conditions of living and transport, the destruction from falling rocks and the fact that the danger of pirate raids had ceased.

Today only few ruins of the medieval settlement are still visible on the rock.

Please, View On Black or ~ L ~ A ~ R ~ G ~ E ~

 

Tracks across a snow blizzard (May!) covered ridge.

THE CHURCH of St Bride's is justly world famous. To enter its doors is to step into 2,000 years of history, which had begun with the Romans some six centuries before the name of St Bride, daughter of an Irish prince, even emerged from legend to become associated forever with the site.

 

The story of St Bride's is inextricably woven into the history of the City of London. By the time the Great Fire of 1666 left the church in ruins, a succession of churches had existed on the site for about a millennium, and the area had already assumed its unique role in the emergence of English printing. It took nine years for St Bride's to re-appear from the ashes under the inspired direction of Christopher Wren, but for the next two-and-a-half centuries it was in the shadow of the church's unmistakeable wedding-cake spire that the rise of the British newspaper industry into the immensely-powerful Fourth Estate took place.

 

Then, in 1940, St Bride's fell victim once again to flames as German incendiary bombs reduced Wren's architectural jewel to a roofless shell. This time 17 years elapsed before rebuilding was completed, although a series of important excavations in 1953 amid the skeletal ruins, led by the medieval archaeologist Professor W. F. Grimes, came up with extraordinary results, uncovering the foundations of all six previous churches on the site.

 

Not only the nation, but the Christian world as a whole, was fascinated by the discovery.

 

Historians and religious scholars had always accepted that there had been a site of Christian worship alongside the Fleet River and close to the Lud Gate, now known as Ludgate Circus, in the heart of the ancient City of London, for about 1,000 years.

 

When the Romans established Londinium following the invasion under the emperor Claudius in 43 AD, they dug a mysterious extra-mural ditch on the site of the future church and built a house, which seems likely to have been one of the earliest sites of worship. A Roman pavement can be seen to this day on display in the much-restored crypts of the church.

 

More than four centuries were to pass before the name of St Bride became associated with the site. But that association was to last throughout subsequent recorded history.

 

Born in 453 AD, shortly after St Patrick, Bride (or St Brigid) was the daughter of a prince and a druidic slave. As a teenager with an overwhelming desire to do good to others, she gave away so many of her father's possessions - daily necessities such as milk and flour, but also jewellery and swords - that he eventually let her follow her calling and enter the religious life. In 470, she and seven other nuns founded a convent in Kildare which developed into a centre of learning and spirituality, famed for its illuminated manuscripts such as the Book of Kildare.

 

According to legend, when Bride received her blessing as abbess it was inadvertently read to her as the rite of consecration as a bishop, which could not then be rescinded. Thus Bride and her successor abbesses had authority equal to that of a bishop for the following seven centuries.

 

She was renowned throughout Christian Europe for her holiness and common sense, and was regarded as a saint during her lifetime. Ironically, in view of the part that flames were later to play in the story of the church, she shared her name with the pagan goddess of fire, who had been noted for her music, her craftsmanship and her poetry - all qualities that have been manifested in and around St Bride's over numerous generations.

 

A line from a poem attributed to her - "I long for a great lake of ale" - was also an ironic harbinger of one of the Fleet Street's preoccupations in later years.

 

She died on 1st February 525 and was buried with the remains of Ireland's two other patron saints - Patrick and Columba. This date continues to be celebrated as the Feast of St Bride.

 

In the early sixth century the first stone-walled church was built here, founded either by St Bride in person or by Celtic monks who had formed a community in London. It was rebuilt many times over the following centuries, with notable structures including those of the Middle Saxons and the Normans.

 

This period in history was characterised by the urbanisation of Europe, military expansion, and intellectual revival, aided by the conversion of the raiding Scandinavians to Christianity. The 11th, 12th and 13th centuries saw a large increase in London's population - from less than 15,000 to over 80,000.

 

By the year 1200 Britain's effective capital city was Westminster, then a small town up-river from the City of London, where the royal treasury and financial records were stored.

 

St Bride's was the first church encountered between London and Westminster. This accident of geography gave it considerable importance; in 1205, the Curia Regis, a council of landowners and ecclesiastics charged with providing legislative advice to King John, and a predecessor to today's parliament, was held in the church. St Bride's influence and its numbers of parishioners grew substantially during the medieval period. From the 13th century onwards London developed through two different seats of power and influence: Westminster became the royal capital and centre of government, while the City of London became the centre of commerce and trade - a distinction evident to this day.

 

The area between them eventually became entirely urbanised by the end of the 16th century, and it was at the beginning of that century that St Bride's developed its first links with one of the future cornerstones of British society which were to constitute its most enduring claim to fame.

 

In the year 1500 the church had impressive neighbours - the many members of the clergy who were unable to afford the high cost of living in the very centre of the medieval city, where there was greater protection from thieves. However, they possessed their own powerful insurance against burglars - the fear of excommunication, which freed them to live outside.

 

So while rich merchants huddled together in the centre for safety, the area around St. Bride's became a haven for the eminent divines who were involved in national life. Salisbury Square, Peterborough Court and Ely Place are among names which have come down through history to remind us of great houses in the vicinity.

 

Since the clergy possessed almost a monopoly of literacy in those days, they were the printers' best customers. Thus Fleet Street became the cradle of the transformation of the medieval art and mystery of printing into the most influential industry man had yet known.

 

In the early 1470s, William Caxton had learnt the recently-invented technique of printing in Cologne. He returned to London in 1476 and set up a press by Westminster Abbey. In all, he printed about 100 books, some 20 of which were translated from French or Dutch, on subjects that included history and geography, the lives of saints, fables, and instructional books (for example, on good manners and learning French). His output also included most of the works of Chaucer.

 

As a well-to-do cloth merchant, Caxton had no need to make his press commercially viable. But after he died in 1491, his apprentice Wynkyn de Worde, who acquired that press, was in different circumstances. Having no other income, printing was his livelihood. So he followed commercial principles and took his goods to the buyer, setting up England's first printing press with moveable type in the churchyard of St Bride's in 1501.

 

It was a period in history when churchyards were hives of activity, boasting inns, taverns and commercial premises, and Fleet Street proved the perfect place for de Worde's new enterprise.

 

The publishers of playwrights and poets soon set up competing presses in other local churchyards, and the connection between St Bride's and world of printing and journalism was cemented. Wynkyn de Worde was buried in the church in 1535.

 

By the 17th century Fleet Street had become an irresistible attraction for the great writers and diarists of the day. A trio of Johns - Milton, Dryden and Evelyn - lived in the vicinity; Samuel Pepys was baptised at St Bride's, and Richard Lovelace buried there.

 

But then, in the space of 16 terrible months, it all changed.

 

St Bride's long connections with the colonies in America began when the parents of Virginia Dare, the first child born to English emigrants to North Carolina in August 1585, were married at the church. The event is commemorated in a touching bust of a little girl which can be found by the font in the south-west corner of the church.

 

One of the most striking features of today's St. Bride's also owes its inspiration to the church's American links. The great canopied oak reredos which enshrines the church altar is a memorial to the Pilgrim Fathers. This connection was made 35 years after Virginia Dare's birth when Edward Winslow (1595-1655) became one of the leaders of the Mayflower expedition in 1620. Winslow, who was three times elected governor of Plymouth, Massachusetts, had served as a boy apprentice in Fleet Street and would have known St Bride's well. His parents were also married there.

 

At the same time, St. Bride's parish was busily helping to populate yet another English colony. One hundred girls and boys from the Bridewell Hospital orphanage were sent to Virginia in 1619. The project was so successful that the governor requested 100 more. All the youngsters received grants of land on coming of age.

 

The Great Plague is believed to have first struck the docklands of London in April 1665, and by 6th June the parish of St Bride's was officially notified of an outbreak within its boundaries. It was also known as "the Poore's Plague," and the parish suffered terribly because of the large number of manual workers.

 

The court of Charles II, together with lawyers, merchants and doctors, fled the city, but the poor could not. St Bride's vicar, the Revd Richard Peirson, remained to witness the devastation to his parish community, including the deaths of his churchwardens.

 

Searchers of the Dead, usually old women, were paid to go out and inspect a corpse to determine cause of death. They were often bribed not to diagnose bubonic plague, as the entire household of a victim had to be locked in for 40 days, which normally resulted in all their deaths. Terrified residents sniffed nosegays to ward off malodorous airs which were thought to carry the infection. Funeral bells tolled constantly.

 

The parish distributed relief to stricken families. Watchmen were paid to guard locked houses and attend to the wants of those within. Nurses were dispatched to attend the sick. Two "bearers" were paid to carry corpses to the plague pits. The cost of all of this was partly reclaimed by the "brokers of the dead" who seized the property left in infected houses. So much was gathered that St Bride's had to rent a storehouse.

 

Many thousands of dogs and cats were culled, as they were believed to spread the pestilence. Flea-infested rats (the real culprits) were thus freed of predators, and proliferated.

 

In all the plague cost the parish of St Bride's some £581. The human cost was far worse: 2,111 people died in the parish in that fateful year. London lost 100,000, or 20% of its inhabitants.

 

Plague victims continued to die in smaller numbers until autumn the following year - which proved to be the very moment the City was consumed, literally, by a second dreadful tribulation on the heels of the first.

 

After a summer of drought, the Great Fire of London began on Sunday 2nd September 1666, and very soon the worried residents of the parish were watching in growing alarm before being put to flight two days later as the advancing flames leapt the narrow alleyways to ignite wooden houses and the often-illegal businesses many of them contained.

 

St Bride's was equipped with its own fire engine, but had failed to keep the machine "scoured, oyled and trimmed." Soldiers destroyed houses about Fleet Bridge in the vain hope that the Fleet River might stay the advance of the flames. But the relentless east wind drove the fire on: one onlooker described how it "rushed like a torrent down Ludgate Hill."

 

On Friday, Samuel Pepys made this entry in his diary:

 

September 7. - Up by five o'clock; and blessed be God!, find all well; and by water to Paul's Wharfe. Walked thence, and saw all the towne burned; and a miserable sight of Paul's church, with all the roof fallen, and the body of the quire fallen into St Fayth's; Paul's School also, Ludgate and Fleete-street, my father's house (in Salisbury Court) and the church (St Bride's), and a good part of the Temple the like.

 

Two weeks before the conflagration, a new vicar had been inducted at St Bride's. The hapless Paul Boston was to possess a church for no longer than those two weeks of his tenure, though in his will he left it £50; the silver gilt vessels bought with that bequest remain prized possessions today.

 

The destruction of the medieval St Bride's was so complete that no attempt was made to use the ruins for service, as was done at St Paul's and elsewhere. So, the big question was: would St Bride's be rebuilt?

 

In 1671 the churchwardens of St Bride's took Mr Christopher Wren (Surveyor General and Principal Architect for rebuilding the City) to dinner at the Globe Tavern. It would take another year before they could convince him of their cause, but their persistence meant that St Bride's was one of the first post-fire churches to be opened.

 

The blaze had destroyed 87 City churches. Despite Wren's belief that only 39 were necessary in such a small area, St Bride's was among the 51 to be rebuilt. The £500 required as a deposit by Guildhall to get things under way was raised in a month - a remarkable effort, given that most of the parishioners had lost homes and businesses in the disaster. Nor was this the end to the financial demands, as money remained tight. But a combination of Coal Dues, donations and loans eventually met the building's cost of £11,430 5s. 11d.

 

Joshua Marshall was the main contractor for the works. A parishioner and master mason to the king, like his father before him, Marshall was a wise choice. He also worked with Wren on Temple Bar and the Monument, while one of his assistants was the young Nicholas Hawksmoor, who was to become a renowned architect himself.

 

As today, the main material for the church was Portland stone. By September 1672, within a year of starting, the walls had reached the upper part of the cornice. The speed of progress was partly ascribed to the fact that the workmen had a hostel by the church, the Old Bell Tavern, built for them by Wren. By 1674 the main structural work was complete, and a year later the church finally reopened for worship on Sunday 19th December 1675.

 

Though it was open, it was not completed; most notably, the tower remained unfinished. In 1682 the churchwardens again approached Wren, this time about building the steeple. Work did not begin until 1701, and took two years to complete. At 234ft it was Wren's highest steeple, although after it was damaged by lightning in 1764 it was reduced to 226ft during more rebuilding.

 

Much has been written about the steeple, the most romantic tale of which is surely that of William Rich, apprenticed to a baker near Ludgate Circus. He fell in love with his master's daughter and, when he set up his own business at the end of his apprenticeship, won her father's approval for her hand in marriage.

 

Rich wished to create a spectacular cake for the wedding feast, but was unsure how, until one day he looked up at the steeple of the church in which the marriage was to be held, and inspiration hit him: a cake in layers, tiered, and diminishing as it rose. Thus began the tradition of the tiered wedding cake.

 

The year before the steeple was finished, the Daily Courant became the first regular daily newspaper to be printed in the United Kingdom, published on 11th March 1702 by Elizabeth Mallet from rooms above the White Hart pub in Fleet Street. A brass plaque to mark the 300th anniversary of this first edition was unveiled by the Prince of Wales at a special service in St Bride's on 11th March 2002.

 

Publishers and newspapers now began to spring up with some urgency; of the national papers that are still in existence, the Daily Universal Register (now The Times) was first published in 1785, and The Observer became the world's first Sunday newspaper in 1791.

 

Many renowned writers tried their hand - Daniel Defoe, for instance, founded the Daily Post.

 

As numerous regional and provincial titles were founded, they set up London offices in and around St Bride's, as did the first news agencies.

 

The vast expansion of the printing industry in Fleet Street also drew interest from intellectuals, actors and artists. Anyone who was anyone - Samuel Johnson, James Boswell, David Garrick, Samuel Richardson, Joshua Reynolds, William Hogarth, William Wordsworth and John Keats - would want to be seen in the coffee houses and inns around St Bride's.

 

Guardian (1821)

Daily Mail (1896)

Sunday Times (1822)

Daily Express (1900)

News of the World (1843)

Daily Mirror (1903)

Daily Telegraph (1855)

Sunday Mirror (1915)

The People (1881)

Sunday Express (1918)

Financial Times (1888)

Morning Star (1930)

 

With the coming of the 20th century their combined circulations were immense, and the power of press barons such as Northcliffe, Kemsley, Beaverbrook, Astor and Rothermere propelled Fleet Street into the very heart of the British power structure, often shaping news as well as reporting it.

 

Then came World War II and, in 1940, Fleet Street watched helplessly as the news exploded right at its doorstep. For St Bride's, by now enshrined as the parish church of journalism, it once again brought catastrophe.

 

The Blitz began in the early autumn as the Germans, their plan for a summer invasion thwarted, sought instead to bomb Britain's cities into submission. Guildsman John Colley, now in his 80s, recalls what it was like to be in a Grub Street at war:

 

"The nightly bombing to which London was being subjected for those last four months of 1940 made little apparent difference to the way Fleet Street went about its business. The business of producing tomorrow's newspapers was so all-consuming that there was little time to think about what was going on above; and that was true not only of those working in the great buildings housing the Nationals, but also in the basements of the scores of London offices of the big provincial papers.

 

"That isn't to say there weren't moments of sheer terror when the ominous whistle of a bomb you knew was going to land close by could be heard, but once the immediate danger was over you just got on with the job that had to be done. It was such a familiar situation that one became hardened to it.

 

"Outside, Fleet Street appeared to be its usual nightly hive of activity and got on with its job as much as circumstances would allow. News vans still dashed off to the London termini; couriers brought Government hand-outs from the Ministry of Information; messengers from picture and news agencies dodged the shrapnel and bombs as they darted from office to office; even the odd tramp made his nightly call to cadge a cuppa.

 

"With most of the newspapers gathered together in an area all around Fleet Street, the agencies - PA, Reuters, Ex Tel and the rest - sent the majority of their news through cables strung across the Street to tape machines in subscribing offices, all liable to disruption by bomb and blast - which brought more messengers delivering a hand service.

 

"Night life in the Street at that time centred around the all-night cafes - and there were many of them, all doing good business serving sustaining tea and snacks. Pubs, of course, had to keep to licensing hours, but Fleet Street's two Black and White all-night milk bars did a roaring trade serving hot soup and a great variety of milk shakes.

 

"Occasionally a fire-fighting party of three dodged from building to building, one carrying a bucket of water, one a stirrup pump and the third a hose on their way to put out an incendiary fire. Air Raid Precaution wardens made their nightly calls and public service vehicles on their way to or from an incident were up and down the Street throughout the night. All in all, there was hardly a quiet moment, either on the ground or up above."

 

Two days before this grim year ended, St Bride's luck ran out. On the night of Sunday 29th December the Luftwaffe targeted the City of London in a concentrated incendiary raid. Some 1400 fires were started; eight of Wren's churches were destroyed. St Bride's was one of them.

 

The church, locked after Evensong, suffered incendiary hits which pierced the roof, and the seasoned timbers proved perfect tinder. Some treasures were rescued from the flames, including the medieval gospel lectern which had survived the Great Fire of 1666. But most was destroyed. The famous bells melted and fell, but the steeple, despite having flames pouring from it, prevailed - testament to Wren's design.

 

Up Ludgate Hill, the Times reported, "the dome of St Paul's seemed to ride the sea of fire like a great ship lifting above the smoke and flames the inviolable ensign of the golden cross."

 

But all that lay ahead for St Bride's were years of ruined desolation until the war ended and the church's administrators were able to address the question that had faced their predecessors in 1666: How do we rebuild both the church and its congregation?

 

By the time the austere 1950s came round, services were being held on the site, some in the open air and others in the crypt chapel.

 

Rebuilding work was scheduled for 1954, thanks to the restoration fund which was a tribute to the dedication of the Rector, Revd Cyril Armitage. The chosen architect, Godfrey Allen, an authority on Wren, studied the master's original plans and produced a faithful recreation. He kept the clear glass Wren loved, but did not rebuild the galleries, instead laying out the stalls in collegiate style.

 

With rebuilding came excavation as well as restoration. In addition to the astonishing discovery of Roman remains on the site in 1953, the crypts were found to contain thousands of human remains, many of them victims of the Great Plague of 1665 and the cholera epidemic of 1854. The latter claimed 10,000 lives in the City of London, and, as a result, Parliament decreed that there should be no more burials in the City. The crypts were sealed and forgotten about.

 

One hundred years later the excavations of Professor F.W. Grimes resulted in St. Bride's possessing two almost unique series of human remains. One includes well over 200 skeletons identified by their sex and age at the time of death, thus forming a very important source of research into forensic and other forms of medicine.

 

The other series, which is estimated by some to include nearly 7,000 human remains, is in a medieval charnel house where all the bones were found in categories - thigh bone with thigh bone and so on - and laid in chequer-board pattern. This is probably evidence of a land shortage in London even that many centuries ago.

 

On 19th December 1957, on the anniversary of Wren's church being opened for worship 282 years previously, St Bride's was rededicated in the presence of the Queen and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

 

In 1962, Dewi Morgan inherited the Rector's mantle from Cyril Armitage, and throughout the 1960s and 1970s St Bride's continued its ministry to the newspaper world, hosting baptisms, weddings and memorial services as well as offering regular weekday worship for those working in the area.

 

In 1967 the church was packed for a service to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Press Association, whose offices were next door. The glass doors at the West End were a gift to mark the occasion. Through the generosity of Sir Max Aitken, Lord Beaverbrook's heir, a permanent exhibition was mounted in the crypt chronicling the history of the site and of Fleet Street, and was renewed with the help of Reuters and the Museum of London 25 years later.

 

By the early 1980s, however, all was not well in the newspaper business. For years Fleet Street had been living with chaotic industrial relations. Proprietors found the so-called Spanish practices of the print unions intolerable, while the workers rejected management attempts to introduce flexible working, no-strike clauses, new technology, and an end to the closed shop.

 

National newspapers continued to be produced by the labour-intensive linotype hot-metal method, rather than being composed electronically. Eddie Shah's regional Messenger Group had, however, benefited from the Conservative government's trade union legislation which allowed employers to de-recognise unions, enabling Shah to use an alternative workforce and new technology. Journalists could input copy directly, sweeping away arcane craft-union manning levels and cutting costs dramatically.

 

On 24th January 1986, some 6,000 newspaper workers went on strike after the breakdown of negotiations with Rupert Murdoch's News International, parent of Times Newspapers and News Group Newspapers. They were unaware that Murdoch had built and clandestinely equipped a new-technology printing plant in Wapping. When they struck, he moved his operation overnight.

 

Within months the printing dinosaur that was Fleet Street was dead. By 1989 all the national newspapers had decamped as other proprietors followed Murdoch's lead. Computers had consigned Wynkyn de Worde's revolution to history.

 

Many people at that time feared that the diaspora of the Fourth Estate might result in St Bride's losing its title of the cathedral of Fleet Street. Some even considered that the great church would lose its parishioners. Might Rupert Murdoch's vision bring about what pestilence, fire and the Luftwaffe had failed to achieve?

 

Fortunately for St Bride's, the national newspapers scattered in every direction rather than congregating in one locality, so that "Fleet Street" remains to this day a generic term for the nation's press, and the church retains its pre-eminent position in the journalistic and media constituency.

 

During the Middle East hostage crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s, it hosted all-night vigils for John McCarthy and others, and on their release in 1991 a grand service of celebration was held.

 

We have commemorated John Schofield, BBC reporter killed in Croatia in 1995; Reuters' Kerem Lawton, killed in Kosovo; Channel 4's Gaby Rado and ITN's Terry Lloyd (Iraq); BBC cameraman Simon Cumbers, murdered by Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia; and the Wall Street Journal's Daniel Pearl, murdered by Al Qaeda in Pakistan in 2002.

 

In 2003 we unveiled a memorial to all journalists who died in Iraq, and in 2006 commemorated James Brolan and Paul Douglas, CBS journalists killed in Baghdad, demonstrating St Bride's unique position in journalism throughout the world. When, earlier this year, The Times' driver in Iraq, Yasser, was killed in a bomb blast in Baghdad, it was to St Bride's that senior News International staff came to light a candle.

 

The Journalists' Altar in the North East corner also carries prayers for reporters who are missing or who have lost their lives in current conflicts.

 

Newspaper proprietors such as Lord Burnham, Lord Rothermere and Lord Hartwell have been remembered in memorial services. So have editors like Sir Edward Pickering, David Astor, Stewart Steven and Louis Kirby; the Guardian's famed woman's editor Mary Stott; the D-Day war reporter Doon Campbell; BBC figures such as Godfrey Talbot, Louis MacMillan and Leonard Miall; and Fiona MacPherson of Good Housekeeping magazine.

 

Strong and successful efforts were made by the former Rector, Canon John Oates, to bring into the church's embrace the new occupants of the now-silent newspaper offices - chiefly lawyers, accountants and investment bankers. Twenty years after the last newspaper left, the large number of memorials and carol services we hold every year are evenly split between the "old" and the "new" Fleet Street.

 

The church today has a light, open feel of symmetry; the floor is paved with black marble from Belgium and white from Italy. This is very much a living church in a modern world.

 

As a result of a successful funding appeal, new side aisles constructed of English and European oak were installed in 2004, offering significantly better views for large congregations while preserving the beautiful character of the church.

 

Out of the inferno of that hellish night in December 1940 has emerged something beautiful, which remains the spiritual heart both of the parish of St Bride's and of the journalistic community in Britain and throughout the world.

 

The church retains strong City links, has built up an enviable musical reputation, and is home to thriving Sunday congregations, as well as being a major tourist landmark. Set back from Fleet Street, only yards from the tremendous bustle of Ludgate Circus, yet seemingly existing in its own peaceful space, St Bride's is one of the most historic, vibrant and beautiful churches to be found anywhere in London.

 

www.stbrides.com/history/index.html

The inscription on the two tablets (read down to the stars):

“What object lesson of peace is shown today by our two countries to all the world. No grim-faced fortifications mark our frontiers, no huge battleships patrol our dividing waters, no stealthy spies lurk in our tranquil border hamlets. Only a scrap of paper, recording hardly more than a simple understanding, safe-guards lives and properties on the Great Lakes, and only humble mile posts mark the inviolable boundary line for thousands of miles through farm and forest.

 

“Our protection is in our fraternity, our armour is our faith, the tie that binds more firmly year by year is ever-increasing acquaintance and comradeship through interchange of citizens. And the compact is not of perishable parchment, but of fair and honorable dealing, which, God grant, shall continue for all time.”

 

Erected by Kiwanis International in memory of a great occasion in the life of two sister nations here on July 26, 1923. Warren Gamaliel Harding twenty-ninth president of the United States of America, and first president to visit Canada, charter member of the Kiwanis Club of Marion, Ohio, spoke words that are worthy of record in lasting granite dedicated September 16, 1925.

 

***

My favorite part is the lion Marega carved on the BACK of the memorial, where few would think of looking. ;)

 

For We're Here - Tributes to the Famous

 

Put some zing into your 365! Join We're Here!

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

CapitalTripoli

Common languagesItalian

Arabic

ReligionIslam

Roman Catholicism

GovernmentColony

Historical eraInterwar period

• Established

1912

• Disestablished

1934

Preceded bySucceeded by

Italian North Africa

Italian Libya

Italian Tripolitania was an Italian colony, located in present-day western Libya, that existed from 1912 to 1934. It was part of the Italian North African territory conquered from the Ottoman Empire in 1911. Italian Tripolitania included the western northern half of Libya, with Tripoli[1] as its main city.

 

History

 

A large number of Italian colonists moved to Tripolitania in the late 1930s. These settlers went primarily to the area of Sahel al-Jefara, in Tripolitania, and in the capital Tripoli. In 1939 there were in all Tripolitania nearly 60,000 Italians, most living in Tripoli (whose population was nearly 45% Italian).[2] As a consequence, huge economic improvements arose in all coastal Tripolitania. For example, Italians created the Tripoli Grand Prix, an internationally renowned automobile race.[3]

 

In December 1934 were guaranteed to autochthonous Libyans (later called by Benito Mussolini "Moslem Italians"[4]) individual freedom, inviolability of home and property, the right to join the military or civil administrations, and the right to freely pursue a career or employment

 

In 1937, northern Tripolitania was split into Tripoli Province and Misrata Province. Inn 1939 Tripolitania was included in the 4th Shore of the Kingdom of Italy.

 

The Province of Tripoli (the most important in all Italian Libya) was subdivided into:

 

Tripoli

Zawiya

Sugh el Giumaa

Nalut

Gharyan

In early 1943 the region was invaded and occupied by the Allies; this was the end of the Italian colonial presence.

 

Italy tried unsuccessfully to maintain the colony of Tripolitania after World War II, but in February 1947 relinquished all Italian colonies in a Peace Treaty.

 

Infrastructure

In Italian Tripolitania were made many infrastructures by the Italians: the most important were the coastal road between Tripoli and Benghazi and the railways Tripoli-Zuara, Tripoli-Garian and Tripoli-Tagiura. Other important infrastructures were the enlargement of the port of Tripoli and the creation of the Tripoli airport.

 

A group of villages for Italians and Libyans were created on the coastal tripolitania during the 1930s.[5]

 

Main military and political developments

1911: Beginning of the Italo-Turkish War. Italian conquest of Tripoli, and Al Khums.[6]

1912: Treaty of Lausanne [it] ends the Italo-Turkish war. Tripolitania and Cyrenaica were ceded to Italy.[6]

1914: Italian advance to Ghat (August) makes Tripolitania (including Fezzan) initially under Italian suzerainty, but because of the recapture of Sabha (November) by Libyan resistance men, the advance turns into retreat.[6]

1915: Italian reverses at the battles of Wadi Marsit, and Al Gardabiya, forced them to withdraw and eventually to retire to Tripoli, Zuwara, and Al Khums.[6][7]

1922:Italian forces occupy Misrata, launching the reconquest of Tripolitania.[6]

1924: With the conquest of Sirt, most of Tripolitania (except the Sirt desert) is in Italian hands.[6]

Winter 1927-8: Launching the "29th Parallel line operations", as a result of coordination between the governments of Tripolitania and Cyrenaica, led to the conquest of gulf of Sidra, and linking the two colonies.[8]

1929: Pietro Badoglio becomes a unique governor of Tripolitania and Cyrenaica.[6]

1929-1930: Conquest of Fezzan.[6]

1934: Tripolitania is incorporated into the Colony of Libya.

1939: Tripolitania is made part of the 4th Shore of the Kingdom of Italy.

(Al-Thukair's guests) From right to left: Maurice Richard, Cartier's sales assistant, Yusuf Kanoo, Jacques Cartier, host Mugbil Al-Thukair, and an unknown guest at Al Thukair's house in Manama, according to Jacques Cartier's travel diary, this luncheon occurred before Cartier and his assistants, accompanied by their host Al-Thukair and his trusted friend Kanoo, who acted as an interpreter, paid a courtesy visit to the ruler of Bahrain, Sheikh Isa Bin Ali Al Khalifa (r. 1869-1932) on Muharraq island, the country's capital back then, on Thursday afternoon, the 16th of March 1912.

 

(In this luncheon, Cartier and his companions experienced traditional Arabian hospitality, typified by the customary dish of pot-roasted whole lamb known as ''Quzi'' stuffed with several well-cooked chickens, which in turn are stuffed with hard-boiled peeled eggs, blanched almonds, cashews, raisins, and black peppercorns, as the slow-roasted lamb marinated both inside and out with seasonings such as turmeric and cumin, served on top of a bed of saffron and cardamom rice infused with rose water and garnished with tender cooked dried chickpeas, golden raisins, blanched almonds and cashews, along with a variety of classic Bahraini dishes, including lamb and chicken stews, chickpea flour dumplings filled with lamb mince and dried prawns cooked in a savoury light tamarind sauce, and egg-battered flat round-shaped fried lean lamb Kofta seasoned with fine herbs and spices, among other mouthwatering delicacies)

 

The two long excerpts below are firsthand accounts of Jacques Cartier's visit to the Gulf in March of 1912, obtained from two separate letters written during his second extended Gulf exploratory pearl-purchasing trip, with Bahrain as the focal point, taken from a series of declassified British archival personal letters written by the Anglo-Irish Dublin-born Oxford-educated multilingual, multidiscipline journalist, linguist, political analyst, writer, editor and translator, Emily Overend Lorimer (1881-1949) to her parents, Thomas George Overend and Hannah Kingsbury the letters describe the lives of Emily and her husband, David Lockhart Robertson Lorimer (1876-1962) (referred to by the pet name 'Lock' in the said letters) when the couple were living in Bahrain from October 1911 until November 1912 during her civil servant husband's tenure as a British Political Agent, there is also a reference to Samuel Marinus Zwemer (1867-1952), the well-funded American missionary and religious scholar, who arrived in Bahrain in December 1892 as a tireless young missionary imbued with evangelistic zeal, he set out almost immediately after arrival with the establishment of a small clinic, dispensary, English school and Christian bookshop in a modest rented building by the sea in Manama, eventually leading up to the opening of the first fully-fledged modern hospital in Bahrain, the American Mission Hospital, and the first English school in the country on the 26th of January 1903, both were built on two separate plots of land purchased from the ruler of Bahrain, Sheikh Isa Bin Ali Al Khalifa (r. 1869-1932) and pearl merchant Abdulaziz Bin Hassan Algosaibi (1876-1953) in Manama, the former commercial capital and the bustling current political and commercial capital within a decade of his arrival in the tiny archipelago British protectorate regardless of the ulterior missionary motives behind their creation these institutions have played significant roles in improving the lives of Bahrainis to the present in particular in the pre-oil era nevertheless, it is worth noting that neither the hospital nor the school was intended to be philanthropic enterprises from the outset and this has remained the case ever since; in any case the Lorimer mentioned above should not be confused with his elder brother, civil servant John Gordon Lorimer (1870-1914) the esteemed diplomat and historian who compiled the declassified seminal encyclopaedic work "The Gazetteer of the Persian Gulf, Oman and Central Arabia" as his younger brother, the noted linguist, was also a colonial officer since the Scottish Lorimer family was renowned for producing numerous high-calibre civil servants who primarily served as colonial military officers and administrators, a clear testament to the dedication this family had to the British imperial enterprise and colonial service however, readers of these excerpts should be cognisant of the racist casual undertones and sentiments of their author and those of the other major Western characters involved in the amusing, gossipy, nonchalant and witty anecdotal events that Emily Lorimer is recounting whether tacitly or explicitly including Jacques Cartier, the young inquisitive self-assured French bourgeoisie jeweller with the keen anthropological eye who serves as the centrepiece of the excerpts, her reserved colonial officer husband David Lorimer and the Protestant theologian missionary Dr. Samuel Zwemer from the then racially segregated United States of America who was closely cooperating with British colonial authorities in Bahrain, the Arabian Gulf and Egypt on his so-called holy mission to civilise the wayward Muslims by preaching the true gospel of Jesus Christ to them in every way possible preferably through the printed word ultimately leading to the abandonment of their errant notion of monotheism and towards embracing the doctrine of the Trinity as manifested in Jesus Christ the son of God as their saviour and redeemer and her parents the recipients of these detailed letters, a clear reflection of the prevalent attitudes in Europe and the West on the whole towards non-white peoples of the Orient, Africa and other parts of the world who were predominantly living under the yoke of Western colonialism at the time when such attitudes were considered culturally normal and widely accepted among ordinary Westerners let alone among the colonial officer class, such as the Lorimers who intrinsically espoused the colonial ideology in its purest form, an ideology theorised and promulgated by some of the most brilliant minds in modern Western thought, among them two of the greatest German philosophers Kant and Hegel, the French orientalist and Aryan racial theorist Renan, and the eminent French aristocratic imperialist politician and nationalist liberal thinker Tocqueville who advocated for the cultural assimilation of the Algerian people through invasive and passively abusive social engineering in a manner more brutal than typical of French colonialism, resulting in the death of well over a million Algerians from the start of the military invasion of Algeria in 1830 and throughout the subsequent long genocidal pacification of the sprawling spans of the Algerian terrain lasting until the turn of the twentieth century Algeria became legally part of France when it was officially annexed by the French National Assembly (Parliament) in 1848 with France thereafter seeing Algeria as a natural southern Mediterranean extension of itself, paving the way for over one and a half million French and European colonists to settle and cultivate the confiscated large swathes of Algeria's fertile arable plains alongside its long coastal area until the end of the occupation, thereupon hundreds of thousands of settlers fled the country in droves in the wake of the hard-won independence of Algeria in 1962 after one hundred and thirty-two years of settler colonial occupation following an eight-year bloody guerrilla war of independence starting in 1954 after nine years of uneasy abeyance as a result of the Sétif and Guelma punitive massacres these began shortly after the announcement of the end of World War Two on the 8th of May 1945 when tens of thousands of Algerians took to the streets in peaceful demonstrations celebrating the end of the war and calling for independence from France in the cities of Sétif and Guelma as Algeria was one of the major battlefields of the North African allies' campaign and instead of allowing demonstrators to proceed peacefully they were mown down in a hail of bullets when French police and colonial forces opened fire indiscriminately killing thousands, together with savage reprisals meted out against native villages by French and European settlers in the Algerian countryside so by the end of the bloody crackdown between fifty and seventy thousand natives lost their lives according to independent sources creating an irreconcilable rift between the Algerian people and colonial France, it was evident to the French and other worn-out European colonial powers that their days as colonial powers were numbered in the post-World War Two new bipolar world order where the real victors of the war, the United States of America and the Soviet Union were keen on liquidating European obsolete classical colonialism for their own ambitions of world dominance however, the French ferocity in dealing with the demonstrations illustrates the sacrosanct uniqueness of French Algeria in the collective French consciousness by juxtaposing the insignificance of Algerian lives to the inviolable French whose entire existence as people was to be in service of their French masters, sending a clear message to all concerned parties internally and externally of France's unwillingness to give up Algeria at any cost as an indivisible part of the French nation, setting it apart from any other colony in the French Colonial Empire, expressing the French unwavering resolve after the humiliating four-year German occupation of France during the war, in addition to being a stark rebel deterrent for the infantilised wayward natives who should be content with the status quo realities of French colonial rule as these massacres were preliminary exercises for future transgressions in the Algerian war of independence witnessing the so-called civilised French commit untold atrocities consisting of bombing villages, summary executions of combatants and civilians alike and systematic torture intended as a collective punishment for Algerians, whom the French had frequently portrayed patronisingly in official documents as ungrateful indolent capricious childlike barbaric Muslims, inherently monolithic in nature unwilling to adopt the auspicious civilising methods imparted to them by their highly civilised French colonisers, were also regurgitated in numerous French civilian narratives and reports throughout the colonial period further these degrading stereotypes, tropes and cliches were consistently invoked in French orientalist racist discourse in unison with the prevailing European orientalist discourse of the time despite contradictory accounts from the two opposing sides of the disproportionate armed struggle, Algerian death toll estimates of the conflict plausibly indicate more than one and a half million Algerians perished on the altar of freedom considering the French bloody track record since their first landing on Algerian soil in 1830 while the just Algerian armed independence struggle was officially branded as a terrorist insurrection against France by the French state and media but also by the vast majority of French people at the time whose prosperity had relied for generations on the extracted natural riches of their colonial Empire particularly after industrialisation in the mid-nineteenth century and on as with other European imperial powers, conspicuously Britain, the largest Empire in history and last but not least, the reactionary to a fault white supremacist French diplomat, scholar, anthropologist and aristocratic royalist Gobineau whose writings on Aryan racial supremacy became an inspirational beacon for his contemporary American white supremacist counterparts, to mention a few, and also prominent nineteenth-century English polymaths, biologist Thomas Huxley, Francis Galton, the father of eugenics and polymath philosopher Herbert Spencer as the trio utilised and co-opted the cutting-edge scientific revolution in natural biology, the Malthusian theory of population, attributed to influential English economist Thomas Malthus, and the groundbreaking evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin, coupled with the pseudo-science of scientific racism falsely informed via the prevalence of human comparative Craniometry measurements embraced and disseminated by several Western thinkers and scientists to various extents, giving rise to the development and circulation of the coined term "Social Darwinism" in Britain in the 1870s soon spreading throughout Europe and the rest of the Western world including the United States to rationalise the frantic unyielding concurrent European colonial rush and in many cases the enslavement and genocide of tens of millions of native populations in the Americas, Africa, Asia and Australia at the peak of European global colonial expansion, one of the best examples of this colonial rapacity is the louche "Opium Wars" when Britain at last succeeded in tipping the long-contentious issue of the trade imbalance with China in its favour by the devious, unethical state-sponsored trafficking of industrially processed mass-produced Indian-grown opium to China via the stupendous opium factories and warehouses of the piracy-rooted origins of the far-reaching long colonial arm of the British East India Company, with disastrous repercussions for tens of millions of Chinese, resulting in two uneven wars in which the pre-industrial self-isolated and proud old China was humiliatingly routed by the modern technologically advanced industrial Britain in the first between 1839-1842 and later by the combined might of Europe's two major maritime powers, Britain and France, in the second between 1856-1860 leaving an indelible mark on the Chinese collective psyche to the present, concurrently, a malevolent uniquely British Ménage à Trois of Social Darwinism, Malthusian economics and free market dynamics was formulating in the minds of the British ruling class, gradually becoming part and parcel of their worldview, demonstrating the profound influence of these ideas on broad sectors of the public schooled Oxbridge-educated British ruling elite back then, where they were regarded as widely held axioms and what a better place to put these ideas into practice than the heavily populated British India, the jewel in the crown of the British Empire in the second half of the nineteenth century during a series of famines that hit India claiming the lives of nearly thirty million people as a result of natural environmental and manmade causes, the latter are mostly attributed to the self-serving highly specialised cash crop agricultural policies of the British Raj government as these cash crops, namely sugarcane, cotton, rice, wheat, indigo and jute, were mainly intended for export to Britain and its global Empire, North America and the rest of the world, putting an end to thousands of years of indigenous agricultural diversity in India, to the detriment of ordinary Indians, especially amid one of the worst purposefully concealed famines in Indian history, the devastating Great Indian Famine between 1876 and 1878 coinciding with the start of the tenure of the ruthless Social Darwinian poet and diplomat Lord Lytton (1831-1891) who served as Viceroy (The Governor-General of India) from 1876 to 1880 and whose insensate handling of the famine could not be more revealing than in his unapologetic statements of complete disregard and dismissal of calls to alleviate the suffering of millions of starving Indians, exhibiting a glaringly shocking colonial sense of entitlement, for Lytton a quintessentially imperialist byproduct of Britain's fully developed industrial revolution overwhelming free market capitalism in the second half of the nineteenth century any form of intervention would be an attempt to derail the natural order of things through the basic evolutionary mechanisms of natural selection by displaying irrational sympathies towards expandable racially inferior overbreeding peasants, of course from a Malthusian-Darwinian dynamic economic perspective, however in a sardonic twist of fate while millions of Indians were dying of starvation, Viceroy Lytton and British Raj state officials were up to their ears in overseeing the undertaking of the colossal "Delhi Durbar" (lit. "Court of Delhi") possibly one of the largest formal banqueting celebratory parties in recorded history where over sixty thousand Indian guests from the highest echelons of the British Raj society were served the best foods and beverages the British Empire had to offer in an extraordinary feat of refined catering beginning on the 1st of January 1877 and lasting for a whole week, this lavish pomp and circumstance celebration was organised to proclaim Queen Victoria as Empress of India and as a stunning tribute to British imperial power in India, the centrepiece of the British Empire, nearly twenty years after quashing the great Indian rebellion of 1857 and less than three years after the dissolution of the odious East India Company in 1874 where Lord Lytton as Viceroy (representative of the British sovereign) seated on his lofty throne basking superciliously in an air of impervious imperial confidence, presided over the event receiving homage from Indian princes and maharajahs representing the Princely states of India on behalf of the Queen as the newly crowned absent overseas Empress of India, succeeding the majestic centuries-old Indian Mughal Emperors, underscoring the status of Britain as the undisputed world power in the second half of the nineteenth century arguably Lord Lytton's actions, or more accurately, inactions, may have contributed to the deaths of about ten million Indians in less than two years, given that these terrible events were a small part of the global European colonial expansion which intensified in the second half of the eighteenth century and continued sporadically in force until the early part of the twentieth century in the aftermath of the First World War and the division of the near-eastern legacy of the vanquished Ottoman Turkish Empire in the secret 1916 infamous Anglo-French Sykes-Picot Agreement, with the consent of the Russian Empire and the Kingdom of Italy in exchange for a share of the Anatolian spoils, especially for the Russians who had been yearning for a sea outlet on the Mediterranean since the reign of Tsar Peter the Great (1672-1725) but were thwarted by the ignominious defeat of their Pré-industrial feudal Russian Empire in the Crimean War (1853-56) at the hands of the technologically and socially advanced industrial powers of Britain and France, thereby finally resolving the "Eastern question" of the feeble Ottoman Empire, the "Sick Man of Europe" once and for all, however, the Russian popular revolution in March 1917 and the subsequent Bolshevik coup in October of the same year altered the primarily Anglo-French Sykes-Picot Agreement by reneging on the British and French allies' promises to Tsarist Russia, refusing to grant the new revolutionary hostile communist regime in Russia the previously agreed-upon Anatolian access to the Mediterranean anyhow, the Anatolian section of this secret agreement did not see the light of day due to the valiant efforts of the Turkish national military commander and World War One military hero and statesman, the father of the Turkish Republic Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (1881-1938) (it should be noted that Mustafa Kemal was conferred with the revered surname "Atatürk" or "Father of the Turks" by the Turkish parliament in 1934 for his monumental role in foiling the Western allies' insidious plans for the Turkish people), leading the remnants of the Ottoman imperial army to victory over the Western allies, despite the fact that Western colonial expansion reached its zenith with the Sykes-Picot Agreement, the industrial West's incessant need for raw materials of all sorts has continued unabated in varying forms from subtle to insidious to outwardly aggressive as evidenced by Western efforts to undermine any attempts at economic independence by some of the postcolonial non-corrupt patriotic regimes in Africa, Asia and other parts of the world by fomenting societal unrest and political instability using covert subversive operations fronted by loyalist local actors, prolonged debilitating economic sanctions and a series of staged mostly bloody military coups in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia from the second half of the twentieth century to the present, such as Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, the Congo in 1960, and Chile in 1973, to name a few and in some cases direct military interventions, as the Suez crisis of 1956, and the more recent unprovoked catastrophic invasion of Iraq in 2003, this Western gluttony for natural resources was the impetus for the surge of Western colonialism in the second half of the eighteenth century to fuel the burgeoning under way industrial revolution in Europe, principally in Britain the first modern industrial capitalist economy in the world, followed gradually but surely in industrialisation in subsequent decades by the other continental European nations of France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, Austria and backward Russia, not to mention the newly formed nations of Germany and Italy, among others, succeeded by the resources-rich robust United States of America on the other side of the Atlantic in the second half of the nineteenth century, progressing in a more potent force throughout the ever-changing socioeconomic landscape of the early unregulated labour market, characterised by the harsh and exploitative working and living conditions of unfettered industrial capitalism, as child labour was a common and abhorrent practice in all major Western industrial nations, where children as young as three were employed in low-paying, often dangerous jobs, this situation was exacerbated by the severe societal implications of increasing technological advancements in mechanisation within industrial workplaces from the late eighteenth to the early twentieth centuries, setting the stage for the gradual implementation of the foundational great ideas of the rationalist philosophy of Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, Leibniz, and Locke and its more concrete and practical successor thinkers of the Age of Enlightenment decidedly Voltaire, Hume, Montesquieu, Diderot, Rousseau and Kant immensely influencing the highly learned founding fathers of the United States of America, chiefly Jefferson, Franklin, Adams and Madison as the first three were members of the committee of five that drafted the United States Declaration of Independence on the 4th of July 1776 leading to the independence of the united principal thirteen colonies from Britain on the 3rd of September 1783 after seven years of a ferocious revolutionary war of independence against the might of the British Empire, meanwhile forging a distinct American Protestant Anglo-Saxon English speaking white identity in its wake, excluding Native Americans entirely from the white mainstay of the nascent republic who would be displaced from their expansive lands in the Midwest of the United States of America more aggressively than before and, to a great extent, exterminated in their millions in the following century as an annoying obstacle standing in the path of the divinely preordained "Manifest Destiny" of the English-speaking Old Testament Protestant-steeped racially indoctrinated gun-toting Pacific westward expanding white American settlers on their long horse-hauled rickety waggon trains, epitomised in the famous mid-nineteenth-century proverb, "The only good Indian is a dead Indian" driving the vast majority of natives to the brink of extinction as a nation where they would end up on the out-of-sight fringes of America, in a few designated secluded economically deprived reservation pockets akin to those of endangered species and, to a lesser degree, the forcefully converted to Christianity African emancipated slaves who were both pagan and Muslim in their African homeland prior to being sold into chattel slavery in America who suffered beyond measure from the moment of bondage in Africa through the abominable conditions of the high mortality slave trade flagrant middle Atlantic passage journeys of unimaginable cruelty on the special purpose slave ships where human beings of all genders and ages were shackled and stacked as inanimate goods without the ability to move or relieve themselves as the dead were disposed of at sea with the survivors embarking on a lifelong of servitude and for almost a century of limited emancipation after the end of the American Civil War under Jim Crow enforced racial segregation laws whereas whites frequently used various intimidation methods of terror to instil fear in the hearts of African Americans most commonly through the extrajudicial killing of grisly mob lynchings (public hangings) spectacles intentionally staged for large crowds of spectators including children where souvenir mementos of the victims were taken as well as photographs, sometimes professionally taken and collected as postcards as these macabre tactics were meant as a form of subjugation and deterrence to prevent former slaves and their African American descendants from demanding equal rights, with the American Anglo-Saxon whites as previously stated, regarding themselves as the godly chosen people with the sole right to populate the promised land of the entire North American continent passed down to them from the first devout Calvinist Protestant Puritan English settlers in the New England colonies during the Jacobean and Caroline eras of the sixteenth century as a divinely sanctioned Manifest Destiny, not dissimilar to how the Biblical Israelites viewed Canaan in the Old Testament until the end of legal segregation in 1964 and the granting of voting rights the following year; despite this the majority of African Americans remain a disenfranchised racial minority to this day, with the spectre of law enforcement horrific brutality looming over their heads, replacing the preceding common old tactics of mob violence by white terror supremacist organisations such as the Ku Klux Klan to maintain white racial and economic hegemony for as long as possible while those momentous events of the American Revolution were taking place on the other side of the Atlantic, the French monarchy under the ineffective and weak Louis XVI and his equally inept unfairly demonised consort Queen Marie Antoinette, was rushing to exact revenge on the British by supporting the American revolutionary government in full strength militarily and financially, in its republican democratic struggle to achieve independence from France's imperial adversary Britain, even though it was in diametric opposition to the French absolutist monarchy political doctrine as it was part of the traditional age-long protracted Anglo-French animosity and world dominance rivalry particularly after the Seven Years' War which the French decisively lost to the British, resulting in France ceding most of its North American colonies to Britain, making Britain the unequalled world naval superpower for the better part of the next two centuries, putting insurmountable pressure on the already exhausted French economy owing to the crushing defeat of the Seven Years' War over a quarter century earlier, contestably the first war on a global scale, financially bankrupting France in the process, compounded by the chronic wealth inequality of the French absolutist monarchy's mediaeval feudal three-estate system, helmed by the aloof and typically unsympathetic uncompromising aristocratic nobility who lived self-absorbed decadent and parasitic idle lives in their rural opulent châteaux, a far cry from the mostly impoverished lives of the peasants working on their extensive lands, causing widespread discontent among the toiling peasants who comprised the vast majority of the rapidly growing French population along with the expanding self-made energetic urban dwelling bourgeoisie middle-classes who were trying to carve out a niche for themselves in eighteenth-century France whose salon culture was one of the primary sources for the dissemination of Enlightenment ideas among the young educated bourgeoisie and reformist elements within the old aristocracy as those salons were originally incepted by the aristocracy to fulfil their cultural recreational needs before being taken over by the rising bourgeoisie as a clear expression of the acute awareness of their self-important new socioeconomic position in society in contrast to the landed aristocracy who traditionally acquired their inherited wealth and titles through royal favour and patronage of considerable land grants for their allegiance via rendering a sundry of services to the sovereign as the rest of Europe then including military services in some instances dating back to mediaeval times interestingly the tremendous success of the American Revolution's principles of republican democracy across the Atlantic which the French monarchy unwittingly supported sowed the seeds of revolution among notable French figures from the bourgeoisie and aristocracy alike who cooperated with their American revolutionary counterparts indirectly through being assigned as part of the French military assistance to the American revolution leading to its triumph in 1783 in the restive five years preceding the official outbreak of the French Revolution on the 5th of May 1789 as attested by the participation of two giant revolutionary figures from both sides of the Atlantic, the scholarly Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers of the United States of America and its third president and the Marquis de Lafayette, the French aristocratic military commander and highly respected revolutionary in the formulation of "The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen" on the 26th of August 1789 followed by a number of key historic milestones most significantly the abolition of slavery in the French colonies on the 4th of February 1794 and also in the adoption of secularism principles of separation of state and church and the dissolution of feudalism inspired by the Age of Reason ideas of Voltaire, Locke and Rousseau as opposed to the symbiotic association reactionary French Catholic Church's, theological doctrine advocating the legitimacy of the divine right of Kings, contradicting Locke's and Rousseau's social contract theory and Montesquieu's conclusive theory of the separation of powers in government which was enthusiastically applied as the pivotal foundation of the revolutionary founding fathers of the United States of America's fledgling democracy and was conducive to democratic proliferation in the West at large and the unfolding of abolitionism in the early nineteenth century and inevitably the rest of the world as well as the emergence of the great progressive socialist ideas of utopian socialism represented by its most prominent proponents Saint-Simon (1760-1825), Fourier (1772-1837) and Owen (1771-1858) and the more comprehensive, highly developed and practically applicable socialist theories of their successors Karl Marx (1818-1883) and his close friend Friedrich Engels (1820-1895) and yet despite all of this as centuries of European colonialism, enslavement and genocide of non-white peoples since the Christian devout Columbus and his brutal conquistador holy warrior successors enslaved and exterminated Central and South American Indigenous peoples ostensibly in the name of Christianity, those conquistadors and the state's official Spanish Catholic clergy for the most part dehumanised and treated Indigenous natives as nonhuman animal-like beasts of burden or at best, heathen primitive savages as their French and British successors would in the following centuries in North America intertwined with the generational condensed accumulation of distinctly Franco-Germanic European racist thought in the West significantly reinforced the falsely vindicated rampant white racial supremacy hypothesis mainly during the scramble for Africa and the mass exploitation of the natural resources of the hitherto unexplored interior of the immense continent following the ill-boding Berlin conference of 1884-1885 to officially partition Africa between Western powers, initiating grotesquely unheard-of levels of atrocities of senseless cruelty in the Congo River basin by Leopold II (r. 1865-1909) of Belgium's ruthless voracious greed in plundering the untapped abundant natural riches of his massive central African privately owned dominion by giving it the ridiculously ironic euphemistic name "The Congo Free State" under the spurious ruse of bringing Western civilisation and modernity to the allegedly primitive savages of the African hinterlands through Christian missionary work and the purported stamping out of local indigenous African slavery controlled by local leaders and chieftains in collaboration with Arab slave traders from the East African coast, Leopold was given free rein with the implicit approval of the major Western powers at the said conference who benefited the most from this scandalous arrangement where Leopold II transformed it into the largest privately held slave colony in modern history complete with its own private murderous mercenary army "Force Publique" (Public Force) with Leopold remaining its legally designated sole owner from 1885 to 1908 a year before his death when he finally considered loosening his tenacious grip on his African fiefdom in the face of mounting international pressure, owing to the undeniable harrowing photographic evidence of the ongoing Congolese genocide victims' charred human remains and the mutilated living survivors with dismembered mangled limbs including those of children, brought to the fore in numerous press reports and various other official reports, namely the decisive official Casement British report of 1904 which was instrumental in Leopold II's relinquishing of the Congo, paradoxically becoming a veritably shameful embarrassment to other European colonial powers particularly Britain, this tragic chapter of Congolese colonial history was even immortalised in literature in the lauded semi-autobiographical novella "Heart of Darkness" by Polish-English novelist Joseph Conrad, hailed ever since as an early anticolonial modernist masterpiece, all the while when these reports began to surface, the population of the Congo was declining at an alarming rate from approximately twenty million prior to Leopold II's Congo blithe appropriation to around eight million by the time of his death at which point he was understandably the richest man in the world as a consequence of all of this, it was becoming increasingly obvious by democratic Western standards at the turn of the twentieth century that it was untenable for a monarch of a constitutional parliamentary European monarchy to retain an overseas bloodstained, immensely lucrative private colony of such vast expanse he had never visited for much longer, so he reluctantly transferred its ownership to the Belgian government, to become known henceforth as the Belgian Congo until it gained independence in 1960 aside from the arrival on the African scene of a slew of staunchly imperialist adventurous fortune-seeking explorers, such as Leopold II of Belgium's African agent, the Welsh-American Henry Morton Stanley (1841-1904) who claimed the huge Congo basin region as private property for the Belgian king, the wily Italian-French Pierre Savorgnan de Brazza (1852-1905) the French colonialist founder of the city of Brazzaville (named after its colonialist founder) the capital of the French Congo (Republic of the Congo) and the controversial Oxford-educated British-born maverick imperialist industrious businessman and South African politician Cecil Rhodes (1853-1902) where he was involved through his British South Africa Company in founding the southern African territory of Rhodesia which bore his name (now Zimbabwe and Zambia) and also founded the internationally famous De Beers Diamond Consortium in South Africa in 1888 the largest diamond company in the world until the early twenty-first century and to some arguably the architect of the notorious institutionalised system of racism "Apartheid" a modern reinvention of slavery in South Africa, underpinning existing forms of racial segregation since the late eighteenth century in the country, one of several milder variances in other European-controlled parts of the world after the abolition of colour-based slavery in the West but his most enduring legacy is the reputable Oxford Rhodes postgraduate scholarship as many Rhodes Scholars have gone on to become heads of state, heads of government, or distinguished in their respective fields, moreover as for the Germans who were among the newcomers along with the Belgians and Italians on the global imperial stage, though similar in cruelty, under the direct orders of the German Emperor Kaiser Wilhelm II (r. 1888-1918) the German Empire committed appalling atrocities in Africa, in line with its then other Western counterparts around the globe, specifically the 1904-1908 "Herero and Namaqua genocide" the first ethnic genocide in the twentieth century intended as a form of collective punishment and ethnic extermination for the Herero and Namaqua peoples of German South West Africa (present-day Republic of Namibia) for their insurgency against German settler-colonial rule which subjected them to intolerable relentless pressure for nearly two decades to wrest control of their arable agricultural lands, pastoral grounds and water resources, coupled with a viciously disproportionate racially discriminatory judicial system, leaving them with little choice but to rise up against their German colonial overlords since the Germans first set foot in Namibia in 1884 as part of their newly carved large oversees Empire in Africa as a consequence of the earlier alluded to Berlin conference of 1884 under the astute tutelage of master statesman Imperial German "Iron Chancellor" Otto Von Bismarck, the armed uprising represented a golden opportunity for the Germans to implement "Lebensraum" or "living space" to create a living space for the superior German people to thrive and prosper to the detriment of lesser races, an inspired distortion of Darwin's survival of the fittest theory, coined and popularised by the German geographer and ethnographer Friedrich Ratzel (1844-1904) who introduced concepts contributing to Lebensraum and Social Darwinism, Ratzel's theories would become an integral component of Nazi ideology in the two decades following his death, in particular with regard to the predominantly Slavic-populated Eastern Europe as German South West Africa became a testing ground for all of these various forms of racist theories, a mishmash of Lebensraum, scientific racism, eugenics and ableism, was emerging principally engendered by Darwin's seminal game-changing theory of evolution as this theory became the gift that keeps on giving to all Western European colonial powers including Tsarist Eurasian Imperial Russia, with ramifications reaching to the present in some Western academic circles in a quest to subtly justify white racial hegemony over other races as part of the German imperial authorities' attempt to permanently resolve the vexing issue of a racially inferior African population therefore following the inevitable conclusion of the grossly asymmetrical conflict, influenced by breakthroughs in biology, notably Darwin's evolutionary theory and the apathetic determinism of its evil spawn "Social Darwinism" as previously referred to, German imperial colonial authorities saw it as an invaluable platform for German doctors and scientists to test hitherto untested pseudo-scientific racial theories on living human beings for the first time where deadly medical experiments on expendable resistance prisoner fighters and their families were carried out in the Shark Island concentration camp, the first death camp of its kind in the world by a select team of doctors under the direct supervision of celebrated professor of medicine, anthropology and eugenics, Eugen Fischer (1874-1967) an ardent future member of the Nazi party (acronym for the National Socialist German Workers' Party) and one of the main influencers of Hitler on Germanic racial superiority as clearly manifested in Hitler's manifesto Mein Kampf (My Struggle) with a special focus on Fischer's role in studying the mixed-race offspring "Basters" (a derogatory Dutch term for mixed-race Afrikaners) of early German and Boer (Dutch) settlers to highlight the risks of interbreeding with perceived inferior races, pushing for the sterilisation of their progeny to avert the transmission of undesirable traits to future generations as these proposals regarding the prohibition of interracial unions, euthanasia of the handicapped, mentally ill and sterilisation of racial inferiors would form the basis of the Nuremberg race laws in 1935 as would the deliberate starvation to death of the non-combatant civilian population including children in the arid Namib coastal desert by denying them access to drinking water on the direct orders of extermination by General von Trotha, on top of working many others to death as forced labour, encompassing men, women and children as young as six in public works projects such as railway construction and so on, the fortunate few thousand survivors were offered up as slaves to German settlers on the confiscated lands of the enslaved themselves as this horrific and until the early twenty-first century remained deliberately obscured, premeditated genocide in Africa served as a rough draft precursor to the colossal Nazi atrocities of death camps monstrosities a quarter-century later, conducted by Fischer's and his African team colleagues' apt students, such as the exonerated of war crimes due to a lack of evidence Otmar Freiherr von (Baron of) Verschuer (1896-1969) the human biologist and eminent geneticist and the Professor of Human Genetics at the University of Münster until his retirement in 1965 and the close mentor to the fiendish young Nazi ideologue physician Dr. Josef Mengele (1911-1979) who was given the appellation "Angel of Death" by his victims as the unrepentant Mengele was one of a handful of senior Nazi war criminals who managed to evade justice for the remainder of their lives, similar yet far less publicised ethnic cleansing atrocities were committed by both the Kingdom of Italy at the onset of the Italian colonial invasion of Libya in October 1911 and Mussolini's subsequent brutal Fascist settler colonialism in Libya where nearly all of the Libyan urban population of the five major urban centres and their livestock were forcibly displaced to sixteen massive death camps in the Libyan desert to be starved to death in just one of these documented genocidal operations from 1929 to 1934 almost seventy thousand Libyans perished as these camps served as another source of inspiration and a prelude for the German Nazis' dreadful concentration camps, in addition to Germany's own previously mentioned African imperial experience, many in the West still tentatively perceive Italian fascism as moderately less dogmatic in comparison to the horrors of German Nazism, most likely owing to the fact that the majority of Italian Fascist victims were North African Arabs and Ethiopians fortunately for the Libyans these genocidal operations ended in 1943 with the Axis's North African defeat in World War Two, ending thirty-two years of Italian settler colonial occupation during which the Libyan population was reduced from around one and a half million prior to 1911 to less than half in 1943 as it was quite plausible for the Fascist dictatorship of Mussolini to endure with the undeclared acquiescence and cooperation of the American-led capitalist liberal democratic West had Italy remained neutral as Franco's Spain, with fascism acting as a necessary evil bulwark against Soviet communism by staving off the powerful Italian left, analogous to that of Spain, from democratically gaining power through tyranny and oppression under the pretext of the ensuing Cold War, while Mussolini's genocidal demographic replacement plans for Libya would have come to fruition, turning the desert nation into a southern Mediterranean extension of Italy, with at least fifteen million Italian settlers displacing the decimated Indigenous population as referred to earlier, over four centuries of European overseas colonialism, racial slavery and genocide in the Americas, Asia, Australia and Africa, aided by apologetic reasoning, apathetic pragmatic rational thought, scientific racism pseudo-science and eugenics and in earlier cases Christian religious justifications, as Western imperialist powers employed these justifications on multiple occasions to lend meaning to their largely insatiable imperialist projects and in other instances to assuage their gnawing consciences, forging the catalyst that paved the way for the emergence of German Nazi Aryan racist ideology in the aftermath of World War One, German defeat and the humiliating Treaty of Versailles by giving rise to the rowdy racially suffused polemics of the charismatic insubstantial Austrian corporal demagogue Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) and his cohorts, a multifaceted Fascist totalitarian ideology affecting the lives of everyone living under its scourge, resulting in the unleashing of atrocities of unparalleled proportions, reflecting the unique vile extremism of this spartan-like militaristic ableist racial hierarchical ideology by perfecting the callous technology of mass murder embodied in the state-of-the-art, highly methodical and extremely efficient Nazi concentration and death camp killing machine apparatus of the gruesome gas chamber and crematorium ovens, along with the mostly lethal medical human experiments on prisoners of all ages and genders, in tandem with extermination by starvation, the Nazis were able to massacre more than twenty million people, roughly six million of whom were European Jews, in what became known as "The Jewish Holocaust" or the "Final Solution to the Jewish Question" a crime exemplifying the centuries-long deep-seated anti-Semitism in Europe and across the Christian West in general from the time of Constantine the Great (r. 306-337) the first Christian Roman Emperor, until Emperor Theodosius I (r. 379-395) made Christianity the only official religion of the Empire in the year 380 AD onwards, to the mediaeval period when Jewish people in Christian Europe were viewed with suspicion as interloping enemies of Jesus Christ these sentiments reached their highest point during the Crusades where entire Jewish communities were wiped out and their properties and valuables looted and confiscated in England, France and Germany and also as fair game easy targets in the Balkans for the self-proclaimed holy Christian warriors on their way to the Levant and the Biblical Holy Land in the east before facing the Saracen (Muslim) enemy, while Jews suffered the most in both England and France under the tacit orders of Richard I (r. 1189-1199) known as Richard the Lionheart of England and his cousin Philip II (r. 1180-1223) of France, both Kings were motivated by expediency rather than religious zealotry in dealing with their respective mounting fiscal crises, specifically the French monarch who targeted defenceless French Jews for their material wealth under the guise of religion by rallying unruly mobs of his Christian subjects as in England against their fellow Jewish neighbours who were designated as a non-citizen restricted special status community using Christian traditional anti-Jewish polemic tropes despite these tragic events, the English Jewish community continued to exist and prosper, albeit in smaller numbers, for another century until another unscrupulous warrior Crusader king, Edward I, byname Edward Longshanks (r. 1272-1307) came along in the final stages of the Crusades and issued an edict of expulsion on the 18th of July 1290 expelling all Jews from the Kingdom of England and sequestering all of their property, the plight of English Jews could not have been more aptly symbolised than by its tragic conclusion whereby a chartered ship laden with valuables belonging to wealthy Jews was craftily seized by its English captain at the behest of the King leaving the Jewish passengers stranded at low tide at the mouth of the river Thames estuary to drown once high tide arrived, it would take almost four centuries for Jews to be allowed back into England under Cromwell's fanatical Puritan Old Testament-inspired ascetic commonwealth dictatorship in 1657 and two centuries after their expulsion from England another tragedy awaited them when Granada the last Muslim Kingdom in Iberia, fell to the Catholic Castilians in 1492 both Muslims and Jews became the target of merciless terror under the newly established Spanish Inquisition in 1478 by the officially devoutly married Catholic joint sovereigns of their respective kingdoms, Monarchs Ferdinand II King of Aragon and Isabella I Queen Regnant of Castile whose marriage union in 1469 resulted in the birth of the last major political and territorial union in the Iberian Peninsula since Visigothic Spain in 1479 and in their quest to establish a socially and religiously homogeneous national identity in the newly united Catholic Spanish Kingdom after the removal of the last tolerant Andalusian multicultural multi-ethnic Arab Muslim polity hurdle represented by the culturally vibrant centre of learning of the Kingdom of Granada, effectively ending nearly eight centuries of "Dhimmi" (people of the covenant or the book) Islamic jurisdiction where Christians, Jews and other minorities lived in relative harmonious peace with very little friction under Muslim jurisprudence protection by unleashing an unmatched systematic wave of persecution by the Inquisition court as hundreds of thousands of Muslim and Jewish Spaniards were forced to convert to Catholicism over the next two centuries and an equal number fled for their lives to North Africa and Ottoman-held territories, with some Jews opting to flee to the more tolerant progressive protestant Dutch Republic after it declared independence from the Spanish Empire in 1581 and last but not least the recurring pogroms (massacres in Russian) of Jews in the Russian Empire from the early nineteenth to the early twentieth centuries, accumulating about sixteen centuries of virulent anti-Semitism in Christian Europe's collective consciousness, engendering this inveterate hatred for Jews to reveal itself in myriads of ways throughout all Nazi-occupied Europe where most of those occupied European countries witnessed some level of complicity with the Nazis in facilitating and perpetrating the heinous crime of the Holocaust genocide of nearly six million Jews by some of the local officials and ordinary citizens alike acting of their own free will, without being enticed by materialistic monetary reward or subjected to duress as in Vichy Fascist France under Marshal Petain, Romania under Antonescu's military dictatorship and Hungary, accompanied by more than fourteen million other victims who were largely overlooked, forgotten and unaccounted for until recently, merely treated as a collateral footnote in history, consisting of an amalgamation of disparate peoples, many of whom the Nazis considered racial inferiors, as Romani people (Roma Gypsies), Slavs, mixed-race Germans, or those with severe physical disabilities, chronic mental illnesses, carriers of hereditary diseases and anyone else who defied Nazi ideology, for example political opponents, intellectuals and others regardless of racial background, or was deemed incompatible with the Nazis' exceedingly narrow and dull uniform exclusionary vision of the world, a brutal conflagration villainy on an unprecedented industrial scale, utilising all of Germany's advanced technological and industrial capabilities to its nefarious goals beginning soon after the ominous Nazi party with its feared paramilitary divisions the SA and SS, hijacked power to which it was elected in free democratic elections in the midst of Germany's quite hard-hitting remorseless economic throes of the Great Depression in 1933, transforming Germany into a despotic one-party state dictatorship led by the self-proclaimed Führer (Leader) Adolf Hitler with a personality-worshipping cult dedicated to him as an infallible leader, lasting until the end of the Second World War and the unlamented downfall of the Third Reich in 1945, it is important to bear in mind that had Nazi Germany won the war the world as we know it today would have been unrecognisable, with meticulously selected fair-haired fair-skinned Germanic European Aryans as the dominant master race, leading inexorably to the steady systematic enslavement and annihilation of all other human races on the planet, ironically it took tens of millions of deaths mostly of white Europeans by the Nazis, for scientific racism and eugenics to fade from popular consciousness in the West furthermore the Emily Lorimer letters provide a glimpse into the mindset of some of the highly educated middle-class members of both genders of the rapidly growing socially mobile industrialised British society particularly women, in pre-World War One as some of these well-educated but partially enfranchised restless women became involved to varying degrees in women's emancipation activism initially in the less successful decades-long struggle of the miscellaneous peaceful women's suffrage movements since the first woman suffrage committee saw the light in Manchester in 1865 and later in its more successful radically violent militant famous offshoot the suffragette movement, founded and led in 1903 by Emmeline Pankhurst (1858-1928) and her shrewd organisationally skilled 23-year-old daughter Christabel as those movements and their numerous splintered groups collectively fought for the inalienable equal right of women to vote in public elections, until it finally bore fruit in the aftermath of the First World War through consecutive acts of Parliament in 1918 and 1928 after the enormous sacrifices made by the staunch and courageous suffragist heroines, ranging from being verbally abused, physically roughed up and sexually assaulted by police during demonstrations to imprisonment, hunger strikes and the mounting to torture cruel response of police authorities forcefully feeding female imprisoned hunger strikers and for some even paying with their lives to advance such a noble cause as the iron-willed and highly committed Emily Davison (1872-1913) the first martyr of the movement, though not the conservative intransigent British imperialist ideologue well-off empowered woman, Emily Lorimer who unsurprisingly was adamantly opposed to granting women the vote, deeming such a move as a subversive attempt against the traditional ruling establishment as was her legendary contemporary the solitary, steely, upper-class, conventional gender role-challenging and perhaps the first stalwart heroine of the British Empire in modern times, Gertrude Bell (1868-1926) a fierce opponent of British female suffrage and emancipation the multifaceted, remarkably industrious, Oxford-educated, highly empowered, extremely privileged Arabist political and intelligence officer, administrator, and grand and military strategist, to name a few of her many preoccupations and interests, and the de facto ruler of Iraq until her sudden most likely suicide drug-induced death after being informally delegated to her by Iraq's High Commissioner Percy Cox an admirer of her who held her wise judgement in high regard, ruling the country via her formal position as the advisor and mentor to the newly British-appointed Hashemite King of Iraq Faisal I in 1921 who was under her total tutelage wielding immense power and influence through him as the real power behind the throne and thus garnering such status among the Iraqi elite that she was given the Turkic female honorary title "Al-Khatun" (The Queen) strikingly she was the first female to hold such positions within the merit-based male-dominated British administrative system including the army, Bell unexpectedly became a champion of women's rights in Iraq, playing an important role in the enfranchisement of Iraqi women by lending her support to already existing local Iraqi women's emancipation initiatives in accordance with the forcibly imposed British colonial grafting process policy in the colonies once the necessity arose to apply urgent reforms to create needed stability as in Bahrain and also to establish an Indigenous popular power base for Britain among marginalised Iraqi women and liberal educated Iraqi elites particularly in Baghdad and other urban centres following the partial granting of the vote to British women in 1918 not to mention her significant contribution to the successful execution of the inextricably linked Sykes-Picot Agreement and the Balfour Declaration on the ground, against her justified reservations on the latter begetting future geopolitical tumultuous changes with unremitting disastrous consequences for the peoples of the region until now at the 1921 Cairo conference, alongside T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia), Herbert Samuel, Percy Cox, Field Marshal Allenby, among others along with the aristocratic resolute colonialist Winston Churchill who masterminded, convened and chaired the conference as the then colonial secretary, other than her above-mentioned anti-suffrage stance, Emily Lorimer was naturally opposed to Arab independence despite her fondness for Arabic literature and language as a British imperialist advocate and the loyal wife of a colonial officer, she firmly believed in the British Empire as a benevolent global force for good, a provider of civilisation and modernity as was the case with other European colonial powers in a world riddled with ignorance and backwardness to say the least as one would expect from a Eurocentric perspective back then, so giving Arabs independence was an unthinkable travesty and even more so to a limited form of Irish self-government, falling short of full independence for the freedom-hungry Irish people who had endured in excess of seven centuries of foreign Anglo-British oppressive feudal exploitation since the Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland in 1169 until independence from Britain in 1922 a relentlessly demeaning and humiliating discriminatory colonial and partially settler multi-layered occupation where the Irish had to bear the brunt of the cultural and socioeconomic changes and upheavals occurring in their English overlords' homeland throughout the long occupation, most notably the so-called "Tudor conquest of Ireland" during the volatile and violent Tudor epoch of Henry VIII's (r. 1509-1547) dramatic religious cataclysms of English reformation and those of his fickle Tudor successors' sixteenth century English monarchs particularly his religiously opposing daughters and equally ruthless half-sisters Mary I (r. 1553-1558) the short reigning devotedly raised Catholic dubbed "Bloody Mary" for her persecution of English Protestants and Elizabeth I (r. 1558-1603) the strong independent-minded, highly intelligent, multilingual, unwed, long reigning Protestant the founder of the maritime piracy-based English Empire what would become known more than a century later in the early eighteenth century as the British Empire, Cromwell's grim Puritan Anti-Catholic draconian conquest of Catholic Ireland and culminating in the partly British-incurred and exacerbated devastating Great Famine also known as the Irish Potato Famine which occurred from 1845 to 1852 due to the unbridled, industrial liberal-driven free market economics of the British ruling liberal (Whig) party cabinet in the mid-nineteenth century, Britain treated the famine afflicting their colonised Catholic white Gaelic Irish neighbours no differently than the series of famines that struck their brown Indian counterparts thousands of kilometres away in the earlier part of the nineteenth century where the British were equally just in being unjust in their indignities towards both colonised peoples, with the only advantage the Irish had was an escape route through the Atlantic since the Biblical-like seven-year Irish famine resulted in over a million fatalities and nearly twice as many emigrating to North America the majority of whom went to the thriving rapidly industrialising United States, forming a large prosperous community in the following century with a small minority heading for the French-speaking Catholic Quebec in Canada and notwithstanding all of this, the Anglo-Irish Emily Overend Lorimer remained an apathetically steadfast British imperialist, viewing the long-proposed meagre Irish self-government (home rule) after centuries of exploitative and occasionally cruel Anglo-British colonialisation of Ireland as a superfluous luxury.

 

17 March 1912.

 

We had an amusing invasion of three weird-looking Frenchmen the other day.

 

They came up the Gulf on a tour - possibly prospecting for commercial openings - with only a few days to spare and without making any enquiries about conditions. They chose to travel on an Arab steamer - which must in itself be a strange experience. They were greatly disconcerted to learn that if they went on to Bushier their boat would then be in Quarantine and they would not be allowed to land at other ports - not even to sightsee.

 

They decided then to stay at Bahrain till their boat should call again on its downward way, so they landed here to look for a hotel!

 

They had introductions to an Arab merchant here and he is generously giving them quarters - otherwise pretty well unprocurable but we wonder how they will like native houses and native food for 10 days. They then came on to us to ask could not Lock arrange that they should be exempted from Quarantine if they went on; he had to explain that this was not in his power nor in anyone else's that he would, if necessary, have to go into Quarantine himself. On this they thought they would like to go and telegraph home; we had to break it gently to them that there was no Telegraph but that they would enjoy like their betters postal communication once a fortnight. Dr. Zwemer was with us when they called and as soon as they were gone, we had a very hearty laugh over their dismay. We have asked them to dine on Thursday next; they ought by that time to be ready to enjoy European food even if our cooking etc. is not quite up to the best Parisian standards. We are longing to know how they communicate with their host who knows nothing but Arabic while one of them knows a little Hindustani!

 

28 March 1912.

 

We had the Frenchmen to dinner one evening; they were very pleasant; M. Cartier the spokesman of the party appears to be the scion of a large firm of jewellers (the name one doubtless ought to know) who have houses in New Bond St., 1 Rue de la Paix and Fifth Avenue, his companion M. Richard was much quieter and more gentlemanly but was scarcely allowed a word in edgeways so it wasn't easy to judge, the third was a Parsi gentleman who was acting as interpreter.

 

They were all much amused at the contrast between the native lunch they had had, squatting round the orthodox sheep's corpse, and the civilized dinner! As a matter of fact, they did not suffer so much for lack of a hotel as they might have done, for they had their own bedding, etc., and their own cook and they seemed to be enjoying their enforced stay.

 

Our tennis party on the 19th. Was a great success; it was the first of our At Homes that unquestionably did not at any moment hang fire. When the guests arrived Lock took the only three real players down to a men's four while I gave the others tea; after this, we sat on the veranda watching what for Bahrain was quite decent tennis, then the players had tea and I sent off a set of amateurs to pat ball to each other. The cook had again surpassed himself in cakes and Jafar managed the recurring hot teapots etc. very well.

 

Since then, we have been playing almost every day; most often Messrs Macpherson and Holst arrive to join us; two afternoons M. Cartier turned up; he must be a pretty useful player, as Archie calls it, when in form and even as it was / on the strange court with a borrowed racket he gave a good account of himself, though I am happy to say that Lock gave him a good beating. Over his whiskey and soda afterwards he was talking about the charms of chess and to my great dismay, Lock offered him a game with me. I was afraid he might be really good and ''stuffy” over my amateur play, so I went very gingerly at it at first; but I soon found that his knowledge of it was not very deep and had the pleasure of giving him a nice mate, which I repeated twice the following evening.

 

It was good fun to play again though not so much fun as if he had been a less easy victim.

This is VC Tower, an interlocking rail station located slightly one block east-ish of Portland, OR's Union Station. My husband worked there during the 90s, and was present for its last throes of life.

 

The Tower finally closed in November of 1997, when the Union Pacific changed the operations of this tower from a local manual system to the automated process controlled by the huge centralized UP dispatch center in Omaha, NE. VC Tower at one time also served as a telegraphing office. The top floor contained all the big brass handled controls for signals and switches, as well as a direct phone line to the Steel Bridge, which was accessed by an old-timey style phone mounted to the interlocking machine on an accordion arm. The bottom floor contained the bulk of the interlocking machine.

 

The window at top left in the photo was used back in the day (before modern communication technology) to pass paper messages via pole to the train engine crew. The window came so close to the engine cab it seemed like you could almost reach your arm out and shake hands with the engineer. Sure, the engineer was separated by feet rather than inches, but I'd never been that close to a working, moving train in my entire life. It was nearly like a drive-thru window at Taco Bell - reflective of just how short the distance viscerally felt between the window and the cab.

 

The roar of the oncoming trains was awesome, sounding like doom pouring down a mountain: an avalanche of metal machinery bearing towards you over the tracks. The early 20th century brick building would shiver and shake as trains approached; it felt like the little tower was trembling in fear. It was amazing, really - experiencing the sensational rumble and energy-rich vibration from a train without physically being upon it impressed itself forever upon my memory. Previously having seen the engineers of trains solely pass by only in a blur, it felt unreal to me to examine their faces as something concrete and specific.

 

One of the neatest features inside the building was an old transit board, hanging above the windows, displaying the surrounding track that fell within VC Tower's control. It showed a bit of local rail history, containing mentions of switches and tracks that no longer existed, as well as prominently labeling the contents of the board as Northern Pacific property. The board would light up individual LEDs when and where a signal was active. There was also some sort of needled meter on the board, but not being a railroad employee myself, I can't say what the lighted meter was for - I only took notice of "oooh! shiny lights!" (I'm shallow, sadly, what can I say?)

 

The interior surfaces of the building were rather richly coated in the accumulated grease and dust of the century, and while exuding an ostensible tidiness, the room upstairs simply could not escape the dirt and grime of being railroad property. The guys who worked there didn't take any especial notice of this, so it's perhaps telling that I, as a female and an outsider to the job, DID notice this particular detail.

 

The guys who worked there in the 90s put up with one oddly similar working condition that film actors I've known do when they're on set - long periods of interminable boredom and waiting, punctuated by bursts of over-busy activity and hustling to get the work done. Those VC Tower guys unfortunately were also charged with chasing off trespassers/vagrants who might want to sleep on the tracks, which could be a scary and risky endeavor indeed.

 

One of the former VC Tower employees sued for injuries resulting from falling asleep and tipping over in his chair on-the-job, and he did so successfully.... It was a long-standing pejorative joke about the particular employee himself, which is why I think I got to hear of it.

 

This is actually the second VC Tower. The original was a wooden structure, with the brick structure built to replace the first. The scuttlebutt is that the wooden building burned down, thus necessitating a new tower. Railroader gossip also holds that VC Tower was one of the last of its kind, if not THE last, in the United States.

 

The real pity about the preservation of this building comes down to the utter neglect of the Tower's interior contents - while VC Tower was initially supposed to be preserved in whole, the contents of the structure were ultimately left to the homeless squatters who slept in the building rather than by the historical society officially charged with its preservation. This means much of the old documents and diagrams/blueprints were used up as toilet paper and/or scrapped material long ago by those myriad trespassers. Some of the old blueprints showed old city street/line planning and technical specifications that are now lost into the mists of history because they were not immediately conserved into a library. Instead they were left to sit inside the unguarded (officially protected by railroad police, but unofficially easily trespassable for anyone able to break a window) building for casual destruction. As it turned out, the only thing remaining inviolable is the brick structure itself. Lots of stuff is now disappeared, representing a real loss to both railroad history buffs and to historical preservationists of the City of Portland.

 

My information here comes either from railroader (specifically via pre-'85 guys from Portland) lore or from my own observations both current and when visiting my then-boyfriend/now-husband and his co-workers at work at VC Tower.

 

The VC Interlocking Tower is now being given new life thanks to Portland's TriMet light rail line - an article on this proposal has been written up in a Portland Tribune article. In particular I love that the PT article makes sure to mention and define the railroader slang of "foamer." It used to drive those poor VC Tower guys nuts when the foamers would give them such idiotic grief that they couldn't get inside the Tower to take a million pictures. In Great Britain they have "trainspotters," but in the U.S., we have their less passive cousins, the "foamers."

  

This is what my story characters would look like if they were real people. I mean, of course they are very real, but you know what I mean.

 

I found these photos on Pinterest and tried to pick a photo for each character that I think resembles them best. I only spent a day on this search, so I might have found better portraits in time, but my doll story The Life and Tales of Elliot Crane has been on hiatus for so long that I simply needed a project finished right now. Thus, coloring and some features may not totally match the dolls that play my characters. But I concentrated on the facial expressions, styling and overall mood the photos give off when I looked for common traits. Whether a character is often timid, headstrong, happy, snarky, ditzy, obsessive, wistful, self-righteous, over-optimistic, moody, hyperactive, insightful or creepy etc., that’s what I wanted to demonstrate with these 25 pictures.

 

I’m about to start my storytelling again in the near future, and before I get there I want you to play a fun game with me. If you have read my story, this should be super easy to do! I have numbered each photo, and here I’m posting a quote by each character, marked with a letter. You’re supposed to combine each number with a letter and the character’s name and list them in the comments under any of these three collages, for example in this manner:

 

1P, Sybil

2H, Elliot

3S, Ben

4G, Violet

 

So if you think it’s Sybil in picture 1 and quote P belongs to her, that would be the correct marking, and so on. BUT there is a twist! Or two. Two of the pictures are of characters you haven’t seen before. One of the two has, however, spoken in the story and threatened to enter it soon. The other one hasn’t even spoken in the story, but that character has been spoken about plenty of times. It’s a character from the past that will make a significant performance in the first book I’m writing based on this story, as the book’s story kicks off over six year before the online story does. That character will also likely enter the online story at some point. That missing character has had a huge impact on a certain main character’s life, so it shouldn’t be too hard to figure out who it is and what quote belongs to him or her.

 

To make things a little easier, the quotes are in a chronological order, starting with A under collage 1 and ending with Y under collage 3. I chose the characters based on the quotes. If they have had something significant to say that either has moved the plot forward or shown what the story is about, I consider them worthy of being here even if they are side characters.

 

The first person to get the list done and correct will get a prize… I will draw a cartoon of any of their chosen doll character and post it on Flickr, so the winner can print it out and put it in a diorama if they like. You can see some of my cartoons and other art here: www.flickr.com/photos/moccasiini/sets/72157664122372833/

 

Are you ready? Here are the 25 quotes divided under these three collages:

 

-----------------------------

 

Edit: Since no one wanted to play the guessing game, I'm matching the characters with the quotes myself for your viewing pleasure.

 

A: I removed A's quote because it's from an unreleased book and thus subject to change. The character is Charlie Huddleston with number 24.

 

B: “Of course. I’m an angel... of pain. I can feel yours. I have – like you – lost my inviolability to the degradation of life.” – Lavinia "Vinnie" Rosendahl, number 6 (A flashback from episode S2E11: Angel Divine)

 

C: “You probably don’t know this, but I’ve been a big fan of Michelangelo for years. From what I understand, he used to think that art can never be perfect enough. My favorite quote by him goes like this: ‘The true work of art is but a shadow of the divine perfection.’ I just think that it applies to humans, too. Humans are divine. Okay, we are totally mortal and all that… But I think that mortality is just a shell that covers divinity. Some people hide their divinity better than others, but we all have it inside.” – Elliot Crane, number 25 (S1E6: Talk About Art, Divinity and Good News)

 

D: “You’d better tell us. It’s my little sister you’re messing with. Then again… it’s my little sister. I probably don't wanna hear.” – Bram De Hurst, number 17 (S1E18: The Purpose of Life 2/2)

 

E: “Idiot! You’re like the annoying little brother I never had – and never wanted.” – Ben Deering, number 1 (S2E5: All Flowers in Time, 1/2)

 

F: “Gosh! You were always so bad at remembering people’s names. And can you please stop kissing my wife? And Mirah, would you remove your hand off his butt?” – Davy Dean "Dee Dee" Faulkner, number 5 (S2E6: All Flowers in Time, 2/2)

 

G: “I know he’s, like, poor. But Elliot said that it’s the thought that counts, right? And then he said that if you have a dream and you want something badly, there’s a good chance that it will come true. But he also said that you have to work on that dream first, and that you can plant it in someone’s brain if you try hard enough. Can you work on that dream and plant it in his brain so he buys a car for me, mom? Please? Aunt Sybil, pleeease?” – Alexander "Alex" De Hurst, number 22 (S2E7: What Happened in Kansas)

 

H: “Oh yes, I will remember you! I will write on your tombstone: ‘Here lies a coward who got a chance to make something out of himself and threw it away like a dish rag.’ And I will regularly visit your grave and remember to spit on your tombstone! How would you like that?” – Sybil De Hurst, number 4 (S2E10: The Peculiar Bet)

 

I: “Yeah, but I wanted three hot guys. And let’s be honest: the quality suffers without Elliot. He seems to be your muse. Sorry to break this to you, but I’m not all that impressed by the portraits you used to take before he came along. I love your landscapes and all things nature, but portraits of people… not so much. Sorry.” – Anissa Loviatar, number 19 (S2E18: She Is Free)

  

A misty view from Richmond Hill... a perspective that has been celebrated by generations of poets, dreamers, lovers, romantics and artists.

 

The view was granted inviolable status in perpetuity by the Richmond Petersham and Ham Open Spaces Act of 1902.

Castelló de la Plana (La Plana Alta, 19 d'abril de 2006).

 

THE WASTE LAND

 

T. S. Eliot

    

"Nam Sibyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis

vidi in ampulla pendere, et cum illi pueri dicerent:

Sibylla ti theleis; respondebat illa: apothanein thelo."

  

I. THE BURIAL OF THE DEAD

 

April is the cruellest month, breeding

Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing

Memory and desire, stirring

Dull roots with spring rain.

Winter kept us warm, covering

Earth in forgetful snow, feeding

A little life with dried tubers.

Summer surprised us, coming over the Starnbergersee

With a shower of rain; we stopped in the colonnade,

And went on in sunlight, into the Hofgarten,

And drank coffee, and talked for an hour.

Bin gar keine Russin, stamm' aus Litauen, echt deutsch.

And when we were children, staying at the archduke's,

My cousin's, he took me out on a sled,

And I was frightened. He said, Marie,

Marie, hold on tight. And down we went.

In the mountains, there you feel free.

I read, much of the night, and go south in the winter.

 

What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow

Out of this stony rubbish? Son of man,

You cannot say, or guess, for you know only

A heap of broken images, where the sun beats,

And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief,

And the dry stone no sound of water. Only

There is shadow under this red rock,

(Come in under the shadow of this red rock),

And I will show you something different from either

Your shadow at morning striding behind you

Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;

I will show you fear in a handful of dust.

Frisch weht der Wind

Der Heimat zu

Mein Irisch Kind,

Wo weilest du?

"You gave me hyacinths first a year ago;

"They called me the hyacinth girl."

- Yet when we came back, late, from the Hyacinth garden,

Your arms full, and your hair wet, I could not

Speak, and my eyes failed, I was neither

Living nor dead, and I knew nothing,

Looking into the heart of light, the silence.

Od' und leer das Meer.

 

Madame Sosostris, famous clairvoyante,

Had a bad cold, nevertheless

Is known to be the wisest woman in Europe,

With a wicked pack of cards. Here, said she,

Is your card, the drowned Phoenician Sailor,

(Those are pearls that were his eyes. Look!)

Here is Belladonna, the Lady of the Rocks,

The lady of situations.

Here is the man with three staves, and here the Wheel,

And here is the one-eyed merchant, and this card,

Which is blank, is something he carries on his back,

Which I am forbidden to see. I do not find

The Hanged Man. Fear death by water.

I see crowds of people, walking round in a ring.

Thank you. If you see dear Mrs. Equitone,

Tell her I bring the horoscope myself:

One must be so careful these days.

 

Unreal City,

Under the brown fog of a winter dawn,

A crowd flowed over London Bridge, so many,

I had not thought death had undone so many.

Sighs, short and infrequent, were exhaled,

And each man fixed his eyes before his feet.

Flowed up the hill and down King William Street,

To where Saint Mary Woolnoth kept the hours

With a dead sound on the final stroke of nine.

There I saw one I knew, and stopped him, crying "Stetson!

"You who were with me in the ships at Mylae!

"That corpse you planted last year in your garden,

"Has it begun to sprout? Will it bloom this year?

"Or has the sudden frost disturbed its bed?

  

"Oh keep the Dog far hence, that's friend to men,

"Or with his nails he'll dig it up again!

"You! hypocrite lecteur! - mon semblable, - mon frere!"

 

II. A GAME OF CHESS

 

The Chair she sat in, like a burnished throne,

Glowed on the marble, where the glass

Held up by standards wrought with fruited vines

From which a golden Cupidon peeped out

(Another hid his eyes behind his wing)

Doubled the flames of sevenbranched candelabra

Reflecting light upon the table as

The glitter of her jewels rose to meet it,

From satin cases poured in rich profusion;

In vials of ivory and coloured glass

Unstoppered, lurked her strange synthetic perfumes,

Unguent, powdered, or liquid - troubled, confused

And drowned the sense in odours; stirred by the air

That freshened from the window, these ascended

In fattening the prolonged candle-flames,

Flung their smoke into the laquearia,

Stirring the pattern on the coffered ceiling.

Huge sea-wood fed with copper

Burned green and orange, framed by the coloured stone,

In which sad light a carved dolphin swam.

Above the antique mantel was displayed

As though a window gave upon the sylvan scene

The change of Philomel, by the barbarous king

So rudely forced; yet there the nightingale

Filled all the desert with inviolable voice

And still she cried, and still the world pursues,

"Jug Jug" to dirty ears.

And other withered stumps of time

Were told upon the walls; staring forms

Leaned out, leaning, hushing the room enclosed.

Footsteps shuffled on the stair.

Under the firelight, under the brush, her hair

Spread out in fiery points

Glowed into words, then would be savagely still.

 

"My nerves are bad to-night. Yes, bad. Stay with me.

"Speak to me. Why do you never speak. Speak.

"What are you thinking of? What thinking? What?

"I never know what you are thinking. Think."

 

I think we are in rats' alley

Where the dead men lost their bones.

 

"What is that noise?"

The wind under the door.

"What is that noise now? What is the wind doing?"

Nothing again nothing.

"Do

"You know nothing? Do you see nothing? Do you remember

"Nothing?"

 

I remember

Those are pearls that were his eyes.

"Are you alive, or not? Is there nothing in your head?"

But

O O O O that Shakespeherian Rag -

It's so elegant

So intelligent

"What shall I do now? What shall I do?"

I shall rush out as I am, and walk the street

"With my hair down, so. What shall we do to-morrow?

"What shall we ever do?"

The hot water at ten.

And if it rains, a closed car at four.

And we shall play a game of chess,

Pressing lidless eyes and waiting for a knock upon the door.

 

When Lil's husband got demobbed, I said -

I didn't mince my words, I said to her myself,

HURRY UP PLEASE ITS TIME

Now Albert's coming back, make yourself a bit smart.

He'll want to know what you done with that money he gave you

To get yourself some teeth. He did, I was there.

You have them all out, Lil, and get a nice set,

He said, I swear, I can't bear to look at you.

And no more can't I, I said, and think of poor Albert,

He's been in the army four years, he wants a good time,

And if you don't give it him, there's others will, I said.

Oh is there, she said. Something o' that, I said.

Then I'll know who to thank, she said, and give me a straight look.

HURRY UP PLEASE ITS TIME

If you don't like it you can get on with it, I said.

Others can pick and choose if you can't.

But if Albert makes off, it won't be for lack of telling.

You ought to be ashamed, I said, to look so antique.

(And her only thirty-one.)

I can't help it, she said, pulling a long face,

It's them pills I took, to bring it off, she said.

(She's had five already, and nearly died of young George.)

The chemist said it would be alright, but I've never been the same.

You are a proper fool, I said.

Well, if Albert won't leave you alone, there it is, I said,

What you get married for if you don't want children?

HURRY UP PLEASE ITS TIME

Well, that Sunday Albert was home, they had a hot gammon,

And they asked me in to dinner, to get the beauty of it hot -

HURRY UP PLEASE ITS TIME

HURRY UP PLEASE ITS TIME

Goonight Bill. Goonight Lou. Goonight May. Goonight.

Ta ta. Goonight. Goonight.

Good night, ladies, good night, sweet ladies, good night, good night.

 

III. THE FIRE SERMON

 

The river's tent is broken: the last fingers of leaf

Clutch and sink into the wet bank. The wind

Crosses the brown land, unheard. The nymphs are departed.

Sweet Thames, run softly, till I end my song.

The river bears no empty bottles, sandwich papers,

Silk handkerchiefs, cardboard boxes, cigarette ends

Or other testimony of summer nights. The nymphs are departed.

And their friends, the loitering heirs of city directors;

Departed, have left no addresses.

 

By the waters of Leman I sat down and wept . . .

Sweet Thames, run softly till I end my song,

Sweet Thames, run softly, for I speak not loud or long.

But at my back in a cold blast I hear

The rattle of the bones, and chuckle spread from ear to ear.

A rat crept softly through the vegetation

Dragging its slimy belly on the bank

While I was fishing in the dull canal

On a winter evening round behind the gashouse

Musing upon the king my brother's wreck

And on the king my father's death before him.

White bodies naked on the low damp ground

And bones cast in a little low dry garret,

Rattled by the rat's foot only, year to year.

But at my back from time to time I hear

The sound of horns and motors, which shall bring

Sweeney to Mrs. Porter in the spring.

O the moon shone bright on Mrs. Porter

And on her daughter

They wash their feet in soda water

Et O ces voix d'enfants, chantant dans la coupole!

 

Twit twit twit

Jug jug jug jug jug jug

So rudely forc'd.

Tereu

 

Unreal City

Under the brown fog of a winter noon

Mr. Eugenides, the Smyrna merchant

Unshaven, with a pocket full of currants

C.i.f. London: documents at sight,

Asked me in demotic French

To luncheon at the Cannon Street Hotel

Followed by a weekend at the Metropole.

 

At the violet hour, when the eyes and back

Turn upward from the desk, when the human engine waits

Like a taxi throbbing waiting,

I Tiresias, though blind, throbbing between two lives,

Old man with wrinkled female breasts, can see

At the violet hour, the evening hour that strives

Homeward, and brings the sailor home from sea,

The typist home at teatime, clears her breakfast, lights

Her stove, and lays out food in tins.

Out of the window perilously spread

Her drying combinations touched by the sun's last rays,

On the divan are piled (at night her bed)

Stockings, slippers, camisoles, and stays.

I Tiresias, old man with wrinkled dugs

Perceived the scene, and foretold the rest -

I too awaited the expected guest.

He, the young man carbuncular, arrives,

A small house agent's clerk, with one bold stare,

One of the low on whom assurance sits

As a silk hat on a Bradford millionaire.

The time is now propitious, as he guesses,

The meal is ended, she is bored and tired,

Endeavours to engage her in caresses

Which still are unreproved, if undesired.

Flushed and decided, he assaults at once;

Exploring hands encounter no defence;

His vanity requires no response,

And makes a welcome of indifference.

(And I Tiresias have foresuffered all

Enacted on this same divan or bed;

I who have sat by Thebes below the wall

And walked among the lowest of the dead.)

Bestows one final patronising kiss,

And gropes his way, finding the stairs unlit . . .

 

She turns and looks a moment in the glass,

Hardly aware of her departed lover;

Her brain allows one half-formed thought to pass:

"Well now that's done: and I'm glad it's over."

When lovely woman stoops to folly and

Paces about her room again, alone,

She smoothes her hair with automatic hand,

And puts a record on the gramophone.

 

"This music crept by me upon the waters"

And along the Strand, up Queen Victoria Street.

O City city, I can sometimes hear

Beside a public bar in Lower Thames Street,

The pleasant whining of a mandoline

And a clatter and a chatter from within

Where fishmen lounge at noon: where the walls

Of Magnus Martyr hold

Inexplicable splendour of Ionian white and gold.

 

The river sweats

Oil and tar

The barges drift

With the turning tide

Red sails

Wide

To leeward, swing on the heavy spar.

The barges wash

Drifting logs

Down Greenwich reach

Past the Isle of Dogs.

Weialala leia

Wallala leialala

 

Elizabeth and Leicester

Beating oars

The stern was formed

A gilded shell

Red and gold

The brisk swell

Rippled both shores

Southwest wind

Carried down stream

The peal of bells

White towers

Weialala leia

Wallala leialala

 

"Trams and dusty trees.

Highbury bore me. Richmond and Kew

Undid me. By Richmond I raised my knees

Supine on the floor of a narrow canoe."

 

"My feet are at Moorgate, and my heart

Under my feet. After the event

He wept. He promised 'a new start'.

I made no comment. What should I resent?"

"On Margate Sands.

I can connect

Nothing with nothing.

The broken fingernails of dirty hands.

My people humble people who expect

Nothing."

la la

 

To Carthage then I came

 

Burning burning burning burning

O Lord Thou pluckest me out

O Lord Thou pluckest

burning

 

IV. DEATH BY WATER

 

Phlebas the Phoenician, a fortnight dead,

Forgot the cry of gulls, and the deep sea swell

And the profit and loss.

A current under sea

Picked his bones in whispers. As he rose and fell

He passed the stages of his age and youth

Entering the whirlpool.

Gentile or Jew

O you who turn the wheel and look to windward,

Consider Phlebas, who was once handsome and tall as you.

 

V. WHAT THE THUNDER SAID

 

After the torchlight red on sweaty faces

After the frosty silence in the gardens

After the agony in stony places

The shouting and the crying

Prison and palace and reverberation

Of thunder of spring over distant mountains

He who was living is now dead

We who were living are now dying

With a little patience

 

Here is no water but only rock

Rock and no water and the sandy road

The road winding above among the mountains

Which are mountains of rock without water

If there were water we should stop and drink

Amongst the rock one cannot stop or think

Sweat is dry and feet are in the sand

If there were only water amongst the rock

Dead mountain mouth of carious teeth that cannot spit

Here one can neither stand nor lie nor sit

There is not even silence in the mountains

But dry sterile thunder without rain

There is not even solitude in the mountains

But red sullen faces sneer and snarl

From doors of mudcracked houses

If there were water

And no rock

If there were rock

And also water

And water

A spring

A pool among the rock

If there were the sound of water only

Not the cicada

And dry grass singing

But sound of water over a rock

Where the hermit-thrush sings in the pine trees

Drip drop drip drop drop drop drop

But there is no water

 

Who is the third who walks always beside you?

When I count, there are only you and I together

But when I look ahead up the white road

There is always another one walking beside you

Gliding wrapt in a brown mantle, hooded

I do not know whether a man or a woman

- But who is that on the other side of you?

 

What is that sound high in the air

Murmur of maternal lamentation

Who are those hooded hordes swarming

Over endless plains, stumbling in cracked earth

Ringed by the flat horizon only

What is the city over the mountains

Cracks and reforms and bursts in the violet air

Falling towers

Jerusalem Athens Alexandria

Vienna London

Unreal

 

A woman drew her long black hair out tight

And fiddled whisper music on those strings

And bats with baby faces in the violet light

Whistled, and beat their wings

And crawled head downward down a blackened wall

And upside down in air were towers

Tolling reminiscent bells, that kept the hours

And voices singing out of empty cisterns and exhausted wells.

 

In this decayed hole among the mountains

In the faint moonlight, the grass is singing

Over the tumbled graves, about the chapel

There is the empty chapel, only the wind's home.

It has no windows, and the door swings,

Dry bones can harm no one.

Only a cock stood on the rooftree

Co co rico co co rico

In a flash of lightning. Then a damp gust

Bringing rain

 

Ganga was sunken, and the limp leaves

Waited for rain, while the black clouds

Gathered far distant, over Himavant.

The jungle crouched, humped in silence.

Then spoke the thunder

DA

Datta: what have we given?

My friend, blood shaking my heart

The awful daring of a moment's surrender

Which an age of prudence can never retract

By this, and this only, we have existed

Which is not to be found in our obituaries

Or in memories draped by the beneficent spider

Or under seals broken by the lean solicitor

In our empty rooms

DA

Dayadhvam: I have heard the key

Turn in the door once and turn once only

We think of the key, each in his prison

Thinking of the key, each confirms a prison

Only at nightfall, aetherial rumours

Revive for a moment a broken Coriolanus

DA

Damyata: The boat responded

Gaily, to the hand expert with sail and oar

The sea was calm, your heart would have responded

Gaily, when invited, beating obedient

To controlling hands

 

I sat upon the shore

Fishing, with the arid plain behind me

Shall I at least set my lands in order?

London Bridge is falling down falling down falling down

Poi s'ascose nel foco che gli affina

Quando fiam ceu chelidon - O swallow swallow

Le Prince d'Aquitaine a la tour abolie

These fragments I have shored against my ruins

Why then Ile fit you. Hieronymo's mad againe.

Datta. Dayadhvam. Damyata.

Shantih shantih shantih

 

A few years ago, early on Saturday morning, I tried to enter St Dunstan's, with no luck. It was locked fast.

 

Which was a shame, as it looked a very interesting church from the outside, and with its location, just outside the city gate on the crossing of two main roads.

 

Anyway, I logged this away in my meory banks, detirmed to go back one day. And for a change this Heritage Weekend, we returned to Canterbury not once, but twice. And on the second day was rewarded with entry to three of the city churches.

 

St Dunstan is most famous for being the final resting place of Sir Thomas More's head, in the family tomb of his wife. There is fine glass commemorating this.

 

Some minor work is being carried out at the rear of the church, so a return will be needed to see the full restored church.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Dedicated to a former Archbishop of Canterbury, St Dunstan's stands outside the city walls. There is structural evidence of the Norman period, but most of the church is fourteenth century. The west tower dates from this time and is very oddly proportioned - about twice the height that its width can really cope with. The south chapel is constructed of brick and was completed in the early sixteenth century. It contains monuments to the More family and is the burial place of St. Thomas More's head, - brought here by his daughter after his execution. The family home stood opposite the church where its brick gateway may still be seen. There are two twentieth-century windows of note in the chapel, by Lawrence Lee and John Hayward.

  

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Canterbury+2

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

St. Dunstan's is an Anglican church in Canterbury, Kent, at the junction of London Road and Whitstable Road. It is dedicated to St. Dunstan (909-988) and gives its name to the part of the city on the left bank of the River Stour. The parish has been held in plurality with others nearby at different times, in a way that is confusing and difficult to document. In 2010 the parish was joined with the parishes of the City Centre Parish in a new pastoral grouping, City Centre with St. Dunstan.

 

The church dates from the 11th century and is a grade I listed building. It was restored in 1878-80 by church architect Ewan Christian. Its association with the deaths of Thomas Becket and Thomas More make it a place of pilgrimage.

 

Dunstan was Archbishop of Canterbury from 960 to 978 and was canonised soon after his death, becoming the favourite saint of the English until he was supplanted by Thomas Becket.[2] He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral but his tomb was destroyed during the Reformation.

 

In 1174, when Henry II began his penitential pilgrimage in reparation for the murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket, he changed his clothing into sackcloth at St. Dunstan’s Church and began his pilgrimage from here to Thomas Becket's tomb at Canterbury Cathedral on foot.

 

His daughter Margaret secured the release of Thomas More's head from its spike on London Bridge and brought it back to the family tomb of her husband William Roper.[4] The Roper family lived nearby off what is now St Dunstan's Street. What remains of their home is called Roper Gate, marked with a commemorative plaque, it is all that survives of Place House. The Roper family vault is located underneath the Nicholas Chapel, to the right of the church's main altar. It was sealed in recent years, according to Anglican tradition. A large stone slab marks its location to the immediate left of the chapel's altar. Three impressive stained glass windows line the chapel, the one behind the altar depicts in brilliant detail the major events and symbols in the life of the Saint. Another of the windows commemorates the visit of Pope John Paul II to Canterbury to pray with the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury at the site of the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. The window displays the arms of the Archbishop's diocese and the Pope. Plaques mounted on the walls explain the veracity of the relic of the Saint's head, the sealing of the vault which contains it, and the life of the Saint, including a prayer he wrote.

  

St Dunstan’s has six bells, hung for change ringing in the English style, the heaviest weighing 13cwt (approx. 675 kg). Due to the unusual narrowness of the belfry, the bells are hung in a two-tier frame.

 

The fifth bell of the ring is one of the oldest Christian church bells in the world, believed to have been cast in 1325 by William le Belyetere, making it nearly 690 years old as of 2014 [5]

 

The bells were removed from the tower in 1935 so that a concrete structural beam could be fitted to the tower. At this time the bells were retuned by the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, and rehung in the present frame in 1936.

 

The bells are rung on Friday evenings for practice, and Sunday mornings for the service, by the St Dunstan’s Society of Change Ringers.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Dunstan%27s,_Canterbury

 

----------------------------------------------

 

ir Thomas More (/ˈmɔːr/; 7 February 1478 – 6 July 1535), venerated by Roman Catholics as Saint Thomas More,[1][2] was an English lawyer, social philosopher, author, statesman and noted Renaissance humanist. He was also a councillor to Henry VIII, and Lord High Chancellor of England from October 1529 to 16 May 1532.[3]

 

More opposed the Protestant Reformation, in particular the theology of Martin Luther and William Tyndale. He also wrote Utopia, published in 1516, about the political system of an imaginary ideal island nation. More opposed the King's separation from the Catholic Church, refusing to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church of England and the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. After refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy, he was convicted of treason and beheaded. Ahead of his execution, he was reported saying his famous words: "I die the King's good servant, but God's first."

 

Pope Pius XI canonised More in 1935 as a martyr. Pope John Paul II in 2000 declared him the "heavenly Patron of Statesmen and Politicians."[4] Since 1980, the Church of England has remembered More liturgically as a Reformation martyr.[5] The Soviet Union honoured him for the 'Communistic' attitude toward property rights expressed in Utopia.

 

Born in Milk Street in London, on February 7, 1478, Thomas More was the son of Sir John More,[9] a successful lawyer and later judge, and his wife Agnes (née Graunger). More was educated at St Anthony's School, then considered one of London's finest schools.[10] From 1490 to 1492, More served John Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor of England, as a household page.[11]:xvi Morton enthusiastically supported the "New Learning" (now called the Renaissance), and thought highly of the young More. Believing that More had great potential, Morton nominated him for a place at the University of Oxford (either in St. Mary's Hall or Canterbury College, both now gone).[12]:38

 

More began his studies at Oxford in 1492, and received a classical education. Studying under Thomas Linacre and William Grocyn, he became proficient in both Latin and Greek. More left Oxford after only two years—at his father's insistence—to begin legal training in London at New Inn, one of the Inns of Chancery.[11]:xvii[13] In 1496, More became a student at Lincoln's Inn, one of the Inns of Court, where he remained until 1502, when he was called to the Bar.

 

According to his friend, theologian Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, More once seriously contemplated abandoning his legal career to become a monk.[14][15] Between 1503 and 1504 More lived near the Carthusian monastery outside the walls of London and joined in the monks' spiritual exercises. Although he deeply admired their piety, More ultimately decided to remain a layman, standing for election to Parliament in 1504 and marrying the following year.[11]:xxi

 

In spite of his choice to pursue a secular career, More continued ascetical practices for the rest of his life, such as wearing a hair shirt next to his skin and occasionally engaging in flagellation.[11]:xxi A tradition of the Third Order of Saint Francis honours More as a member of that Order on their calendar of saints.

 

More married Jane Colt in 1505.[12]:118 She was 5 years younger than her husband, quiet and good-natured.[12]:119 Erasmus reported that More wanted to give his young wife a better education than she had previously received at home, and tutored her in music and literature.[12]:119 The couple had four children before Jane died in 1511: Margaret, Elizabeth, Cicely, and John.[12]:132

 

Going "against friends' advice and common custom," within thirty days More had married one of the many eligible women among his wide circle of friends.[17] He certainly expected a mother to take care of his little children and, as the view of his time considered marriage as an "economic union",[18] he chose a rich widow, Alice Harpur Middleton.[19] More is regarded not getting remarried for sexual pleasure, since Alice is much older than himself, and their marriage possibly had not been consummated.[18] The speed of the marriage was so unusual that More had to get a dispensation of the banns, which, due to his good public reputation, he easily obtained.[17] Alice More lacked Jane's docility; More's friend Andrew Ammonius derided Alice as a "hook-nosed harpy."[20] Erasmus, however, called their marriage happy.[12]:144

 

More had no children from his second marriage, although he raised Alice's daughter from her previous marriage as his own. More also became the guardian of two young girls: Anne Cresacre would eventually marry his son, John More;[12]:146 and Margaret Giggs (later Clement) would be the only member of his family to witness his execution (she died on the 35th anniversary of that execution, and her daughter married More's nephew William Rastell). An affectionate father, More wrote letters to his children whenever he was away on legal or government business, and encouraged them to write to him often.[12]:150[21]:xiv

 

More insisted upon giving his daughters the same classical education as his son, a highly unusual attitude at the time.[12]:146–47 His eldest daughter, Margaret, attracted much admiration for her erudition, especially her fluency in Greek and Latin.[12]:147 More told his daughter of his pride in her academic accomplishment in September 1522, after he showed the bishop a letter she had written:

 

When he saw from the signature that it was the letter of a lady, his surprise led him to read it more eagerly … he said he would never have believed it to be your work unless I had assured him of the fact, and he began to praise it in the highest terms … for its pure Latinity, its correctness, its erudition, and its expressions of tender affection. He took out at once from his pocket a portague [A Portuguese gold coin] … to send to you as a pledge and token of his good will towards you.[21]:152

 

More's decision to educate his daughters set an example for other noble families. Even Erasmus became much more favourable once he witnessed their accomplishments.[12]:149

 

A portrait of More and his family was painted by Holbein, but it was lost in a fire in the 18th century. More's grandson commissioned a copy, two versions of which survive.

 

In 1504 More was elected to Parliament to represent Great Yarmouth, and in 1510 began representing London.[22]

 

From 1510, More served as one of the two undersheriffs of the City of London, a position of considerable responsibility in which he earned a reputation as an honest and effective public servant. More became Master of Requests in 1514,[23] the same year in which he was appointed as a Privy Counsellor.[24] After undertaking a diplomatic mission to the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, accompanying Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal Archbishop of York, to Calais and Bruges, More was knighted and made under-treasurer of the Exchequer in 1521.[24]

 

As secretary and personal adviser to King Henry VIII, More became increasingly influential: welcoming foreign diplomats, drafting official documents, and serving as a liaison between the King and Lord Chancellor Wolsey. More later served as High Steward for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.

 

In 1523 More was elected as knight of the shire (MP) for Middlesex and, on Wolsey's recommendation, the House of Commons elected More its Speaker.[24] In 1525 More became Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, with executive and judicial responsibilities over much of northern England.

 

More supported the Catholic Church and saw the Protestant Reformation as heresy, a threat to the unity of both church and society. More believed in the theology, polemics, and ecclesiastical laws of the church, and "heard Luther's call to destroy the Catholic Church as a call to war."[25]

 

His early actions against the Reformation included aiding Wolsey in preventing Lutheran books from being imported into England, spying on and investigating suspected Protestants, especially publishers, and arresting anyone holding in his possession, transporting, or selling the books of the Protestant Reformation. More vigorously suppressed the travelling country ministers who used Tyndale's English translation of the New Testament.[citation needed] It contained controversial translations of certain words; for example, Tyndale used "senior" and "elder" rather than "priest" for the Greek "presbyteros", and some of the marginal glosses challenged Catholic doctrine.[26] It was during this time that most of his literary polemics appeared.

 

Rumours circulated during and after More's lifetime regarding ill-treatment of heretics during his time as Lord Chancellor. The popular anti-Catholic polemicist John Foxe, who "placed Protestant sufferings against the background of... the Antichrist",[27] was instrumental in publicising accusations of torture in his famous Book of Martyrs, claiming that More had often personally used violence or torture while interrogating heretics. Later authors such as Brian Moynahan and Michael Farris cite Foxe when repeating these allegations.[28] More himself denied these allegations:

 

Stories of a similar nature were current even in More's lifetime and he denied them forcefully. He admitted that he did imprison heretics in his house – 'theyr sure kepynge' – he called it – but he utterly rejected claims of torture and whipping... 'so helpe me God.'[12]:298

 

However, More writes in his "Apology" (1533) that he only applied corporal punishment to two heretics: a child who was caned in front of his family for heresy regarding the Eucharist, and a "feeble-minded" man who was whipped for disrupting prayers.[29]:404 During More's chancellorship, six people were burned at the stake for heresy; they were Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbery, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.[12]:299–306 Moynahan has argued that More was influential in the burning of Tyndale, as More's agents had long pursued him, even though this took place over a year after his own death.[30] Burning at the stake had long been a standard punishment for heresy; about thirty burnings had taken place in the century before More's elevation to Chancellor, and burning continued to be used by both Catholics and Protestants during the religious upheaval of the following decades.[31] His biographer Peter Ackroyd notes that More explicitly "approved of Burning".[12]:298

 

John Tewkesbury was a London leather seller found guilty by Bishop of London John Stokesley[32] of harbouring banned books; he was sentenced to burning for refusing to recant. More declared: he "burned as there was neuer wretche I wene better worthy."[33]

 

Modern commentators are divided over More's religious actions as Chancellor. Some biographers, including Ackroyd, have taken a relatively tolerant view of More's campaign against Protestantism by placing his actions within the turbulent religious climate of the time. Others have been more critical, such as Richard Marius, an American scholar of the Reformation, believing that persecutions were a betrayal of More's earlier humanist convictions, including More's zealous and well-documented advocacy of extermination for Protestants.[29]:386–406

 

Some Protestants take a different view. In 1980, More was added to the Church of England's calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church, despite being a fierce opponent of the English Reformation that created the Church of England. He was added jointly with John Fisher, to be commemorated every 6 July (the date of More's execution) as "Thomas More, Scholar, and John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, Reformation Martyrs, 1535".[5] Pope John Paul II honoured him by making him patron saint of statesmen and politicians in October 2000, stating: "It can be said that he demonstrated in a singular way the value of a moral conscience... even if, in his actions against heretics, he reflected the limits of the culture of his time".

 

As the conflict over supremacy between the Papacy and the King reached its apogee, More continued to remain steadfast in supporting the supremacy of the Pope as Successor of Peter over that of the King of England. In 1530, More refused to sign a letter by the leading English churchmen and aristocrats asking Pope Clement VII to annul Henry's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, and also quarrelled with Henry VIII over the heresy laws. In 1531, Henry had isolated More by purging most clergy who supported the papal stance from senior positions in the church. Parliament's reinstatement of the charge of praemunire in 1529 had made it a crime to support in public or office the claim of any authority outside the realm (such as the Papacy) to have a legal jurisdiction superior to the King's. In 1531, a royal decree required the clergy to take an oath acknowledging the King as "Supreme Head" of the Church in England. As a layperson, More did not need to take the oath and the clergy, after some initial resistance, took the oath with the addition of the clause "as far as the law of Christ allows." However, More saw he could not render the support Henry expected from his Lord Chancellor for the policy the King was developing to support the annulment of his marriage with Catherine. In 1532 he petitioned the King to relieve him of his office, alleging failing health. Henry granted his request.

 

In 1533, More refused to attend the coronation of Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. Technically, this was not an act of treason, as More had written to Henry acknowledging Anne's queenship and expressing his desire for the King's happiness and the new Queen's health.[34] Despite this, his refusal to attend was widely interpreted as a snub against Anne, and Henry took action against him.

 

Shortly thereafter, More was charged with accepting bribes, but the charges had to be dismissed for lack of any evidence. In early 1534, More was accused of conspiring with the "Holy Maid of Kent," Elizabeth Barton, a nun who had prophesied against the king's annulment, but More was able to produce a letter in which he had instructed Barton not to interfere with state matters.[citation needed]

 

On 13 April 1534, More was asked to appear before a commission and swear his allegiance to the parliamentary Act of Succession. More accepted Parliament's right to declare Anne Boleyn the legitimate Queen of England, but, holding fast to the teaching of papal supremacy, he steadfastly refused to take the oath of supremacy of the Crown in the relationship between the kingdom and the church in England. More furthermore publicly refused to uphold Henry's annulment from Catherine. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, refused the oath along with More. The oath reads:[35]

 

...By reason whereof the Bishop of Rome and See Apostolic, contrary to the great and inviolable grants of jurisdictions given by God immediately to emperors, kings and princes in succession to their heirs, hath presumed in times past to invest who should please them to inherit in other men's kingdoms and dominions, which thing we your most humble subjects, both spiritual and temporal, do most abhor and detest...

 

With his refusal to support the King's annulment, More's enemies had enough evidence to have the King arrest him on treason. Four days later, Henry had More imprisoned in the Tower of London. There More prepared a devotional Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation. While More was imprisoned in the Tower, Thomas Cromwell made several visits, urging More to take the oath, which he continued to refuse.

 

On 1 July 1535, More was tried before a panel of judges that included the new Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas Audley, as well as Anne Boleyn's father, brother, and uncle. He was charged with high treason for denying the validity of the Act of Supremacy and was tried under the following section of the Treasons Act 1534:

 

If any person or persons, after the first day of February next coming, do maliciously wish, will or desire, by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king's most royal person, the queen's, or their heirs apparent, or to deprive them or any of them of their dignity, title, or name of their royal estates …

 

That then every such person and persons so offending … shall have and suffer such pains of death and other penalties, as is limited and accustomed in cases of high treason.[36]

 

More, relying on legal precedent and the maxim "qui tacet consentire videtur" (literally, who (is) silent is seen to consent), understood that he could not be convicted as long as he did not explicitly deny that the King was Supreme Head of the Church, and he therefore refused to answer all questions regarding his opinions on the subject.

 

Thomas Cromwell, at the time the most powerful of the King's advisors, brought forth the Solicitor General, Richard Rich, to testify that More had, in his presence, denied that the King was the legitimate head of the church. This testimony was characterised by More as being extremely dubious. Witnesses Richard Southwell and Mr. Palmer both denied having heard the details of the reported conversation, and as More himself pointed out:

 

Can it therefore seem likely to your Lordships, that I should in so weighty an Affair as this, act so unadvisedly, as to trust Mr. Rich, a Man I had always so mean an Opinion of, in reference to his Truth and Honesty, … that I should only impart to Mr. Rich the Secrets of my Conscience in respect to the King's Supremacy, the particular Secrets, and only Point about which I have been so long pressed to explain my self? which I never did, nor never would reveal; when the Act was once made, either to the King himself, or any of his Privy Councillors, as is well known to your Honours, who have been sent upon no other account at several times by his Majesty to me in the Tower. I refer it to your Judgments, my Lords, whether this can seem credible to any of your Lordships.

 

The jury took only fifteen minutes, however, to find More guilty.

 

After the jury's verdict was delivered and before his sentencing, More spoke freely of his belief that "no temporal man may be the head of the spirituality". He was sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered (the usual punishment for traitors who were not the nobility), but the King commuted this to execution by decapitation. The execution took place on 6 July 1535. When he came to mount the steps to the scaffold, he is widely quoted as saying (to the officials): "I pray you, I pray you, Mr Lieutenant, see me safe up and for my coming down, I can shift for myself"; while on the scaffold he declared that he died "the king's good servant, but God's first."

 

Another comment he is believed to have made to the executioner is that his beard was completely innocent of any crime, and did not deserve the axe; he then positioned his beard so that it would not be harmed.[39] More asked that his foster/adopted daughter Margaret Clement (née Giggs) be given his headless corpse to bury.[40] She was the only member of his family to witness his execution. He was buried at the Tower of London, in the chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in an unmarked grave. His head was fixed upon a pike over London Bridge for a month, according to the normal custom for traitors. His daughter Margaret (Meg) Roper rescued it, possibly by bribery, before it could be thrown in the River Thames.[citation needed]

 

The skull is believed to rest in the Roper Vault of St Dunstan's Church, Canterbury, though some researchers[who?] have claimed it might be within the tomb he erected for More in Chelsea Old Church (see below). The evidence,[clarification needed] however, seems to be in favour of its placement in St Dunstan's, with the remains of his daughter, Margaret Roper, and her husband's family, whose vault it was.[citation needed]

 

Among other surviving relics is his hair shirt, presented for safe keeping by Margaret Clement.[41] This was long in the custody of the community of Augustinian canonesses who until 1983 lived at the convent at Abbotskerswell Priory, Devon. It is now preserved at Syon Abbey, near South Brent.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

A few years ago, early on Saturday morning, I tried to enter St Dunstan's, with no luck. It was locked fast.

 

Which was a shame, as it looked a very interesting church from the outside, and with its location, just outside the city gate on the crossing of two main roads.

 

Anyway, I logged this away in my meory banks, detirmed to go back one day. And for a change this Heritage Weekend, we returned to Canterbury not once, but twice. And on the second day was rewarded with entry to three of the city churches.

 

St Dunstan is most famous for being the final resting place of Sir Thomas More's head, in the family tomb of his wife. There is fine glass commemorating this.

 

Some minor work is being carried out at the rear of the church, so a return will be needed to see the full restored church.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Dedicated to a former Archbishop of Canterbury, St Dunstan's stands outside the city walls. There is structural evidence of the Norman period, but most of the church is fourteenth century. The west tower dates from this time and is very oddly proportioned - about twice the height that its width can really cope with. The south chapel is constructed of brick and was completed in the early sixteenth century. It contains monuments to the More family and is the burial place of St. Thomas More's head, - brought here by his daughter after his execution. The family home stood opposite the church where its brick gateway may still be seen. There are two twentieth-century windows of note in the chapel, by Lawrence Lee and John Hayward.

  

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Canterbury+2

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

St. Dunstan's is an Anglican church in Canterbury, Kent, at the junction of London Road and Whitstable Road. It is dedicated to St. Dunstan (909-988) and gives its name to the part of the city on the left bank of the River Stour. The parish has been held in plurality with others nearby at different times, in a way that is confusing and difficult to document. In 2010 the parish was joined with the parishes of the City Centre Parish in a new pastoral grouping, City Centre with St. Dunstan.

 

The church dates from the 11th century and is a grade I listed building. It was restored in 1878-80 by church architect Ewan Christian. Its association with the deaths of Thomas Becket and Thomas More make it a place of pilgrimage.

 

Dunstan was Archbishop of Canterbury from 960 to 978 and was canonised soon after his death, becoming the favourite saint of the English until he was supplanted by Thomas Becket.[2] He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral but his tomb was destroyed during the Reformation.

 

In 1174, when Henry II began his penitential pilgrimage in reparation for the murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket, he changed his clothing into sackcloth at St. Dunstan’s Church and began his pilgrimage from here to Thomas Becket's tomb at Canterbury Cathedral on foot.

 

His daughter Margaret secured the release of Thomas More's head from its spike on London Bridge and brought it back to the family tomb of her husband William Roper.[4] The Roper family lived nearby off what is now St Dunstan's Street. What remains of their home is called Roper Gate, marked with a commemorative plaque, it is all that survives of Place House. The Roper family vault is located underneath the Nicholas Chapel, to the right of the church's main altar. It was sealed in recent years, according to Anglican tradition. A large stone slab marks its location to the immediate left of the chapel's altar. Three impressive stained glass windows line the chapel, the one behind the altar depicts in brilliant detail the major events and symbols in the life of the Saint. Another of the windows commemorates the visit of Pope John Paul II to Canterbury to pray with the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury at the site of the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. The window displays the arms of the Archbishop's diocese and the Pope. Plaques mounted on the walls explain the veracity of the relic of the Saint's head, the sealing of the vault which contains it, and the life of the Saint, including a prayer he wrote.

  

St Dunstan’s has six bells, hung for change ringing in the English style, the heaviest weighing 13cwt (approx. 675 kg). Due to the unusual narrowness of the belfry, the bells are hung in a two-tier frame.

 

The fifth bell of the ring is one of the oldest Christian church bells in the world, believed to have been cast in 1325 by William le Belyetere, making it nearly 690 years old as of 2014 [5]

 

The bells were removed from the tower in 1935 so that a concrete structural beam could be fitted to the tower. At this time the bells were retuned by the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, and rehung in the present frame in 1936.

 

The bells are rung on Friday evenings for practice, and Sunday mornings for the service, by the St Dunstan’s Society of Change Ringers.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Dunstan%27s,_Canterbury

 

----------------------------------------------

 

ir Thomas More (/ˈmɔːr/; 7 February 1478 – 6 July 1535), venerated by Roman Catholics as Saint Thomas More,[1][2] was an English lawyer, social philosopher, author, statesman and noted Renaissance humanist. He was also a councillor to Henry VIII, and Lord High Chancellor of England from October 1529 to 16 May 1532.[3]

 

More opposed the Protestant Reformation, in particular the theology of Martin Luther and William Tyndale. He also wrote Utopia, published in 1516, about the political system of an imaginary ideal island nation. More opposed the King's separation from the Catholic Church, refusing to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church of England and the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. After refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy, he was convicted of treason and beheaded. Ahead of his execution, he was reported saying his famous words: "I die the King's good servant, but God's first."

 

Pope Pius XI canonised More in 1935 as a martyr. Pope John Paul II in 2000 declared him the "heavenly Patron of Statesmen and Politicians."[4] Since 1980, the Church of England has remembered More liturgically as a Reformation martyr.[5] The Soviet Union honoured him for the 'Communistic' attitude toward property rights expressed in Utopia.

 

Born in Milk Street in London, on February 7, 1478, Thomas More was the son of Sir John More,[9] a successful lawyer and later judge, and his wife Agnes (née Graunger). More was educated at St Anthony's School, then considered one of London's finest schools.[10] From 1490 to 1492, More served John Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor of England, as a household page.[11]:xvi Morton enthusiastically supported the "New Learning" (now called the Renaissance), and thought highly of the young More. Believing that More had great potential, Morton nominated him for a place at the University of Oxford (either in St. Mary's Hall or Canterbury College, both now gone).[12]:38

 

More began his studies at Oxford in 1492, and received a classical education. Studying under Thomas Linacre and William Grocyn, he became proficient in both Latin and Greek. More left Oxford after only two years—at his father's insistence—to begin legal training in London at New Inn, one of the Inns of Chancery.[11]:xvii[13] In 1496, More became a student at Lincoln's Inn, one of the Inns of Court, where he remained until 1502, when he was called to the Bar.

 

According to his friend, theologian Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, More once seriously contemplated abandoning his legal career to become a monk.[14][15] Between 1503 and 1504 More lived near the Carthusian monastery outside the walls of London and joined in the monks' spiritual exercises. Although he deeply admired their piety, More ultimately decided to remain a layman, standing for election to Parliament in 1504 and marrying the following year.[11]:xxi

 

In spite of his choice to pursue a secular career, More continued ascetical practices for the rest of his life, such as wearing a hair shirt next to his skin and occasionally engaging in flagellation.[11]:xxi A tradition of the Third Order of Saint Francis honours More as a member of that Order on their calendar of saints.

 

More married Jane Colt in 1505.[12]:118 She was 5 years younger than her husband, quiet and good-natured.[12]:119 Erasmus reported that More wanted to give his young wife a better education than she had previously received at home, and tutored her in music and literature.[12]:119 The couple had four children before Jane died in 1511: Margaret, Elizabeth, Cicely, and John.[12]:132

 

Going "against friends' advice and common custom," within thirty days More had married one of the many eligible women among his wide circle of friends.[17] He certainly expected a mother to take care of his little children and, as the view of his time considered marriage as an "economic union",[18] he chose a rich widow, Alice Harpur Middleton.[19] More is regarded not getting remarried for sexual pleasure, since Alice is much older than himself, and their marriage possibly had not been consummated.[18] The speed of the marriage was so unusual that More had to get a dispensation of the banns, which, due to his good public reputation, he easily obtained.[17] Alice More lacked Jane's docility; More's friend Andrew Ammonius derided Alice as a "hook-nosed harpy."[20] Erasmus, however, called their marriage happy.[12]:144

 

More had no children from his second marriage, although he raised Alice's daughter from her previous marriage as his own. More also became the guardian of two young girls: Anne Cresacre would eventually marry his son, John More;[12]:146 and Margaret Giggs (later Clement) would be the only member of his family to witness his execution (she died on the 35th anniversary of that execution, and her daughter married More's nephew William Rastell). An affectionate father, More wrote letters to his children whenever he was away on legal or government business, and encouraged them to write to him often.[12]:150[21]:xiv

 

More insisted upon giving his daughters the same classical education as his son, a highly unusual attitude at the time.[12]:146–47 His eldest daughter, Margaret, attracted much admiration for her erudition, especially her fluency in Greek and Latin.[12]:147 More told his daughter of his pride in her academic accomplishment in September 1522, after he showed the bishop a letter she had written:

 

When he saw from the signature that it was the letter of a lady, his surprise led him to read it more eagerly … he said he would never have believed it to be your work unless I had assured him of the fact, and he began to praise it in the highest terms … for its pure Latinity, its correctness, its erudition, and its expressions of tender affection. He took out at once from his pocket a portague [A Portuguese gold coin] … to send to you as a pledge and token of his good will towards you.[21]:152

 

More's decision to educate his daughters set an example for other noble families. Even Erasmus became much more favourable once he witnessed their accomplishments.[12]:149

 

A portrait of More and his family was painted by Holbein, but it was lost in a fire in the 18th century. More's grandson commissioned a copy, two versions of which survive.

 

In 1504 More was elected to Parliament to represent Great Yarmouth, and in 1510 began representing London.[22]

 

From 1510, More served as one of the two undersheriffs of the City of London, a position of considerable responsibility in which he earned a reputation as an honest and effective public servant. More became Master of Requests in 1514,[23] the same year in which he was appointed as a Privy Counsellor.[24] After undertaking a diplomatic mission to the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, accompanying Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal Archbishop of York, to Calais and Bruges, More was knighted and made under-treasurer of the Exchequer in 1521.[24]

 

As secretary and personal adviser to King Henry VIII, More became increasingly influential: welcoming foreign diplomats, drafting official documents, and serving as a liaison between the King and Lord Chancellor Wolsey. More later served as High Steward for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.

 

In 1523 More was elected as knight of the shire (MP) for Middlesex and, on Wolsey's recommendation, the House of Commons elected More its Speaker.[24] In 1525 More became Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, with executive and judicial responsibilities over much of northern England.

 

More supported the Catholic Church and saw the Protestant Reformation as heresy, a threat to the unity of both church and society. More believed in the theology, polemics, and ecclesiastical laws of the church, and "heard Luther's call to destroy the Catholic Church as a call to war."[25]

 

His early actions against the Reformation included aiding Wolsey in preventing Lutheran books from being imported into England, spying on and investigating suspected Protestants, especially publishers, and arresting anyone holding in his possession, transporting, or selling the books of the Protestant Reformation. More vigorously suppressed the travelling country ministers who used Tyndale's English translation of the New Testament.[citation needed] It contained controversial translations of certain words; for example, Tyndale used "senior" and "elder" rather than "priest" for the Greek "presbyteros", and some of the marginal glosses challenged Catholic doctrine.[26] It was during this time that most of his literary polemics appeared.

 

Rumours circulated during and after More's lifetime regarding ill-treatment of heretics during his time as Lord Chancellor. The popular anti-Catholic polemicist John Foxe, who "placed Protestant sufferings against the background of... the Antichrist",[27] was instrumental in publicising accusations of torture in his famous Book of Martyrs, claiming that More had often personally used violence or torture while interrogating heretics. Later authors such as Brian Moynahan and Michael Farris cite Foxe when repeating these allegations.[28] More himself denied these allegations:

 

Stories of a similar nature were current even in More's lifetime and he denied them forcefully. He admitted that he did imprison heretics in his house – 'theyr sure kepynge' – he called it – but he utterly rejected claims of torture and whipping... 'so helpe me God.'[12]:298

 

However, More writes in his "Apology" (1533) that he only applied corporal punishment to two heretics: a child who was caned in front of his family for heresy regarding the Eucharist, and a "feeble-minded" man who was whipped for disrupting prayers.[29]:404 During More's chancellorship, six people were burned at the stake for heresy; they were Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbery, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.[12]:299–306 Moynahan has argued that More was influential in the burning of Tyndale, as More's agents had long pursued him, even though this took place over a year after his own death.[30] Burning at the stake had long been a standard punishment for heresy; about thirty burnings had taken place in the century before More's elevation to Chancellor, and burning continued to be used by both Catholics and Protestants during the religious upheaval of the following decades.[31] His biographer Peter Ackroyd notes that More explicitly "approved of Burning".[12]:298

 

John Tewkesbury was a London leather seller found guilty by Bishop of London John Stokesley[32] of harbouring banned books; he was sentenced to burning for refusing to recant. More declared: he "burned as there was neuer wretche I wene better worthy."[33]

 

Modern commentators are divided over More's religious actions as Chancellor. Some biographers, including Ackroyd, have taken a relatively tolerant view of More's campaign against Protestantism by placing his actions within the turbulent religious climate of the time. Others have been more critical, such as Richard Marius, an American scholar of the Reformation, believing that persecutions were a betrayal of More's earlier humanist convictions, including More's zealous and well-documented advocacy of extermination for Protestants.[29]:386–406

 

Some Protestants take a different view. In 1980, More was added to the Church of England's calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church, despite being a fierce opponent of the English Reformation that created the Church of England. He was added jointly with John Fisher, to be commemorated every 6 July (the date of More's execution) as "Thomas More, Scholar, and John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, Reformation Martyrs, 1535".[5] Pope John Paul II honoured him by making him patron saint of statesmen and politicians in October 2000, stating: "It can be said that he demonstrated in a singular way the value of a moral conscience... even if, in his actions against heretics, he reflected the limits of the culture of his time".

 

As the conflict over supremacy between the Papacy and the King reached its apogee, More continued to remain steadfast in supporting the supremacy of the Pope as Successor of Peter over that of the King of England. In 1530, More refused to sign a letter by the leading English churchmen and aristocrats asking Pope Clement VII to annul Henry's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, and also quarrelled with Henry VIII over the heresy laws. In 1531, Henry had isolated More by purging most clergy who supported the papal stance from senior positions in the church. Parliament's reinstatement of the charge of praemunire in 1529 had made it a crime to support in public or office the claim of any authority outside the realm (such as the Papacy) to have a legal jurisdiction superior to the King's. In 1531, a royal decree required the clergy to take an oath acknowledging the King as "Supreme Head" of the Church in England. As a layperson, More did not need to take the oath and the clergy, after some initial resistance, took the oath with the addition of the clause "as far as the law of Christ allows." However, More saw he could not render the support Henry expected from his Lord Chancellor for the policy the King was developing to support the annulment of his marriage with Catherine. In 1532 he petitioned the King to relieve him of his office, alleging failing health. Henry granted his request.

 

In 1533, More refused to attend the coronation of Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. Technically, this was not an act of treason, as More had written to Henry acknowledging Anne's queenship and expressing his desire for the King's happiness and the new Queen's health.[34] Despite this, his refusal to attend was widely interpreted as a snub against Anne, and Henry took action against him.

 

Shortly thereafter, More was charged with accepting bribes, but the charges had to be dismissed for lack of any evidence. In early 1534, More was accused of conspiring with the "Holy Maid of Kent," Elizabeth Barton, a nun who had prophesied against the king's annulment, but More was able to produce a letter in which he had instructed Barton not to interfere with state matters.[citation needed]

 

On 13 April 1534, More was asked to appear before a commission and swear his allegiance to the parliamentary Act of Succession. More accepted Parliament's right to declare Anne Boleyn the legitimate Queen of England, but, holding fast to the teaching of papal supremacy, he steadfastly refused to take the oath of supremacy of the Crown in the relationship between the kingdom and the church in England. More furthermore publicly refused to uphold Henry's annulment from Catherine. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, refused the oath along with More. The oath reads:[35]

 

...By reason whereof the Bishop of Rome and See Apostolic, contrary to the great and inviolable grants of jurisdictions given by God immediately to emperors, kings and princes in succession to their heirs, hath presumed in times past to invest who should please them to inherit in other men's kingdoms and dominions, which thing we your most humble subjects, both spiritual and temporal, do most abhor and detest...

 

With his refusal to support the King's annulment, More's enemies had enough evidence to have the King arrest him on treason. Four days later, Henry had More imprisoned in the Tower of London. There More prepared a devotional Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation. While More was imprisoned in the Tower, Thomas Cromwell made several visits, urging More to take the oath, which he continued to refuse.

 

On 1 July 1535, More was tried before a panel of judges that included the new Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas Audley, as well as Anne Boleyn's father, brother, and uncle. He was charged with high treason for denying the validity of the Act of Supremacy and was tried under the following section of the Treasons Act 1534:

 

If any person or persons, after the first day of February next coming, do maliciously wish, will or desire, by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king's most royal person, the queen's, or their heirs apparent, or to deprive them or any of them of their dignity, title, or name of their royal estates …

 

That then every such person and persons so offending … shall have and suffer such pains of death and other penalties, as is limited and accustomed in cases of high treason.[36]

 

More, relying on legal precedent and the maxim "qui tacet consentire videtur" (literally, who (is) silent is seen to consent), understood that he could not be convicted as long as he did not explicitly deny that the King was Supreme Head of the Church, and he therefore refused to answer all questions regarding his opinions on the subject.

 

Thomas Cromwell, at the time the most powerful of the King's advisors, brought forth the Solicitor General, Richard Rich, to testify that More had, in his presence, denied that the King was the legitimate head of the church. This testimony was characterised by More as being extremely dubious. Witnesses Richard Southwell and Mr. Palmer both denied having heard the details of the reported conversation, and as More himself pointed out:

 

Can it therefore seem likely to your Lordships, that I should in so weighty an Affair as this, act so unadvisedly, as to trust Mr. Rich, a Man I had always so mean an Opinion of, in reference to his Truth and Honesty, … that I should only impart to Mr. Rich the Secrets of my Conscience in respect to the King's Supremacy, the particular Secrets, and only Point about which I have been so long pressed to explain my self? which I never did, nor never would reveal; when the Act was once made, either to the King himself, or any of his Privy Councillors, as is well known to your Honours, who have been sent upon no other account at several times by his Majesty to me in the Tower. I refer it to your Judgments, my Lords, whether this can seem credible to any of your Lordships.

 

The jury took only fifteen minutes, however, to find More guilty.

 

After the jury's verdict was delivered and before his sentencing, More spoke freely of his belief that "no temporal man may be the head of the spirituality". He was sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered (the usual punishment for traitors who were not the nobility), but the King commuted this to execution by decapitation. The execution took place on 6 July 1535. When he came to mount the steps to the scaffold, he is widely quoted as saying (to the officials): "I pray you, I pray you, Mr Lieutenant, see me safe up and for my coming down, I can shift for myself"; while on the scaffold he declared that he died "the king's good servant, but God's first."

 

Another comment he is believed to have made to the executioner is that his beard was completely innocent of any crime, and did not deserve the axe; he then positioned his beard so that it would not be harmed.[39] More asked that his foster/adopted daughter Margaret Clement (née Giggs) be given his headless corpse to bury.[40] She was the only member of his family to witness his execution. He was buried at the Tower of London, in the chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in an unmarked grave. His head was fixed upon a pike over London Bridge for a month, according to the normal custom for traitors. His daughter Margaret (Meg) Roper rescued it, possibly by bribery, before it could be thrown in the River Thames.[citation needed]

 

The skull is believed to rest in the Roper Vault of St Dunstan's Church, Canterbury, though some researchers[who?] have claimed it might be within the tomb he erected for More in Chelsea Old Church (see below). The evidence,[clarification needed] however, seems to be in favour of its placement in St Dunstan's, with the remains of his daughter, Margaret Roper, and her husband's family, whose vault it was.[citation needed]

 

Among other surviving relics is his hair shirt, presented for safe keeping by Margaret Clement.[41] This was long in the custody of the community of Augustinian canonesses who until 1983 lived at the convent at Abbotskerswell Priory, Devon. It is now preserved at Syon Abbey, near South Brent.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

A few years ago, early on Saturday morning, I tried to enter St Dunstan's, with no luck. It was locked fast.

 

Which was a shame, as it looked a very interesting church from the outside, and with its location, just outside the city gate on the crossing of two main roads.

 

Anyway, I logged this away in my meory banks, detirmed to go back one day. And for a change this Heritage Weekend, we returned to Canterbury not once, but twice. And on the second day was rewarded with entry to three of the city churches.

 

St Dunstan is most famous for being the final resting place of Sir Thomas More's head, in the family tomb of his wife. There is fine glass commemorating this.

 

Some minor work is being carried out at the rear of the church, so a return will be needed to see the full restored church.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Dedicated to a former Archbishop of Canterbury, St Dunstan's stands outside the city walls. There is structural evidence of the Norman period, but most of the church is fourteenth century. The west tower dates from this time and is very oddly proportioned - about twice the height that its width can really cope with. The south chapel is constructed of brick and was completed in the early sixteenth century. It contains monuments to the More family and is the burial place of St. Thomas More's head, - brought here by his daughter after his execution. The family home stood opposite the church where its brick gateway may still be seen. There are two twentieth-century windows of note in the chapel, by Lawrence Lee and John Hayward.

  

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Canterbury+2

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

St. Dunstan's is an Anglican church in Canterbury, Kent, at the junction of London Road and Whitstable Road. It is dedicated to St. Dunstan (909-988) and gives its name to the part of the city on the left bank of the River Stour. The parish has been held in plurality with others nearby at different times, in a way that is confusing and difficult to document. In 2010 the parish was joined with the parishes of the City Centre Parish in a new pastoral grouping, City Centre with St. Dunstan.

 

The church dates from the 11th century and is a grade I listed building. It was restored in 1878-80 by church architect Ewan Christian. Its association with the deaths of Thomas Becket and Thomas More make it a place of pilgrimage.

 

Dunstan was Archbishop of Canterbury from 960 to 978 and was canonised soon after his death, becoming the favourite saint of the English until he was supplanted by Thomas Becket.[2] He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral but his tomb was destroyed during the Reformation.

 

In 1174, when Henry II began his penitential pilgrimage in reparation for the murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket, he changed his clothing into sackcloth at St. Dunstan’s Church and began his pilgrimage from here to Thomas Becket's tomb at Canterbury Cathedral on foot.

 

His daughter Margaret secured the release of Thomas More's head from its spike on London Bridge and brought it back to the family tomb of her husband William Roper.[4] The Roper family lived nearby off what is now St Dunstan's Street. What remains of their home is called Roper Gate, marked with a commemorative plaque, it is all that survives of Place House. The Roper family vault is located underneath the Nicholas Chapel, to the right of the church's main altar. It was sealed in recent years, according to Anglican tradition. A large stone slab marks its location to the immediate left of the chapel's altar. Three impressive stained glass windows line the chapel, the one behind the altar depicts in brilliant detail the major events and symbols in the life of the Saint. Another of the windows commemorates the visit of Pope John Paul II to Canterbury to pray with the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury at the site of the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. The window displays the arms of the Archbishop's diocese and the Pope. Plaques mounted on the walls explain the veracity of the relic of the Saint's head, the sealing of the vault which contains it, and the life of the Saint, including a prayer he wrote.

  

St Dunstan’s has six bells, hung for change ringing in the English style, the heaviest weighing 13cwt (approx. 675 kg). Due to the unusual narrowness of the belfry, the bells are hung in a two-tier frame.

 

The fifth bell of the ring is one of the oldest Christian church bells in the world, believed to have been cast in 1325 by William le Belyetere, making it nearly 690 years old as of 2014 [5]

 

The bells were removed from the tower in 1935 so that a concrete structural beam could be fitted to the tower. At this time the bells were retuned by the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, and rehung in the present frame in 1936.

 

The bells are rung on Friday evenings for practice, and Sunday mornings for the service, by the St Dunstan’s Society of Change Ringers.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Dunstan%27s,_Canterbury

 

----------------------------------------------

 

ir Thomas More (/ˈmɔːr/; 7 February 1478 – 6 July 1535), venerated by Roman Catholics as Saint Thomas More,[1][2] was an English lawyer, social philosopher, author, statesman and noted Renaissance humanist. He was also a councillor to Henry VIII, and Lord High Chancellor of England from October 1529 to 16 May 1532.[3]

 

More opposed the Protestant Reformation, in particular the theology of Martin Luther and William Tyndale. He also wrote Utopia, published in 1516, about the political system of an imaginary ideal island nation. More opposed the King's separation from the Catholic Church, refusing to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church of England and the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. After refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy, he was convicted of treason and beheaded. Ahead of his execution, he was reported saying his famous words: "I die the King's good servant, but God's first."

 

Pope Pius XI canonised More in 1935 as a martyr. Pope John Paul II in 2000 declared him the "heavenly Patron of Statesmen and Politicians."[4] Since 1980, the Church of England has remembered More liturgically as a Reformation martyr.[5] The Soviet Union honoured him for the 'Communistic' attitude toward property rights expressed in Utopia.

 

Born in Milk Street in London, on February 7, 1478, Thomas More was the son of Sir John More,[9] a successful lawyer and later judge, and his wife Agnes (née Graunger). More was educated at St Anthony's School, then considered one of London's finest schools.[10] From 1490 to 1492, More served John Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor of England, as a household page.[11]:xvi Morton enthusiastically supported the "New Learning" (now called the Renaissance), and thought highly of the young More. Believing that More had great potential, Morton nominated him for a place at the University of Oxford (either in St. Mary's Hall or Canterbury College, both now gone).[12]:38

 

More began his studies at Oxford in 1492, and received a classical education. Studying under Thomas Linacre and William Grocyn, he became proficient in both Latin and Greek. More left Oxford after only two years—at his father's insistence—to begin legal training in London at New Inn, one of the Inns of Chancery.[11]:xvii[13] In 1496, More became a student at Lincoln's Inn, one of the Inns of Court, where he remained until 1502, when he was called to the Bar.

 

According to his friend, theologian Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, More once seriously contemplated abandoning his legal career to become a monk.[14][15] Between 1503 and 1504 More lived near the Carthusian monastery outside the walls of London and joined in the monks' spiritual exercises. Although he deeply admired their piety, More ultimately decided to remain a layman, standing for election to Parliament in 1504 and marrying the following year.[11]:xxi

 

In spite of his choice to pursue a secular career, More continued ascetical practices for the rest of his life, such as wearing a hair shirt next to his skin and occasionally engaging in flagellation.[11]:xxi A tradition of the Third Order of Saint Francis honours More as a member of that Order on their calendar of saints.

 

More married Jane Colt in 1505.[12]:118 She was 5 years younger than her husband, quiet and good-natured.[12]:119 Erasmus reported that More wanted to give his young wife a better education than she had previously received at home, and tutored her in music and literature.[12]:119 The couple had four children before Jane died in 1511: Margaret, Elizabeth, Cicely, and John.[12]:132

 

Going "against friends' advice and common custom," within thirty days More had married one of the many eligible women among his wide circle of friends.[17] He certainly expected a mother to take care of his little children and, as the view of his time considered marriage as an "economic union",[18] he chose a rich widow, Alice Harpur Middleton.[19] More is regarded not getting remarried for sexual pleasure, since Alice is much older than himself, and their marriage possibly had not been consummated.[18] The speed of the marriage was so unusual that More had to get a dispensation of the banns, which, due to his good public reputation, he easily obtained.[17] Alice More lacked Jane's docility; More's friend Andrew Ammonius derided Alice as a "hook-nosed harpy."[20] Erasmus, however, called their marriage happy.[12]:144

 

More had no children from his second marriage, although he raised Alice's daughter from her previous marriage as his own. More also became the guardian of two young girls: Anne Cresacre would eventually marry his son, John More;[12]:146 and Margaret Giggs (later Clement) would be the only member of his family to witness his execution (she died on the 35th anniversary of that execution, and her daughter married More's nephew William Rastell). An affectionate father, More wrote letters to his children whenever he was away on legal or government business, and encouraged them to write to him often.[12]:150[21]:xiv

 

More insisted upon giving his daughters the same classical education as his son, a highly unusual attitude at the time.[12]:146–47 His eldest daughter, Margaret, attracted much admiration for her erudition, especially her fluency in Greek and Latin.[12]:147 More told his daughter of his pride in her academic accomplishment in September 1522, after he showed the bishop a letter she had written:

 

When he saw from the signature that it was the letter of a lady, his surprise led him to read it more eagerly … he said he would never have believed it to be your work unless I had assured him of the fact, and he began to praise it in the highest terms … for its pure Latinity, its correctness, its erudition, and its expressions of tender affection. He took out at once from his pocket a portague [A Portuguese gold coin] … to send to you as a pledge and token of his good will towards you.[21]:152

 

More's decision to educate his daughters set an example for other noble families. Even Erasmus became much more favourable once he witnessed their accomplishments.[12]:149

 

A portrait of More and his family was painted by Holbein, but it was lost in a fire in the 18th century. More's grandson commissioned a copy, two versions of which survive.

 

In 1504 More was elected to Parliament to represent Great Yarmouth, and in 1510 began representing London.[22]

 

From 1510, More served as one of the two undersheriffs of the City of London, a position of considerable responsibility in which he earned a reputation as an honest and effective public servant. More became Master of Requests in 1514,[23] the same year in which he was appointed as a Privy Counsellor.[24] After undertaking a diplomatic mission to the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, accompanying Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal Archbishop of York, to Calais and Bruges, More was knighted and made under-treasurer of the Exchequer in 1521.[24]

 

As secretary and personal adviser to King Henry VIII, More became increasingly influential: welcoming foreign diplomats, drafting official documents, and serving as a liaison between the King and Lord Chancellor Wolsey. More later served as High Steward for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.

 

In 1523 More was elected as knight of the shire (MP) for Middlesex and, on Wolsey's recommendation, the House of Commons elected More its Speaker.[24] In 1525 More became Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, with executive and judicial responsibilities over much of northern England.

 

More supported the Catholic Church and saw the Protestant Reformation as heresy, a threat to the unity of both church and society. More believed in the theology, polemics, and ecclesiastical laws of the church, and "heard Luther's call to destroy the Catholic Church as a call to war."[25]

 

His early actions against the Reformation included aiding Wolsey in preventing Lutheran books from being imported into England, spying on and investigating suspected Protestants, especially publishers, and arresting anyone holding in his possession, transporting, or selling the books of the Protestant Reformation. More vigorously suppressed the travelling country ministers who used Tyndale's English translation of the New Testament.[citation needed] It contained controversial translations of certain words; for example, Tyndale used "senior" and "elder" rather than "priest" for the Greek "presbyteros", and some of the marginal glosses challenged Catholic doctrine.[26] It was during this time that most of his literary polemics appeared.

 

Rumours circulated during and after More's lifetime regarding ill-treatment of heretics during his time as Lord Chancellor. The popular anti-Catholic polemicist John Foxe, who "placed Protestant sufferings against the background of... the Antichrist",[27] was instrumental in publicising accusations of torture in his famous Book of Martyrs, claiming that More had often personally used violence or torture while interrogating heretics. Later authors such as Brian Moynahan and Michael Farris cite Foxe when repeating these allegations.[28] More himself denied these allegations:

 

Stories of a similar nature were current even in More's lifetime and he denied them forcefully. He admitted that he did imprison heretics in his house – 'theyr sure kepynge' – he called it – but he utterly rejected claims of torture and whipping... 'so helpe me God.'[12]:298

 

However, More writes in his "Apology" (1533) that he only applied corporal punishment to two heretics: a child who was caned in front of his family for heresy regarding the Eucharist, and a "feeble-minded" man who was whipped for disrupting prayers.[29]:404 During More's chancellorship, six people were burned at the stake for heresy; they were Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbery, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.[12]:299–306 Moynahan has argued that More was influential in the burning of Tyndale, as More's agents had long pursued him, even though this took place over a year after his own death.[30] Burning at the stake had long been a standard punishment for heresy; about thirty burnings had taken place in the century before More's elevation to Chancellor, and burning continued to be used by both Catholics and Protestants during the religious upheaval of the following decades.[31] His biographer Peter Ackroyd notes that More explicitly "approved of Burning".[12]:298

 

John Tewkesbury was a London leather seller found guilty by Bishop of London John Stokesley[32] of harbouring banned books; he was sentenced to burning for refusing to recant. More declared: he "burned as there was neuer wretche I wene better worthy."[33]

 

Modern commentators are divided over More's religious actions as Chancellor. Some biographers, including Ackroyd, have taken a relatively tolerant view of More's campaign against Protestantism by placing his actions within the turbulent religious climate of the time. Others have been more critical, such as Richard Marius, an American scholar of the Reformation, believing that persecutions were a betrayal of More's earlier humanist convictions, including More's zealous and well-documented advocacy of extermination for Protestants.[29]:386–406

 

Some Protestants take a different view. In 1980, More was added to the Church of England's calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church, despite being a fierce opponent of the English Reformation that created the Church of England. He was added jointly with John Fisher, to be commemorated every 6 July (the date of More's execution) as "Thomas More, Scholar, and John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, Reformation Martyrs, 1535".[5] Pope John Paul II honoured him by making him patron saint of statesmen and politicians in October 2000, stating: "It can be said that he demonstrated in a singular way the value of a moral conscience... even if, in his actions against heretics, he reflected the limits of the culture of his time".

 

As the conflict over supremacy between the Papacy and the King reached its apogee, More continued to remain steadfast in supporting the supremacy of the Pope as Successor of Peter over that of the King of England. In 1530, More refused to sign a letter by the leading English churchmen and aristocrats asking Pope Clement VII to annul Henry's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, and also quarrelled with Henry VIII over the heresy laws. In 1531, Henry had isolated More by purging most clergy who supported the papal stance from senior positions in the church. Parliament's reinstatement of the charge of praemunire in 1529 had made it a crime to support in public or office the claim of any authority outside the realm (such as the Papacy) to have a legal jurisdiction superior to the King's. In 1531, a royal decree required the clergy to take an oath acknowledging the King as "Supreme Head" of the Church in England. As a layperson, More did not need to take the oath and the clergy, after some initial resistance, took the oath with the addition of the clause "as far as the law of Christ allows." However, More saw he could not render the support Henry expected from his Lord Chancellor for the policy the King was developing to support the annulment of his marriage with Catherine. In 1532 he petitioned the King to relieve him of his office, alleging failing health. Henry granted his request.

 

In 1533, More refused to attend the coronation of Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. Technically, this was not an act of treason, as More had written to Henry acknowledging Anne's queenship and expressing his desire for the King's happiness and the new Queen's health.[34] Despite this, his refusal to attend was widely interpreted as a snub against Anne, and Henry took action against him.

 

Shortly thereafter, More was charged with accepting bribes, but the charges had to be dismissed for lack of any evidence. In early 1534, More was accused of conspiring with the "Holy Maid of Kent," Elizabeth Barton, a nun who had prophesied against the king's annulment, but More was able to produce a letter in which he had instructed Barton not to interfere with state matters.[citation needed]

 

On 13 April 1534, More was asked to appear before a commission and swear his allegiance to the parliamentary Act of Succession. More accepted Parliament's right to declare Anne Boleyn the legitimate Queen of England, but, holding fast to the teaching of papal supremacy, he steadfastly refused to take the oath of supremacy of the Crown in the relationship between the kingdom and the church in England. More furthermore publicly refused to uphold Henry's annulment from Catherine. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, refused the oath along with More. The oath reads:[35]

 

...By reason whereof the Bishop of Rome and See Apostolic, contrary to the great and inviolable grants of jurisdictions given by God immediately to emperors, kings and princes in succession to their heirs, hath presumed in times past to invest who should please them to inherit in other men's kingdoms and dominions, which thing we your most humble subjects, both spiritual and temporal, do most abhor and detest...

 

With his refusal to support the King's annulment, More's enemies had enough evidence to have the King arrest him on treason. Four days later, Henry had More imprisoned in the Tower of London. There More prepared a devotional Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation. While More was imprisoned in the Tower, Thomas Cromwell made several visits, urging More to take the oath, which he continued to refuse.

 

On 1 July 1535, More was tried before a panel of judges that included the new Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas Audley, as well as Anne Boleyn's father, brother, and uncle. He was charged with high treason for denying the validity of the Act of Supremacy and was tried under the following section of the Treasons Act 1534:

 

If any person or persons, after the first day of February next coming, do maliciously wish, will or desire, by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king's most royal person, the queen's, or their heirs apparent, or to deprive them or any of them of their dignity, title, or name of their royal estates …

 

That then every such person and persons so offending … shall have and suffer such pains of death and other penalties, as is limited and accustomed in cases of high treason.[36]

 

More, relying on legal precedent and the maxim "qui tacet consentire videtur" (literally, who (is) silent is seen to consent), understood that he could not be convicted as long as he did not explicitly deny that the King was Supreme Head of the Church, and he therefore refused to answer all questions regarding his opinions on the subject.

 

Thomas Cromwell, at the time the most powerful of the King's advisors, brought forth the Solicitor General, Richard Rich, to testify that More had, in his presence, denied that the King was the legitimate head of the church. This testimony was characterised by More as being extremely dubious. Witnesses Richard Southwell and Mr. Palmer both denied having heard the details of the reported conversation, and as More himself pointed out:

 

Can it therefore seem likely to your Lordships, that I should in so weighty an Affair as this, act so unadvisedly, as to trust Mr. Rich, a Man I had always so mean an Opinion of, in reference to his Truth and Honesty, … that I should only impart to Mr. Rich the Secrets of my Conscience in respect to the King's Supremacy, the particular Secrets, and only Point about which I have been so long pressed to explain my self? which I never did, nor never would reveal; when the Act was once made, either to the King himself, or any of his Privy Councillors, as is well known to your Honours, who have been sent upon no other account at several times by his Majesty to me in the Tower. I refer it to your Judgments, my Lords, whether this can seem credible to any of your Lordships.

 

The jury took only fifteen minutes, however, to find More guilty.

 

After the jury's verdict was delivered and before his sentencing, More spoke freely of his belief that "no temporal man may be the head of the spirituality". He was sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered (the usual punishment for traitors who were not the nobility), but the King commuted this to execution by decapitation. The execution took place on 6 July 1535. When he came to mount the steps to the scaffold, he is widely quoted as saying (to the officials): "I pray you, I pray you, Mr Lieutenant, see me safe up and for my coming down, I can shift for myself"; while on the scaffold he declared that he died "the king's good servant, but God's first."

 

Another comment he is believed to have made to the executioner is that his beard was completely innocent of any crime, and did not deserve the axe; he then positioned his beard so that it would not be harmed.[39] More asked that his foster/adopted daughter Margaret Clement (née Giggs) be given his headless corpse to bury.[40] She was the only member of his family to witness his execution. He was buried at the Tower of London, in the chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in an unmarked grave. His head was fixed upon a pike over London Bridge for a month, according to the normal custom for traitors. His daughter Margaret (Meg) Roper rescued it, possibly by bribery, before it could be thrown in the River Thames.[citation needed]

 

The skull is believed to rest in the Roper Vault of St Dunstan's Church, Canterbury, though some researchers[who?] have claimed it might be within the tomb he erected for More in Chelsea Old Church (see below). The evidence,[clarification needed] however, seems to be in favour of its placement in St Dunstan's, with the remains of his daughter, Margaret Roper, and her husband's family, whose vault it was.[citation needed]

 

Among other surviving relics is his hair shirt, presented for safe keeping by Margaret Clement.[41] This was long in the custody of the community of Augustinian canonesses who until 1983 lived at the convent at Abbotskerswell Priory, Devon. It is now preserved at Syon Abbey, near South Brent.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

A few years ago, early on Saturday morning, I tried to enter St Dunstan's, with no luck. It was locked fast.

 

Which was a shame, as it looked a very interesting church from the outside, and with its location, just outside the city gate on the crossing of two main roads.

 

Anyway, I logged this away in my meory banks, detirmed to go back one day. And for a change this Heritage Weekend, we returned to Canterbury not once, but twice. And on the second day was rewarded with entry to three of the city churches.

 

St Dunstan is most famous for being the final resting place of Sir Thomas More's head, in the family tomb of his wife. There is fine glass commemorating this.

 

Some minor work is being carried out at the rear of the church, so a return will be needed to see the full restored church.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Dedicated to a former Archbishop of Canterbury, St Dunstan's stands outside the city walls. There is structural evidence of the Norman period, but most of the church is fourteenth century. The west tower dates from this time and is very oddly proportioned - about twice the height that its width can really cope with. The south chapel is constructed of brick and was completed in the early sixteenth century. It contains monuments to the More family and is the burial place of St. Thomas More's head, - brought here by his daughter after his execution. The family home stood opposite the church where its brick gateway may still be seen. There are two twentieth-century windows of note in the chapel, by Lawrence Lee and John Hayward.

  

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Canterbury+2

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

St. Dunstan's is an Anglican church in Canterbury, Kent, at the junction of London Road and Whitstable Road. It is dedicated to St. Dunstan (909-988) and gives its name to the part of the city on the left bank of the River Stour. The parish has been held in plurality with others nearby at different times, in a way that is confusing and difficult to document. In 2010 the parish was joined with the parishes of the City Centre Parish in a new pastoral grouping, City Centre with St. Dunstan.

 

The church dates from the 11th century and is a grade I listed building. It was restored in 1878-80 by church architect Ewan Christian. Its association with the deaths of Thomas Becket and Thomas More make it a place of pilgrimage.

 

Dunstan was Archbishop of Canterbury from 960 to 978 and was canonised soon after his death, becoming the favourite saint of the English until he was supplanted by Thomas Becket.[2] He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral but his tomb was destroyed during the Reformation.

 

In 1174, when Henry II began his penitential pilgrimage in reparation for the murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket, he changed his clothing into sackcloth at St. Dunstan’s Church and began his pilgrimage from here to Thomas Becket's tomb at Canterbury Cathedral on foot.

 

His daughter Margaret secured the release of Thomas More's head from its spike on London Bridge and brought it back to the family tomb of her husband William Roper.[4] The Roper family lived nearby off what is now St Dunstan's Street. What remains of their home is called Roper Gate, marked with a commemorative plaque, it is all that survives of Place House. The Roper family vault is located underneath the Nicholas Chapel, to the right of the church's main altar. It was sealed in recent years, according to Anglican tradition. A large stone slab marks its location to the immediate left of the chapel's altar. Three impressive stained glass windows line the chapel, the one behind the altar depicts in brilliant detail the major events and symbols in the life of the Saint. Another of the windows commemorates the visit of Pope John Paul II to Canterbury to pray with the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury at the site of the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. The window displays the arms of the Archbishop's diocese and the Pope. Plaques mounted on the walls explain the veracity of the relic of the Saint's head, the sealing of the vault which contains it, and the life of the Saint, including a prayer he wrote.

  

St Dunstan’s has six bells, hung for change ringing in the English style, the heaviest weighing 13cwt (approx. 675 kg). Due to the unusual narrowness of the belfry, the bells are hung in a two-tier frame.

 

The fifth bell of the ring is one of the oldest Christian church bells in the world, believed to have been cast in 1325 by William le Belyetere, making it nearly 690 years old as of 2014 [5]

 

The bells were removed from the tower in 1935 so that a concrete structural beam could be fitted to the tower. At this time the bells were retuned by the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, and rehung in the present frame in 1936.

 

The bells are rung on Friday evenings for practice, and Sunday mornings for the service, by the St Dunstan’s Society of Change Ringers.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Dunstan%27s,_Canterbury

 

----------------------------------------------

 

ir Thomas More (/ˈmɔːr/; 7 February 1478 – 6 July 1535), venerated by Roman Catholics as Saint Thomas More,[1][2] was an English lawyer, social philosopher, author, statesman and noted Renaissance humanist. He was also a councillor to Henry VIII, and Lord High Chancellor of England from October 1529 to 16 May 1532.[3]

 

More opposed the Protestant Reformation, in particular the theology of Martin Luther and William Tyndale. He also wrote Utopia, published in 1516, about the political system of an imaginary ideal island nation. More opposed the King's separation from the Catholic Church, refusing to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church of England and the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. After refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy, he was convicted of treason and beheaded. Ahead of his execution, he was reported saying his famous words: "I die the King's good servant, but God's first."

 

Pope Pius XI canonised More in 1935 as a martyr. Pope John Paul II in 2000 declared him the "heavenly Patron of Statesmen and Politicians."[4] Since 1980, the Church of England has remembered More liturgically as a Reformation martyr.[5] The Soviet Union honoured him for the 'Communistic' attitude toward property rights expressed in Utopia.

 

Born in Milk Street in London, on February 7, 1478, Thomas More was the son of Sir John More,[9] a successful lawyer and later judge, and his wife Agnes (née Graunger). More was educated at St Anthony's School, then considered one of London's finest schools.[10] From 1490 to 1492, More served John Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor of England, as a household page.[11]:xvi Morton enthusiastically supported the "New Learning" (now called the Renaissance), and thought highly of the young More. Believing that More had great potential, Morton nominated him for a place at the University of Oxford (either in St. Mary's Hall or Canterbury College, both now gone).[12]:38

 

More began his studies at Oxford in 1492, and received a classical education. Studying under Thomas Linacre and William Grocyn, he became proficient in both Latin and Greek. More left Oxford after only two years—at his father's insistence—to begin legal training in London at New Inn, one of the Inns of Chancery.[11]:xvii[13] In 1496, More became a student at Lincoln's Inn, one of the Inns of Court, where he remained until 1502, when he was called to the Bar.

 

According to his friend, theologian Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, More once seriously contemplated abandoning his legal career to become a monk.[14][15] Between 1503 and 1504 More lived near the Carthusian monastery outside the walls of London and joined in the monks' spiritual exercises. Although he deeply admired their piety, More ultimately decided to remain a layman, standing for election to Parliament in 1504 and marrying the following year.[11]:xxi

 

In spite of his choice to pursue a secular career, More continued ascetical practices for the rest of his life, such as wearing a hair shirt next to his skin and occasionally engaging in flagellation.[11]:xxi A tradition of the Third Order of Saint Francis honours More as a member of that Order on their calendar of saints.

 

More married Jane Colt in 1505.[12]:118 She was 5 years younger than her husband, quiet and good-natured.[12]:119 Erasmus reported that More wanted to give his young wife a better education than she had previously received at home, and tutored her in music and literature.[12]:119 The couple had four children before Jane died in 1511: Margaret, Elizabeth, Cicely, and John.[12]:132

 

Going "against friends' advice and common custom," within thirty days More had married one of the many eligible women among his wide circle of friends.[17] He certainly expected a mother to take care of his little children and, as the view of his time considered marriage as an "economic union",[18] he chose a rich widow, Alice Harpur Middleton.[19] More is regarded not getting remarried for sexual pleasure, since Alice is much older than himself, and their marriage possibly had not been consummated.[18] The speed of the marriage was so unusual that More had to get a dispensation of the banns, which, due to his good public reputation, he easily obtained.[17] Alice More lacked Jane's docility; More's friend Andrew Ammonius derided Alice as a "hook-nosed harpy."[20] Erasmus, however, called their marriage happy.[12]:144

 

More had no children from his second marriage, although he raised Alice's daughter from her previous marriage as his own. More also became the guardian of two young girls: Anne Cresacre would eventually marry his son, John More;[12]:146 and Margaret Giggs (later Clement) would be the only member of his family to witness his execution (she died on the 35th anniversary of that execution, and her daughter married More's nephew William Rastell). An affectionate father, More wrote letters to his children whenever he was away on legal or government business, and encouraged them to write to him often.[12]:150[21]:xiv

 

More insisted upon giving his daughters the same classical education as his son, a highly unusual attitude at the time.[12]:146–47 His eldest daughter, Margaret, attracted much admiration for her erudition, especially her fluency in Greek and Latin.[12]:147 More told his daughter of his pride in her academic accomplishment in September 1522, after he showed the bishop a letter she had written:

 

When he saw from the signature that it was the letter of a lady, his surprise led him to read it more eagerly … he said he would never have believed it to be your work unless I had assured him of the fact, and he began to praise it in the highest terms … for its pure Latinity, its correctness, its erudition, and its expressions of tender affection. He took out at once from his pocket a portague [A Portuguese gold coin] … to send to you as a pledge and token of his good will towards you.[21]:152

 

More's decision to educate his daughters set an example for other noble families. Even Erasmus became much more favourable once he witnessed their accomplishments.[12]:149

 

A portrait of More and his family was painted by Holbein, but it was lost in a fire in the 18th century. More's grandson commissioned a copy, two versions of which survive.

 

In 1504 More was elected to Parliament to represent Great Yarmouth, and in 1510 began representing London.[22]

 

From 1510, More served as one of the two undersheriffs of the City of London, a position of considerable responsibility in which he earned a reputation as an honest and effective public servant. More became Master of Requests in 1514,[23] the same year in which he was appointed as a Privy Counsellor.[24] After undertaking a diplomatic mission to the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, accompanying Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal Archbishop of York, to Calais and Bruges, More was knighted and made under-treasurer of the Exchequer in 1521.[24]

 

As secretary and personal adviser to King Henry VIII, More became increasingly influential: welcoming foreign diplomats, drafting official documents, and serving as a liaison between the King and Lord Chancellor Wolsey. More later served as High Steward for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.

 

In 1523 More was elected as knight of the shire (MP) for Middlesex and, on Wolsey's recommendation, the House of Commons elected More its Speaker.[24] In 1525 More became Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, with executive and judicial responsibilities over much of northern England.

 

More supported the Catholic Church and saw the Protestant Reformation as heresy, a threat to the unity of both church and society. More believed in the theology, polemics, and ecclesiastical laws of the church, and "heard Luther's call to destroy the Catholic Church as a call to war."[25]

 

His early actions against the Reformation included aiding Wolsey in preventing Lutheran books from being imported into England, spying on and investigating suspected Protestants, especially publishers, and arresting anyone holding in his possession, transporting, or selling the books of the Protestant Reformation. More vigorously suppressed the travelling country ministers who used Tyndale's English translation of the New Testament.[citation needed] It contained controversial translations of certain words; for example, Tyndale used "senior" and "elder" rather than "priest" for the Greek "presbyteros", and some of the marginal glosses challenged Catholic doctrine.[26] It was during this time that most of his literary polemics appeared.

 

Rumours circulated during and after More's lifetime regarding ill-treatment of heretics during his time as Lord Chancellor. The popular anti-Catholic polemicist John Foxe, who "placed Protestant sufferings against the background of... the Antichrist",[27] was instrumental in publicising accusations of torture in his famous Book of Martyrs, claiming that More had often personally used violence or torture while interrogating heretics. Later authors such as Brian Moynahan and Michael Farris cite Foxe when repeating these allegations.[28] More himself denied these allegations:

 

Stories of a similar nature were current even in More's lifetime and he denied them forcefully. He admitted that he did imprison heretics in his house – 'theyr sure kepynge' – he called it – but he utterly rejected claims of torture and whipping... 'so helpe me God.'[12]:298

 

However, More writes in his "Apology" (1533) that he only applied corporal punishment to two heretics: a child who was caned in front of his family for heresy regarding the Eucharist, and a "feeble-minded" man who was whipped for disrupting prayers.[29]:404 During More's chancellorship, six people were burned at the stake for heresy; they were Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbery, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.[12]:299–306 Moynahan has argued that More was influential in the burning of Tyndale, as More's agents had long pursued him, even though this took place over a year after his own death.[30] Burning at the stake had long been a standard punishment for heresy; about thirty burnings had taken place in the century before More's elevation to Chancellor, and burning continued to be used by both Catholics and Protestants during the religious upheaval of the following decades.[31] His biographer Peter Ackroyd notes that More explicitly "approved of Burning".[12]:298

 

John Tewkesbury was a London leather seller found guilty by Bishop of London John Stokesley[32] of harbouring banned books; he was sentenced to burning for refusing to recant. More declared: he "burned as there was neuer wretche I wene better worthy."[33]

 

Modern commentators are divided over More's religious actions as Chancellor. Some biographers, including Ackroyd, have taken a relatively tolerant view of More's campaign against Protestantism by placing his actions within the turbulent religious climate of the time. Others have been more critical, such as Richard Marius, an American scholar of the Reformation, believing that persecutions were a betrayal of More's earlier humanist convictions, including More's zealous and well-documented advocacy of extermination for Protestants.[29]:386–406

 

Some Protestants take a different view. In 1980, More was added to the Church of England's calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church, despite being a fierce opponent of the English Reformation that created the Church of England. He was added jointly with John Fisher, to be commemorated every 6 July (the date of More's execution) as "Thomas More, Scholar, and John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, Reformation Martyrs, 1535".[5] Pope John Paul II honoured him by making him patron saint of statesmen and politicians in October 2000, stating: "It can be said that he demonstrated in a singular way the value of a moral conscience... even if, in his actions against heretics, he reflected the limits of the culture of his time".

 

As the conflict over supremacy between the Papacy and the King reached its apogee, More continued to remain steadfast in supporting the supremacy of the Pope as Successor of Peter over that of the King of England. In 1530, More refused to sign a letter by the leading English churchmen and aristocrats asking Pope Clement VII to annul Henry's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, and also quarrelled with Henry VIII over the heresy laws. In 1531, Henry had isolated More by purging most clergy who supported the papal stance from senior positions in the church. Parliament's reinstatement of the charge of praemunire in 1529 had made it a crime to support in public or office the claim of any authority outside the realm (such as the Papacy) to have a legal jurisdiction superior to the King's. In 1531, a royal decree required the clergy to take an oath acknowledging the King as "Supreme Head" of the Church in England. As a layperson, More did not need to take the oath and the clergy, after some initial resistance, took the oath with the addition of the clause "as far as the law of Christ allows." However, More saw he could not render the support Henry expected from his Lord Chancellor for the policy the King was developing to support the annulment of his marriage with Catherine. In 1532 he petitioned the King to relieve him of his office, alleging failing health. Henry granted his request.

 

In 1533, More refused to attend the coronation of Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. Technically, this was not an act of treason, as More had written to Henry acknowledging Anne's queenship and expressing his desire for the King's happiness and the new Queen's health.[34] Despite this, his refusal to attend was widely interpreted as a snub against Anne, and Henry took action against him.

 

Shortly thereafter, More was charged with accepting bribes, but the charges had to be dismissed for lack of any evidence. In early 1534, More was accused of conspiring with the "Holy Maid of Kent," Elizabeth Barton, a nun who had prophesied against the king's annulment, but More was able to produce a letter in which he had instructed Barton not to interfere with state matters.[citation needed]

 

On 13 April 1534, More was asked to appear before a commission and swear his allegiance to the parliamentary Act of Succession. More accepted Parliament's right to declare Anne Boleyn the legitimate Queen of England, but, holding fast to the teaching of papal supremacy, he steadfastly refused to take the oath of supremacy of the Crown in the relationship between the kingdom and the church in England. More furthermore publicly refused to uphold Henry's annulment from Catherine. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, refused the oath along with More. The oath reads:[35]

 

...By reason whereof the Bishop of Rome and See Apostolic, contrary to the great and inviolable grants of jurisdictions given by God immediately to emperors, kings and princes in succession to their heirs, hath presumed in times past to invest who should please them to inherit in other men's kingdoms and dominions, which thing we your most humble subjects, both spiritual and temporal, do most abhor and detest...

 

With his refusal to support the King's annulment, More's enemies had enough evidence to have the King arrest him on treason. Four days later, Henry had More imprisoned in the Tower of London. There More prepared a devotional Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation. While More was imprisoned in the Tower, Thomas Cromwell made several visits, urging More to take the oath, which he continued to refuse.

 

On 1 July 1535, More was tried before a panel of judges that included the new Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas Audley, as well as Anne Boleyn's father, brother, and uncle. He was charged with high treason for denying the validity of the Act of Supremacy and was tried under the following section of the Treasons Act 1534:

 

If any person or persons, after the first day of February next coming, do maliciously wish, will or desire, by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king's most royal person, the queen's, or their heirs apparent, or to deprive them or any of them of their dignity, title, or name of their royal estates …

 

That then every such person and persons so offending … shall have and suffer such pains of death and other penalties, as is limited and accustomed in cases of high treason.[36]

 

More, relying on legal precedent and the maxim "qui tacet consentire videtur" (literally, who (is) silent is seen to consent), understood that he could not be convicted as long as he did not explicitly deny that the King was Supreme Head of the Church, and he therefore refused to answer all questions regarding his opinions on the subject.

 

Thomas Cromwell, at the time the most powerful of the King's advisors, brought forth the Solicitor General, Richard Rich, to testify that More had, in his presence, denied that the King was the legitimate head of the church. This testimony was characterised by More as being extremely dubious. Witnesses Richard Southwell and Mr. Palmer both denied having heard the details of the reported conversation, and as More himself pointed out:

 

Can it therefore seem likely to your Lordships, that I should in so weighty an Affair as this, act so unadvisedly, as to trust Mr. Rich, a Man I had always so mean an Opinion of, in reference to his Truth and Honesty, … that I should only impart to Mr. Rich the Secrets of my Conscience in respect to the King's Supremacy, the particular Secrets, and only Point about which I have been so long pressed to explain my self? which I never did, nor never would reveal; when the Act was once made, either to the King himself, or any of his Privy Councillors, as is well known to your Honours, who have been sent upon no other account at several times by his Majesty to me in the Tower. I refer it to your Judgments, my Lords, whether this can seem credible to any of your Lordships.

 

The jury took only fifteen minutes, however, to find More guilty.

 

After the jury's verdict was delivered and before his sentencing, More spoke freely of his belief that "no temporal man may be the head of the spirituality". He was sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered (the usual punishment for traitors who were not the nobility), but the King commuted this to execution by decapitation. The execution took place on 6 July 1535. When he came to mount the steps to the scaffold, he is widely quoted as saying (to the officials): "I pray you, I pray you, Mr Lieutenant, see me safe up and for my coming down, I can shift for myself"; while on the scaffold he declared that he died "the king's good servant, but God's first."

 

Another comment he is believed to have made to the executioner is that his beard was completely innocent of any crime, and did not deserve the axe; he then positioned his beard so that it would not be harmed.[39] More asked that his foster/adopted daughter Margaret Clement (née Giggs) be given his headless corpse to bury.[40] She was the only member of his family to witness his execution. He was buried at the Tower of London, in the chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in an unmarked grave. His head was fixed upon a pike over London Bridge for a month, according to the normal custom for traitors. His daughter Margaret (Meg) Roper rescued it, possibly by bribery, before it could be thrown in the River Thames.[citation needed]

 

The skull is believed to rest in the Roper Vault of St Dunstan's Church, Canterbury, though some researchers[who?] have claimed it might be within the tomb he erected for More in Chelsea Old Church (see below). The evidence,[clarification needed] however, seems to be in favour of its placement in St Dunstan's, with the remains of his daughter, Margaret Roper, and her husband's family, whose vault it was.[citation needed]

 

Among other surviving relics is his hair shirt, presented for safe keeping by Margaret Clement.[41] This was long in the custody of the community of Augustinian canonesses who until 1983 lived at the convent at Abbotskerswell Priory, Devon. It is now preserved at Syon Abbey, near South Brent.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

Here is my virtual tour through the city - portfotolio.net/jup3nep/album/72157631887823501

 

The Topkapı Palace (Turkish: Topkapı Sarayı or in Ottoman Turkish: طوپقپو سرايى) is a large palace in Istanbul, Turkey, that was the primary residence of the Ottoman Sultans for approximately 400 years (1465-1856) of their 624-year reign.

 

As well as a royal residence, the palace was a setting for state occasions and royal entertainments. It is now a major tourist attraction and contains important holy relics of the Muslim world, including Muhammed's cloak and sword. The Topkapı Palace is among the monuments contained within the "Historic Areas of Istanbul", which became a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1985, and is described in Criterion iv as "the best example[s] of ensembles of palaces [...] of the Ottoman period."

 

Construction began in 1459, ordered by Sultan Mehmed II, the conqueror of Byzantine Constantinople. The palace complex consists of four main courtyards and many smaller buildings. At its peak, the palace was home to as many as 4,000 people, and covered a large area with a long shoreline. The complex was expanded over the centuries, with major renovations after the 1509 earthquake and the 1665 fire. The palace contained mosques, a hospital, bakeries, and a mint. The name translates as "Cannon gate Palace" from a nearby gate which has since been destroyed.

 

From the end of the 17th century the Topkapı Palace gradually lost its importance as the Sultans preferred to spend more time in their new palaces along the Bosporus. In 1856, Sultan Abdül Mecid I decided to move the court to the newly built Dolmabahçe Palace, the first European-style palace in the city. Some functions, such as the imperial treasury, the library, and the mint were retained in the Topkapı Palace.

 

Following the end of the Ottoman Empire in 1921, the Topkapı Palace was transformed by a government decree dated April 3, 1924 into a museum of the imperial era. The Topkapı Palace Museum is administered by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. The palace complex has hundreds of rooms and chambers, but only the most important are accessible to the public today. The complex is guarded by officials of the ministry as well as armed guards of the Turkish military. The palace includes many fine examples of Ottoman architecture. It contains large collections of porcelain, robes, weapons, shields, armor, Ottoman miniatures, Islamic calligraphic manuscripts and murals, as well as a display of Ottoman treasures and jewelry.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topkap%C4%B1_Palace

  

Harem (pronounced [haˈɾem], Turkish, from Arabic: حرم‎ ḥaram "forbidden place; sacrosanct, sanctum", related to حريم ḥarīm, "a sacred inviolable place; female members of the family" and حرام ḥarām, "forbidden; sacred") refers to the sphere of women in what is usually a polygynous household and their enclosed quarters which are forbidden to men. It originated in the Near East and is typically associated in the Western world with the Ottoman Empire. For the South Asian equivalent, see purdah and zenana.

 

The word harem is strictly applicable to Muslim households only, but the system was common, more or less, to most ancient Oriental communities, especially where polygamy was permitted.

 

The Imperial Harem of the Ottoman sultan, which was also called seraglio in the West, typically housed several dozen women, including wives. It also housed the Sultan's mother, daughters and other female relatives, as well as eunuchs and slave servant girls to serve the aforementioned women. During the later periods, the sons of the Sultan also lived in the Harem until they were 16 years old, when it was considered appropriate for them to appear in the public and administrative areas of the palace. The Topkapı Harem was, in some senses, merely the private living quarters of the Sultan and his family, within the palace complex. Some women of Ottoman harem, especially wives, mothers and sisters of sultans played very important political roles in Ottoman history, and in times it was said that the empire was ruled from harem. Hürrem Sultan (wife of Süleyman The Magnificent, mother of Selim II) and Kösem Sultan (mother of Murad IV) were the two most powerful women in Ottoman history.

 

Moulay Ismail, Alaouite sultan of Morocco from 1672 to 1727, is said to have fathered a total of 525 sons and 342 daughters by 1703 and achieved a 700th son in 1721. He had over 500 concubines.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harem

 

A few years ago, early on Saturday morning, I tried to enter St Dunstan's, with no luck. It was locked fast.

 

Which was a shame, as it looked a very interesting church from the outside, and with its location, just outside the city gate on the crossing of two main roads.

 

Anyway, I logged this away in my meory banks, detirmed to go back one day. And for a change this Heritage Weekend, we returned to Canterbury not once, but twice. And on the second day was rewarded with entry to three of the city churches.

 

St Dunstan is most famous for being the final resting place of Sir Thomas More's head, in the family tomb of his wife. There is fine glass commemorating this.

 

Some minor work is being carried out at the rear of the church, so a return will be needed to see the full restored church.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Dedicated to a former Archbishop of Canterbury, St Dunstan's stands outside the city walls. There is structural evidence of the Norman period, but most of the church is fourteenth century. The west tower dates from this time and is very oddly proportioned - about twice the height that its width can really cope with. The south chapel is constructed of brick and was completed in the early sixteenth century. It contains monuments to the More family and is the burial place of St. Thomas More's head, - brought here by his daughter after his execution. The family home stood opposite the church where its brick gateway may still be seen. There are two twentieth-century windows of note in the chapel, by Lawrence Lee and John Hayward.

  

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Canterbury+2

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

St. Dunstan's is an Anglican church in Canterbury, Kent, at the junction of London Road and Whitstable Road. It is dedicated to St. Dunstan (909-988) and gives its name to the part of the city on the left bank of the River Stour. The parish has been held in plurality with others nearby at different times, in a way that is confusing and difficult to document. In 2010 the parish was joined with the parishes of the City Centre Parish in a new pastoral grouping, City Centre with St. Dunstan.

 

The church dates from the 11th century and is a grade I listed building. It was restored in 1878-80 by church architect Ewan Christian. Its association with the deaths of Thomas Becket and Thomas More make it a place of pilgrimage.

 

Dunstan was Archbishop of Canterbury from 960 to 978 and was canonised soon after his death, becoming the favourite saint of the English until he was supplanted by Thomas Becket.[2] He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral but his tomb was destroyed during the Reformation.

 

In 1174, when Henry II began his penitential pilgrimage in reparation for the murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket, he changed his clothing into sackcloth at St. Dunstan’s Church and began his pilgrimage from here to Thomas Becket's tomb at Canterbury Cathedral on foot.

 

His daughter Margaret secured the release of Thomas More's head from its spike on London Bridge and brought it back to the family tomb of her husband William Roper.[4] The Roper family lived nearby off what is now St Dunstan's Street. What remains of their home is called Roper Gate, marked with a commemorative plaque, it is all that survives of Place House. The Roper family vault is located underneath the Nicholas Chapel, to the right of the church's main altar. It was sealed in recent years, according to Anglican tradition. A large stone slab marks its location to the immediate left of the chapel's altar. Three impressive stained glass windows line the chapel, the one behind the altar depicts in brilliant detail the major events and symbols in the life of the Saint. Another of the windows commemorates the visit of Pope John Paul II to Canterbury to pray with the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury at the site of the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. The window displays the arms of the Archbishop's diocese and the Pope. Plaques mounted on the walls explain the veracity of the relic of the Saint's head, the sealing of the vault which contains it, and the life of the Saint, including a prayer he wrote.

  

St Dunstan’s has six bells, hung for change ringing in the English style, the heaviest weighing 13cwt (approx. 675 kg). Due to the unusual narrowness of the belfry, the bells are hung in a two-tier frame.

 

The fifth bell of the ring is one of the oldest Christian church bells in the world, believed to have been cast in 1325 by William le Belyetere, making it nearly 690 years old as of 2014 [5]

 

The bells were removed from the tower in 1935 so that a concrete structural beam could be fitted to the tower. At this time the bells were retuned by the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, and rehung in the present frame in 1936.

 

The bells are rung on Friday evenings for practice, and Sunday mornings for the service, by the St Dunstan’s Society of Change Ringers.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Dunstan%27s,_Canterbury

 

----------------------------------------------

 

ir Thomas More (/ˈmɔːr/; 7 February 1478 – 6 July 1535), venerated by Roman Catholics as Saint Thomas More,[1][2] was an English lawyer, social philosopher, author, statesman and noted Renaissance humanist. He was also a councillor to Henry VIII, and Lord High Chancellor of England from October 1529 to 16 May 1532.[3]

 

More opposed the Protestant Reformation, in particular the theology of Martin Luther and William Tyndale. He also wrote Utopia, published in 1516, about the political system of an imaginary ideal island nation. More opposed the King's separation from the Catholic Church, refusing to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church of England and the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. After refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy, he was convicted of treason and beheaded. Ahead of his execution, he was reported saying his famous words: "I die the King's good servant, but God's first."

 

Pope Pius XI canonised More in 1935 as a martyr. Pope John Paul II in 2000 declared him the "heavenly Patron of Statesmen and Politicians."[4] Since 1980, the Church of England has remembered More liturgically as a Reformation martyr.[5] The Soviet Union honoured him for the 'Communistic' attitude toward property rights expressed in Utopia.

 

Born in Milk Street in London, on February 7, 1478, Thomas More was the son of Sir John More,[9] a successful lawyer and later judge, and his wife Agnes (née Graunger). More was educated at St Anthony's School, then considered one of London's finest schools.[10] From 1490 to 1492, More served John Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor of England, as a household page.[11]:xvi Morton enthusiastically supported the "New Learning" (now called the Renaissance), and thought highly of the young More. Believing that More had great potential, Morton nominated him for a place at the University of Oxford (either in St. Mary's Hall or Canterbury College, both now gone).[12]:38

 

More began his studies at Oxford in 1492, and received a classical education. Studying under Thomas Linacre and William Grocyn, he became proficient in both Latin and Greek. More left Oxford after only two years—at his father's insistence—to begin legal training in London at New Inn, one of the Inns of Chancery.[11]:xvii[13] In 1496, More became a student at Lincoln's Inn, one of the Inns of Court, where he remained until 1502, when he was called to the Bar.

 

According to his friend, theologian Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, More once seriously contemplated abandoning his legal career to become a monk.[14][15] Between 1503 and 1504 More lived near the Carthusian monastery outside the walls of London and joined in the monks' spiritual exercises. Although he deeply admired their piety, More ultimately decided to remain a layman, standing for election to Parliament in 1504 and marrying the following year.[11]:xxi

 

In spite of his choice to pursue a secular career, More continued ascetical practices for the rest of his life, such as wearing a hair shirt next to his skin and occasionally engaging in flagellation.[11]:xxi A tradition of the Third Order of Saint Francis honours More as a member of that Order on their calendar of saints.

 

More married Jane Colt in 1505.[12]:118 She was 5 years younger than her husband, quiet and good-natured.[12]:119 Erasmus reported that More wanted to give his young wife a better education than she had previously received at home, and tutored her in music and literature.[12]:119 The couple had four children before Jane died in 1511: Margaret, Elizabeth, Cicely, and John.[12]:132

 

Going "against friends' advice and common custom," within thirty days More had married one of the many eligible women among his wide circle of friends.[17] He certainly expected a mother to take care of his little children and, as the view of his time considered marriage as an "economic union",[18] he chose a rich widow, Alice Harpur Middleton.[19] More is regarded not getting remarried for sexual pleasure, since Alice is much older than himself, and their marriage possibly had not been consummated.[18] The speed of the marriage was so unusual that More had to get a dispensation of the banns, which, due to his good public reputation, he easily obtained.[17] Alice More lacked Jane's docility; More's friend Andrew Ammonius derided Alice as a "hook-nosed harpy."[20] Erasmus, however, called their marriage happy.[12]:144

 

More had no children from his second marriage, although he raised Alice's daughter from her previous marriage as his own. More also became the guardian of two young girls: Anne Cresacre would eventually marry his son, John More;[12]:146 and Margaret Giggs (later Clement) would be the only member of his family to witness his execution (she died on the 35th anniversary of that execution, and her daughter married More's nephew William Rastell). An affectionate father, More wrote letters to his children whenever he was away on legal or government business, and encouraged them to write to him often.[12]:150[21]:xiv

 

More insisted upon giving his daughters the same classical education as his son, a highly unusual attitude at the time.[12]:146–47 His eldest daughter, Margaret, attracted much admiration for her erudition, especially her fluency in Greek and Latin.[12]:147 More told his daughter of his pride in her academic accomplishment in September 1522, after he showed the bishop a letter she had written:

 

When he saw from the signature that it was the letter of a lady, his surprise led him to read it more eagerly … he said he would never have believed it to be your work unless I had assured him of the fact, and he began to praise it in the highest terms … for its pure Latinity, its correctness, its erudition, and its expressions of tender affection. He took out at once from his pocket a portague [A Portuguese gold coin] … to send to you as a pledge and token of his good will towards you.[21]:152

 

More's decision to educate his daughters set an example for other noble families. Even Erasmus became much more favourable once he witnessed their accomplishments.[12]:149

 

A portrait of More and his family was painted by Holbein, but it was lost in a fire in the 18th century. More's grandson commissioned a copy, two versions of which survive.

 

In 1504 More was elected to Parliament to represent Great Yarmouth, and in 1510 began representing London.[22]

 

From 1510, More served as one of the two undersheriffs of the City of London, a position of considerable responsibility in which he earned a reputation as an honest and effective public servant. More became Master of Requests in 1514,[23] the same year in which he was appointed as a Privy Counsellor.[24] After undertaking a diplomatic mission to the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, accompanying Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal Archbishop of York, to Calais and Bruges, More was knighted and made under-treasurer of the Exchequer in 1521.[24]

 

As secretary and personal adviser to King Henry VIII, More became increasingly influential: welcoming foreign diplomats, drafting official documents, and serving as a liaison between the King and Lord Chancellor Wolsey. More later served as High Steward for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.

 

In 1523 More was elected as knight of the shire (MP) for Middlesex and, on Wolsey's recommendation, the House of Commons elected More its Speaker.[24] In 1525 More became Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, with executive and judicial responsibilities over much of northern England.

 

More supported the Catholic Church and saw the Protestant Reformation as heresy, a threat to the unity of both church and society. More believed in the theology, polemics, and ecclesiastical laws of the church, and "heard Luther's call to destroy the Catholic Church as a call to war."[25]

 

His early actions against the Reformation included aiding Wolsey in preventing Lutheran books from being imported into England, spying on and investigating suspected Protestants, especially publishers, and arresting anyone holding in his possession, transporting, or selling the books of the Protestant Reformation. More vigorously suppressed the travelling country ministers who used Tyndale's English translation of the New Testament.[citation needed] It contained controversial translations of certain words; for example, Tyndale used "senior" and "elder" rather than "priest" for the Greek "presbyteros", and some of the marginal glosses challenged Catholic doctrine.[26] It was during this time that most of his literary polemics appeared.

 

Rumours circulated during and after More's lifetime regarding ill-treatment of heretics during his time as Lord Chancellor. The popular anti-Catholic polemicist John Foxe, who "placed Protestant sufferings against the background of... the Antichrist",[27] was instrumental in publicising accusations of torture in his famous Book of Martyrs, claiming that More had often personally used violence or torture while interrogating heretics. Later authors such as Brian Moynahan and Michael Farris cite Foxe when repeating these allegations.[28] More himself denied these allegations:

 

Stories of a similar nature were current even in More's lifetime and he denied them forcefully. He admitted that he did imprison heretics in his house – 'theyr sure kepynge' – he called it – but he utterly rejected claims of torture and whipping... 'so helpe me God.'[12]:298

 

However, More writes in his "Apology" (1533) that he only applied corporal punishment to two heretics: a child who was caned in front of his family for heresy regarding the Eucharist, and a "feeble-minded" man who was whipped for disrupting prayers.[29]:404 During More's chancellorship, six people were burned at the stake for heresy; they were Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbery, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.[12]:299–306 Moynahan has argued that More was influential in the burning of Tyndale, as More's agents had long pursued him, even though this took place over a year after his own death.[30] Burning at the stake had long been a standard punishment for heresy; about thirty burnings had taken place in the century before More's elevation to Chancellor, and burning continued to be used by both Catholics and Protestants during the religious upheaval of the following decades.[31] His biographer Peter Ackroyd notes that More explicitly "approved of Burning".[12]:298

 

John Tewkesbury was a London leather seller found guilty by Bishop of London John Stokesley[32] of harbouring banned books; he was sentenced to burning for refusing to recant. More declared: he "burned as there was neuer wretche I wene better worthy."[33]

 

Modern commentators are divided over More's religious actions as Chancellor. Some biographers, including Ackroyd, have taken a relatively tolerant view of More's campaign against Protestantism by placing his actions within the turbulent religious climate of the time. Others have been more critical, such as Richard Marius, an American scholar of the Reformation, believing that persecutions were a betrayal of More's earlier humanist convictions, including More's zealous and well-documented advocacy of extermination for Protestants.[29]:386–406

 

Some Protestants take a different view. In 1980, More was added to the Church of England's calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church, despite being a fierce opponent of the English Reformation that created the Church of England. He was added jointly with John Fisher, to be commemorated every 6 July (the date of More's execution) as "Thomas More, Scholar, and John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, Reformation Martyrs, 1535".[5] Pope John Paul II honoured him by making him patron saint of statesmen and politicians in October 2000, stating: "It can be said that he demonstrated in a singular way the value of a moral conscience... even if, in his actions against heretics, he reflected the limits of the culture of his time".

 

As the conflict over supremacy between the Papacy and the King reached its apogee, More continued to remain steadfast in supporting the supremacy of the Pope as Successor of Peter over that of the King of England. In 1530, More refused to sign a letter by the leading English churchmen and aristocrats asking Pope Clement VII to annul Henry's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, and also quarrelled with Henry VIII over the heresy laws. In 1531, Henry had isolated More by purging most clergy who supported the papal stance from senior positions in the church. Parliament's reinstatement of the charge of praemunire in 1529 had made it a crime to support in public or office the claim of any authority outside the realm (such as the Papacy) to have a legal jurisdiction superior to the King's. In 1531, a royal decree required the clergy to take an oath acknowledging the King as "Supreme Head" of the Church in England. As a layperson, More did not need to take the oath and the clergy, after some initial resistance, took the oath with the addition of the clause "as far as the law of Christ allows." However, More saw he could not render the support Henry expected from his Lord Chancellor for the policy the King was developing to support the annulment of his marriage with Catherine. In 1532 he petitioned the King to relieve him of his office, alleging failing health. Henry granted his request.

 

In 1533, More refused to attend the coronation of Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. Technically, this was not an act of treason, as More had written to Henry acknowledging Anne's queenship and expressing his desire for the King's happiness and the new Queen's health.[34] Despite this, his refusal to attend was widely interpreted as a snub against Anne, and Henry took action against him.

 

Shortly thereafter, More was charged with accepting bribes, but the charges had to be dismissed for lack of any evidence. In early 1534, More was accused of conspiring with the "Holy Maid of Kent," Elizabeth Barton, a nun who had prophesied against the king's annulment, but More was able to produce a letter in which he had instructed Barton not to interfere with state matters.[citation needed]

 

On 13 April 1534, More was asked to appear before a commission and swear his allegiance to the parliamentary Act of Succession. More accepted Parliament's right to declare Anne Boleyn the legitimate Queen of England, but, holding fast to the teaching of papal supremacy, he steadfastly refused to take the oath of supremacy of the Crown in the relationship between the kingdom and the church in England. More furthermore publicly refused to uphold Henry's annulment from Catherine. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, refused the oath along with More. The oath reads:[35]

 

...By reason whereof the Bishop of Rome and See Apostolic, contrary to the great and inviolable grants of jurisdictions given by God immediately to emperors, kings and princes in succession to their heirs, hath presumed in times past to invest who should please them to inherit in other men's kingdoms and dominions, which thing we your most humble subjects, both spiritual and temporal, do most abhor and detest...

 

With his refusal to support the King's annulment, More's enemies had enough evidence to have the King arrest him on treason. Four days later, Henry had More imprisoned in the Tower of London. There More prepared a devotional Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation. While More was imprisoned in the Tower, Thomas Cromwell made several visits, urging More to take the oath, which he continued to refuse.

 

On 1 July 1535, More was tried before a panel of judges that included the new Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas Audley, as well as Anne Boleyn's father, brother, and uncle. He was charged with high treason for denying the validity of the Act of Supremacy and was tried under the following section of the Treasons Act 1534:

 

If any person or persons, after the first day of February next coming, do maliciously wish, will or desire, by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king's most royal person, the queen's, or their heirs apparent, or to deprive them or any of them of their dignity, title, or name of their royal estates …

 

That then every such person and persons so offending … shall have and suffer such pains of death and other penalties, as is limited and accustomed in cases of high treason.[36]

 

More, relying on legal precedent and the maxim "qui tacet consentire videtur" (literally, who (is) silent is seen to consent), understood that he could not be convicted as long as he did not explicitly deny that the King was Supreme Head of the Church, and he therefore refused to answer all questions regarding his opinions on the subject.

 

Thomas Cromwell, at the time the most powerful of the King's advisors, brought forth the Solicitor General, Richard Rich, to testify that More had, in his presence, denied that the King was the legitimate head of the church. This testimony was characterised by More as being extremely dubious. Witnesses Richard Southwell and Mr. Palmer both denied having heard the details of the reported conversation, and as More himself pointed out:

 

Can it therefore seem likely to your Lordships, that I should in so weighty an Affair as this, act so unadvisedly, as to trust Mr. Rich, a Man I had always so mean an Opinion of, in reference to his Truth and Honesty, … that I should only impart to Mr. Rich the Secrets of my Conscience in respect to the King's Supremacy, the particular Secrets, and only Point about which I have been so long pressed to explain my self? which I never did, nor never would reveal; when the Act was once made, either to the King himself, or any of his Privy Councillors, as is well known to your Honours, who have been sent upon no other account at several times by his Majesty to me in the Tower. I refer it to your Judgments, my Lords, whether this can seem credible to any of your Lordships.

 

The jury took only fifteen minutes, however, to find More guilty.

 

After the jury's verdict was delivered and before his sentencing, More spoke freely of his belief that "no temporal man may be the head of the spirituality". He was sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered (the usual punishment for traitors who were not the nobility), but the King commuted this to execution by decapitation. The execution took place on 6 July 1535. When he came to mount the steps to the scaffold, he is widely quoted as saying (to the officials): "I pray you, I pray you, Mr Lieutenant, see me safe up and for my coming down, I can shift for myself"; while on the scaffold he declared that he died "the king's good servant, but God's first."

 

Another comment he is believed to have made to the executioner is that his beard was completely innocent of any crime, and did not deserve the axe; he then positioned his beard so that it would not be harmed.[39] More asked that his foster/adopted daughter Margaret Clement (née Giggs) be given his headless corpse to bury.[40] She was the only member of his family to witness his execution. He was buried at the Tower of London, in the chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in an unmarked grave. His head was fixed upon a pike over London Bridge for a month, according to the normal custom for traitors. His daughter Margaret (Meg) Roper rescued it, possibly by bribery, before it could be thrown in the River Thames.[citation needed]

 

The skull is believed to rest in the Roper Vault of St Dunstan's Church, Canterbury, though some researchers[who?] have claimed it might be within the tomb he erected for More in Chelsea Old Church (see below). The evidence,[clarification needed] however, seems to be in favour of its placement in St Dunstan's, with the remains of his daughter, Margaret Roper, and her husband's family, whose vault it was.[citation needed]

 

Among other surviving relics is his hair shirt, presented for safe keeping by Margaret Clement.[41] This was long in the custody of the community of Augustinian canonesses who until 1983 lived at the convent at Abbotskerswell Priory, Devon. It is now preserved at Syon Abbey, near South Brent.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

A few years ago, early on Saturday morning, I tried to enter St Dunstan's, with no luck. It was locked fast.

 

Which was a shame, as it looked a very interesting church from the outside, and with its location, just outside the city gate on the crossing of two main roads.

 

Anyway, I logged this away in my meory banks, detirmed to go back one day. And for a change this Heritage Weekend, we returned to Canterbury not once, but twice. And on the second day was rewarded with entry to three of the city churches.

 

St Dunstan is most famous for being the final resting place of Sir Thomas More's head, in the family tomb of his wife. There is fine glass commemorating this.

 

Some minor work is being carried out at the rear of the church, so a return will be needed to see the full restored church.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Dedicated to a former Archbishop of Canterbury, St Dunstan's stands outside the city walls. There is structural evidence of the Norman period, but most of the church is fourteenth century. The west tower dates from this time and is very oddly proportioned - about twice the height that its width can really cope with. The south chapel is constructed of brick and was completed in the early sixteenth century. It contains monuments to the More family and is the burial place of St. Thomas More's head, - brought here by his daughter after his execution. The family home stood opposite the church where its brick gateway may still be seen. There are two twentieth-century windows of note in the chapel, by Lawrence Lee and John Hayward.

  

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Canterbury+2

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

St. Dunstan's is an Anglican church in Canterbury, Kent, at the junction of London Road and Whitstable Road. It is dedicated to St. Dunstan (909-988) and gives its name to the part of the city on the left bank of the River Stour. The parish has been held in plurality with others nearby at different times, in a way that is confusing and difficult to document. In 2010 the parish was joined with the parishes of the City Centre Parish in a new pastoral grouping, City Centre with St. Dunstan.

 

The church dates from the 11th century and is a grade I listed building. It was restored in 1878-80 by church architect Ewan Christian. Its association with the deaths of Thomas Becket and Thomas More make it a place of pilgrimage.

 

Dunstan was Archbishop of Canterbury from 960 to 978 and was canonised soon after his death, becoming the favourite saint of the English until he was supplanted by Thomas Becket.[2] He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral but his tomb was destroyed during the Reformation.

 

In 1174, when Henry II began his penitential pilgrimage in reparation for the murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket, he changed his clothing into sackcloth at St. Dunstan’s Church and began his pilgrimage from here to Thomas Becket's tomb at Canterbury Cathedral on foot.

 

His daughter Margaret secured the release of Thomas More's head from its spike on London Bridge and brought it back to the family tomb of her husband William Roper.[4] The Roper family lived nearby off what is now St Dunstan's Street. What remains of their home is called Roper Gate, marked with a commemorative plaque, it is all that survives of Place House. The Roper family vault is located underneath the Nicholas Chapel, to the right of the church's main altar. It was sealed in recent years, according to Anglican tradition. A large stone slab marks its location to the immediate left of the chapel's altar. Three impressive stained glass windows line the chapel, the one behind the altar depicts in brilliant detail the major events and symbols in the life of the Saint. Another of the windows commemorates the visit of Pope John Paul II to Canterbury to pray with the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury at the site of the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. The window displays the arms of the Archbishop's diocese and the Pope. Plaques mounted on the walls explain the veracity of the relic of the Saint's head, the sealing of the vault which contains it, and the life of the Saint, including a prayer he wrote.

  

St Dunstan’s has six bells, hung for change ringing in the English style, the heaviest weighing 13cwt (approx. 675 kg). Due to the unusual narrowness of the belfry, the bells are hung in a two-tier frame.

 

The fifth bell of the ring is one of the oldest Christian church bells in the world, believed to have been cast in 1325 by William le Belyetere, making it nearly 690 years old as of 2014 [5]

 

The bells were removed from the tower in 1935 so that a concrete structural beam could be fitted to the tower. At this time the bells were retuned by the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, and rehung in the present frame in 1936.

 

The bells are rung on Friday evenings for practice, and Sunday mornings for the service, by the St Dunstan’s Society of Change Ringers.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Dunstan%27s,_Canterbury

 

----------------------------------------------

 

ir Thomas More (/ˈmɔːr/; 7 February 1478 – 6 July 1535), venerated by Roman Catholics as Saint Thomas More,[1][2] was an English lawyer, social philosopher, author, statesman and noted Renaissance humanist. He was also a councillor to Henry VIII, and Lord High Chancellor of England from October 1529 to 16 May 1532.[3]

 

More opposed the Protestant Reformation, in particular the theology of Martin Luther and William Tyndale. He also wrote Utopia, published in 1516, about the political system of an imaginary ideal island nation. More opposed the King's separation from the Catholic Church, refusing to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church of England and the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. After refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy, he was convicted of treason and beheaded. Ahead of his execution, he was reported saying his famous words: "I die the King's good servant, but God's first."

 

Pope Pius XI canonised More in 1935 as a martyr. Pope John Paul II in 2000 declared him the "heavenly Patron of Statesmen and Politicians."[4] Since 1980, the Church of England has remembered More liturgically as a Reformation martyr.[5] The Soviet Union honoured him for the 'Communistic' attitude toward property rights expressed in Utopia.

 

Born in Milk Street in London, on February 7, 1478, Thomas More was the son of Sir John More,[9] a successful lawyer and later judge, and his wife Agnes (née Graunger). More was educated at St Anthony's School, then considered one of London's finest schools.[10] From 1490 to 1492, More served John Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor of England, as a household page.[11]:xvi Morton enthusiastically supported the "New Learning" (now called the Renaissance), and thought highly of the young More. Believing that More had great potential, Morton nominated him for a place at the University of Oxford (either in St. Mary's Hall or Canterbury College, both now gone).[12]:38

 

More began his studies at Oxford in 1492, and received a classical education. Studying under Thomas Linacre and William Grocyn, he became proficient in both Latin and Greek. More left Oxford after only two years—at his father's insistence—to begin legal training in London at New Inn, one of the Inns of Chancery.[11]:xvii[13] In 1496, More became a student at Lincoln's Inn, one of the Inns of Court, where he remained until 1502, when he was called to the Bar.

 

According to his friend, theologian Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, More once seriously contemplated abandoning his legal career to become a monk.[14][15] Between 1503 and 1504 More lived near the Carthusian monastery outside the walls of London and joined in the monks' spiritual exercises. Although he deeply admired their piety, More ultimately decided to remain a layman, standing for election to Parliament in 1504 and marrying the following year.[11]:xxi

 

In spite of his choice to pursue a secular career, More continued ascetical practices for the rest of his life, such as wearing a hair shirt next to his skin and occasionally engaging in flagellation.[11]:xxi A tradition of the Third Order of Saint Francis honours More as a member of that Order on their calendar of saints.

 

More married Jane Colt in 1505.[12]:118 She was 5 years younger than her husband, quiet and good-natured.[12]:119 Erasmus reported that More wanted to give his young wife a better education than she had previously received at home, and tutored her in music and literature.[12]:119 The couple had four children before Jane died in 1511: Margaret, Elizabeth, Cicely, and John.[12]:132

 

Going "against friends' advice and common custom," within thirty days More had married one of the many eligible women among his wide circle of friends.[17] He certainly expected a mother to take care of his little children and, as the view of his time considered marriage as an "economic union",[18] he chose a rich widow, Alice Harpur Middleton.[19] More is regarded not getting remarried for sexual pleasure, since Alice is much older than himself, and their marriage possibly had not been consummated.[18] The speed of the marriage was so unusual that More had to get a dispensation of the banns, which, due to his good public reputation, he easily obtained.[17] Alice More lacked Jane's docility; More's friend Andrew Ammonius derided Alice as a "hook-nosed harpy."[20] Erasmus, however, called their marriage happy.[12]:144

 

More had no children from his second marriage, although he raised Alice's daughter from her previous marriage as his own. More also became the guardian of two young girls: Anne Cresacre would eventually marry his son, John More;[12]:146 and Margaret Giggs (later Clement) would be the only member of his family to witness his execution (she died on the 35th anniversary of that execution, and her daughter married More's nephew William Rastell). An affectionate father, More wrote letters to his children whenever he was away on legal or government business, and encouraged them to write to him often.[12]:150[21]:xiv

 

More insisted upon giving his daughters the same classical education as his son, a highly unusual attitude at the time.[12]:146–47 His eldest daughter, Margaret, attracted much admiration for her erudition, especially her fluency in Greek and Latin.[12]:147 More told his daughter of his pride in her academic accomplishment in September 1522, after he showed the bishop a letter she had written:

 

When he saw from the signature that it was the letter of a lady, his surprise led him to read it more eagerly … he said he would never have believed it to be your work unless I had assured him of the fact, and he began to praise it in the highest terms … for its pure Latinity, its correctness, its erudition, and its expressions of tender affection. He took out at once from his pocket a portague [A Portuguese gold coin] … to send to you as a pledge and token of his good will towards you.[21]:152

 

More's decision to educate his daughters set an example for other noble families. Even Erasmus became much more favourable once he witnessed their accomplishments.[12]:149

 

A portrait of More and his family was painted by Holbein, but it was lost in a fire in the 18th century. More's grandson commissioned a copy, two versions of which survive.

 

In 1504 More was elected to Parliament to represent Great Yarmouth, and in 1510 began representing London.[22]

 

From 1510, More served as one of the two undersheriffs of the City of London, a position of considerable responsibility in which he earned a reputation as an honest and effective public servant. More became Master of Requests in 1514,[23] the same year in which he was appointed as a Privy Counsellor.[24] After undertaking a diplomatic mission to the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, accompanying Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal Archbishop of York, to Calais and Bruges, More was knighted and made under-treasurer of the Exchequer in 1521.[24]

 

As secretary and personal adviser to King Henry VIII, More became increasingly influential: welcoming foreign diplomats, drafting official documents, and serving as a liaison between the King and Lord Chancellor Wolsey. More later served as High Steward for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.

 

In 1523 More was elected as knight of the shire (MP) for Middlesex and, on Wolsey's recommendation, the House of Commons elected More its Speaker.[24] In 1525 More became Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, with executive and judicial responsibilities over much of northern England.

 

More supported the Catholic Church and saw the Protestant Reformation as heresy, a threat to the unity of both church and society. More believed in the theology, polemics, and ecclesiastical laws of the church, and "heard Luther's call to destroy the Catholic Church as a call to war."[25]

 

His early actions against the Reformation included aiding Wolsey in preventing Lutheran books from being imported into England, spying on and investigating suspected Protestants, especially publishers, and arresting anyone holding in his possession, transporting, or selling the books of the Protestant Reformation. More vigorously suppressed the travelling country ministers who used Tyndale's English translation of the New Testament.[citation needed] It contained controversial translations of certain words; for example, Tyndale used "senior" and "elder" rather than "priest" for the Greek "presbyteros", and some of the marginal glosses challenged Catholic doctrine.[26] It was during this time that most of his literary polemics appeared.

 

Rumours circulated during and after More's lifetime regarding ill-treatment of heretics during his time as Lord Chancellor. The popular anti-Catholic polemicist John Foxe, who "placed Protestant sufferings against the background of... the Antichrist",[27] was instrumental in publicising accusations of torture in his famous Book of Martyrs, claiming that More had often personally used violence or torture while interrogating heretics. Later authors such as Brian Moynahan and Michael Farris cite Foxe when repeating these allegations.[28] More himself denied these allegations:

 

Stories of a similar nature were current even in More's lifetime and he denied them forcefully. He admitted that he did imprison heretics in his house – 'theyr sure kepynge' – he called it – but he utterly rejected claims of torture and whipping... 'so helpe me God.'[12]:298

 

However, More writes in his "Apology" (1533) that he only applied corporal punishment to two heretics: a child who was caned in front of his family for heresy regarding the Eucharist, and a "feeble-minded" man who was whipped for disrupting prayers.[29]:404 During More's chancellorship, six people were burned at the stake for heresy; they were Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbery, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.[12]:299–306 Moynahan has argued that More was influential in the burning of Tyndale, as More's agents had long pursued him, even though this took place over a year after his own death.[30] Burning at the stake had long been a standard punishment for heresy; about thirty burnings had taken place in the century before More's elevation to Chancellor, and burning continued to be used by both Catholics and Protestants during the religious upheaval of the following decades.[31] His biographer Peter Ackroyd notes that More explicitly "approved of Burning".[12]:298

 

John Tewkesbury was a London leather seller found guilty by Bishop of London John Stokesley[32] of harbouring banned books; he was sentenced to burning for refusing to recant. More declared: he "burned as there was neuer wretche I wene better worthy."[33]

 

Modern commentators are divided over More's religious actions as Chancellor. Some biographers, including Ackroyd, have taken a relatively tolerant view of More's campaign against Protestantism by placing his actions within the turbulent religious climate of the time. Others have been more critical, such as Richard Marius, an American scholar of the Reformation, believing that persecutions were a betrayal of More's earlier humanist convictions, including More's zealous and well-documented advocacy of extermination for Protestants.[29]:386–406

 

Some Protestants take a different view. In 1980, More was added to the Church of England's calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church, despite being a fierce opponent of the English Reformation that created the Church of England. He was added jointly with John Fisher, to be commemorated every 6 July (the date of More's execution) as "Thomas More, Scholar, and John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, Reformation Martyrs, 1535".[5] Pope John Paul II honoured him by making him patron saint of statesmen and politicians in October 2000, stating: "It can be said that he demonstrated in a singular way the value of a moral conscience... even if, in his actions against heretics, he reflected the limits of the culture of his time".

 

As the conflict over supremacy between the Papacy and the King reached its apogee, More continued to remain steadfast in supporting the supremacy of the Pope as Successor of Peter over that of the King of England. In 1530, More refused to sign a letter by the leading English churchmen and aristocrats asking Pope Clement VII to annul Henry's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, and also quarrelled with Henry VIII over the heresy laws. In 1531, Henry had isolated More by purging most clergy who supported the papal stance from senior positions in the church. Parliament's reinstatement of the charge of praemunire in 1529 had made it a crime to support in public or office the claim of any authority outside the realm (such as the Papacy) to have a legal jurisdiction superior to the King's. In 1531, a royal decree required the clergy to take an oath acknowledging the King as "Supreme Head" of the Church in England. As a layperson, More did not need to take the oath and the clergy, after some initial resistance, took the oath with the addition of the clause "as far as the law of Christ allows." However, More saw he could not render the support Henry expected from his Lord Chancellor for the policy the King was developing to support the annulment of his marriage with Catherine. In 1532 he petitioned the King to relieve him of his office, alleging failing health. Henry granted his request.

 

In 1533, More refused to attend the coronation of Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. Technically, this was not an act of treason, as More had written to Henry acknowledging Anne's queenship and expressing his desire for the King's happiness and the new Queen's health.[34] Despite this, his refusal to attend was widely interpreted as a snub against Anne, and Henry took action against him.

 

Shortly thereafter, More was charged with accepting bribes, but the charges had to be dismissed for lack of any evidence. In early 1534, More was accused of conspiring with the "Holy Maid of Kent," Elizabeth Barton, a nun who had prophesied against the king's annulment, but More was able to produce a letter in which he had instructed Barton not to interfere with state matters.[citation needed]

 

On 13 April 1534, More was asked to appear before a commission and swear his allegiance to the parliamentary Act of Succession. More accepted Parliament's right to declare Anne Boleyn the legitimate Queen of England, but, holding fast to the teaching of papal supremacy, he steadfastly refused to take the oath of supremacy of the Crown in the relationship between the kingdom and the church in England. More furthermore publicly refused to uphold Henry's annulment from Catherine. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, refused the oath along with More. The oath reads:[35]

 

...By reason whereof the Bishop of Rome and See Apostolic, contrary to the great and inviolable grants of jurisdictions given by God immediately to emperors, kings and princes in succession to their heirs, hath presumed in times past to invest who should please them to inherit in other men's kingdoms and dominions, which thing we your most humble subjects, both spiritual and temporal, do most abhor and detest...

 

With his refusal to support the King's annulment, More's enemies had enough evidence to have the King arrest him on treason. Four days later, Henry had More imprisoned in the Tower of London. There More prepared a devotional Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation. While More was imprisoned in the Tower, Thomas Cromwell made several visits, urging More to take the oath, which he continued to refuse.

 

On 1 July 1535, More was tried before a panel of judges that included the new Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas Audley, as well as Anne Boleyn's father, brother, and uncle. He was charged with high treason for denying the validity of the Act of Supremacy and was tried under the following section of the Treasons Act 1534:

 

If any person or persons, after the first day of February next coming, do maliciously wish, will or desire, by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king's most royal person, the queen's, or their heirs apparent, or to deprive them or any of them of their dignity, title, or name of their royal estates …

 

That then every such person and persons so offending … shall have and suffer such pains of death and other penalties, as is limited and accustomed in cases of high treason.[36]

 

More, relying on legal precedent and the maxim "qui tacet consentire videtur" (literally, who (is) silent is seen to consent), understood that he could not be convicted as long as he did not explicitly deny that the King was Supreme Head of the Church, and he therefore refused to answer all questions regarding his opinions on the subject.

 

Thomas Cromwell, at the time the most powerful of the King's advisors, brought forth the Solicitor General, Richard Rich, to testify that More had, in his presence, denied that the King was the legitimate head of the church. This testimony was characterised by More as being extremely dubious. Witnesses Richard Southwell and Mr. Palmer both denied having heard the details of the reported conversation, and as More himself pointed out:

 

Can it therefore seem likely to your Lordships, that I should in so weighty an Affair as this, act so unadvisedly, as to trust Mr. Rich, a Man I had always so mean an Opinion of, in reference to his Truth and Honesty, … that I should only impart to Mr. Rich the Secrets of my Conscience in respect to the King's Supremacy, the particular Secrets, and only Point about which I have been so long pressed to explain my self? which I never did, nor never would reveal; when the Act was once made, either to the King himself, or any of his Privy Councillors, as is well known to your Honours, who have been sent upon no other account at several times by his Majesty to me in the Tower. I refer it to your Judgments, my Lords, whether this can seem credible to any of your Lordships.

 

The jury took only fifteen minutes, however, to find More guilty.

 

After the jury's verdict was delivered and before his sentencing, More spoke freely of his belief that "no temporal man may be the head of the spirituality". He was sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered (the usual punishment for traitors who were not the nobility), but the King commuted this to execution by decapitation. The execution took place on 6 July 1535. When he came to mount the steps to the scaffold, he is widely quoted as saying (to the officials): "I pray you, I pray you, Mr Lieutenant, see me safe up and for my coming down, I can shift for myself"; while on the scaffold he declared that he died "the king's good servant, but God's first."

 

Another comment he is believed to have made to the executioner is that his beard was completely innocent of any crime, and did not deserve the axe; he then positioned his beard so that it would not be harmed.[39] More asked that his foster/adopted daughter Margaret Clement (née Giggs) be given his headless corpse to bury.[40] She was the only member of his family to witness his execution. He was buried at the Tower of London, in the chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in an unmarked grave. His head was fixed upon a pike over London Bridge for a month, according to the normal custom for traitors. His daughter Margaret (Meg) Roper rescued it, possibly by bribery, before it could be thrown in the River Thames.[citation needed]

 

The skull is believed to rest in the Roper Vault of St Dunstan's Church, Canterbury, though some researchers[who?] have claimed it might be within the tomb he erected for More in Chelsea Old Church (see below). The evidence,[clarification needed] however, seems to be in favour of its placement in St Dunstan's, with the remains of his daughter, Margaret Roper, and her husband's family, whose vault it was.[citation needed]

 

Among other surviving relics is his hair shirt, presented for safe keeping by Margaret Clement.[41] This was long in the custody of the community of Augustinian canonesses who until 1983 lived at the convent at Abbotskerswell Priory, Devon. It is now preserved at Syon Abbey, near South Brent.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

A few years ago, early on Saturday morning, I tried to enter St Dunstan's, with no luck. It was locked fast.

 

Which was a shame, as it looked a very interesting church from the outside, and with its location, just outside the city gate on the crossing of two main roads.

 

Anyway, I logged this away in my memory banks, determined to go back one day. And for a change this Heritage Weekend, we returned to Canterbury not once, but twice. And on the second day was rewarded with entry to three of the city churches.

 

St Dunstan is most famous for being the final resting place of Sir Thomas More's head, in the family tomb of his wife. There is fine glass commemorating this.

 

Some minor work is being carried out at the rear of the church, so a return will be needed to see the full restored church.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Dedicated to a former Archbishop of Canterbury, St Dunstan's stands outside the city walls. There is structural evidence of the Norman period, but most of the church is fourteenth century. The west tower dates from this time and is very oddly proportioned - about twice the height that its width can really cope with. The south chapel is constructed of brick and was completed in the early sixteenth century. It contains monuments to the More family and is the burial place of St. Thomas More's head, - brought here by his daughter after his execution. The family home stood opposite the church where its brick gateway may still be seen. There are two twentieth-century windows of note in the chapel, by Lawrence Lee and John Hayward.

  

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Canterbury+2

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

St. Dunstan's is an Anglican church in Canterbury, Kent, at the junction of London Road and Whitstable Road. It is dedicated to St. Dunstan (909-988) and gives its name to the part of the city on the left bank of the River Stour. The parish has been held in plurality with others nearby at different times, in a way that is confusing and difficult to document. In 2010 the parish was joined with the parishes of the City Centre Parish in a new pastoral grouping, City Centre with St. Dunstan.

 

The church dates from the 11th century and is a grade I listed building. It was restored in 1878-80 by church architect Ewan Christian. Its association with the deaths of Thomas Becket and Thomas More make it a place of pilgrimage.

 

Dunstan was Archbishop of Canterbury from 960 to 978 and was canonised soon after his death, becoming the favourite saint of the English until he was supplanted by Thomas Becket.[2] He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral but his tomb was destroyed during the Reformation.

 

In 1174, when Henry II began his penitential pilgrimage in reparation for the murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket, he changed his clothing into sackcloth at St. Dunstan’s Church and began his pilgrimage from here to Thomas Becket's tomb at Canterbury Cathedral on foot.

 

His daughter Margaret secured the release of Thomas More's head from its spike on London Bridge and brought it back to the family tomb of her husband William Roper.[4] The Roper family lived nearby off what is now St Dunstan's Street. What remains of their home is called Roper Gate, marked with a commemorative plaque, it is all that survives of Place House. The Roper family vault is located underneath the Nicholas Chapel, to the right of the church's main altar. It was sealed in recent years, according to Anglican tradition. A large stone slab marks its location to the immediate left of the chapel's altar. Three impressive stained glass windows line the chapel, the one behind the altar depicts in brilliant detail the major events and symbols in the life of the Saint. Another of the windows commemorates the visit of Pope John Paul II to Canterbury to pray with the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury at the site of the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. The window displays the arms of the Archbishop's diocese and the Pope. Plaques mounted on the walls explain the veracity of the relic of the Saint's head, the sealing of the vault which contains it, and the life of the Saint, including a prayer he wrote.

  

St Dunstan’s has six bells, hung for change ringing in the English style, the heaviest weighing 13cwt (approx. 675 kg). Due to the unusual narrowness of the belfry, the bells are hung in a two-tier frame.

 

The fifth bell of the ring is one of the oldest Christian church bells in the world, believed to have been cast in 1325 by William le Belyetere, making it nearly 690 years old as of 2014 [5]

 

The bells were removed from the tower in 1935 so that a concrete structural beam could be fitted to the tower. At this time the bells were retuned by the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, and rehung in the present frame in 1936.

 

The bells are rung on Friday evenings for practice, and Sunday mornings for the service, by the St Dunstan’s Society of Change Ringers.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Dunstan%27s,_Canterbury

 

----------------------------------------------

 

ir Thomas More (/ˈmɔːr/; 7 February 1478 – 6 July 1535), venerated by Roman Catholics as Saint Thomas More,[1][2] was an English lawyer, social philosopher, author, statesman and noted Renaissance humanist. He was also a councillor to Henry VIII, and Lord High Chancellor of England from October 1529 to 16 May 1532.[3]

 

More opposed the Protestant Reformation, in particular the theology of Martin Luther and William Tyndale. He also wrote Utopia, published in 1516, about the political system of an imaginary ideal island nation. More opposed the King's separation from the Catholic Church, refusing to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church of England and the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. After refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy, he was convicted of treason and beheaded. Ahead of his execution, he was reported saying his famous words: "I die the King's good servant, but God's first."

 

Pope Pius XI canonised More in 1935 as a martyr. Pope John Paul II in 2000 declared him the "heavenly Patron of Statesmen and Politicians."[4] Since 1980, the Church of England has remembered More liturgically as a Reformation martyr.[5] The Soviet Union honoured him for the 'Communistic' attitude toward property rights expressed in Utopia.

 

Born in Milk Street in London, on February 7, 1478, Thomas More was the son of Sir John More,[9] a successful lawyer and later judge, and his wife Agnes (née Graunger). More was educated at St Anthony's School, then considered one of London's finest schools.[10] From 1490 to 1492, More served John Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor of England, as a household page.[11]:xvi Morton enthusiastically supported the "New Learning" (now called the Renaissance), and thought highly of the young More. Believing that More had great potential, Morton nominated him for a place at the University of Oxford (either in St. Mary's Hall or Canterbury College, both now gone).[12]:38

 

More began his studies at Oxford in 1492, and received a classical education. Studying under Thomas Linacre and William Grocyn, he became proficient in both Latin and Greek. More left Oxford after only two years—at his father's insistence—to begin legal training in London at New Inn, one of the Inns of Chancery.[11]:xvii[13] In 1496, More became a student at Lincoln's Inn, one of the Inns of Court, where he remained until 1502, when he was called to the Bar.

 

According to his friend, theologian Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, More once seriously contemplated abandoning his legal career to become a monk.[14][15] Between 1503 and 1504 More lived near the Carthusian monastery outside the walls of London and joined in the monks' spiritual exercises. Although he deeply admired their piety, More ultimately decided to remain a layman, standing for election to Parliament in 1504 and marrying the following year.[11]:xxi

 

In spite of his choice to pursue a secular career, More continued ascetical practices for the rest of his life, such as wearing a hair shirt next to his skin and occasionally engaging in flagellation.[11]:xxi A tradition of the Third Order of Saint Francis honours More as a member of that Order on their calendar of saints.

 

More married Jane Colt in 1505.[12]:118 She was 5 years younger than her husband, quiet and good-natured.[12]:119 Erasmus reported that More wanted to give his young wife a better education than she had previously received at home, and tutored her in music and literature.[12]:119 The couple had four children before Jane died in 1511: Margaret, Elizabeth, Cicely, and John.[12]:132

 

Going "against friends' advice and common custom," within thirty days More had married one of the many eligible women among his wide circle of friends.[17] He certainly expected a mother to take care of his little children and, as the view of his time considered marriage as an "economic union",[18] he chose a rich widow, Alice Harpur Middleton.[19] More is regarded not getting remarried for sexual pleasure, since Alice is much older than himself, and their marriage possibly had not been consummated.[18] The speed of the marriage was so unusual that More had to get a dispensation of the banns, which, due to his good public reputation, he easily obtained.[17] Alice More lacked Jane's docility; More's friend Andrew Ammonius derided Alice as a "hook-nosed harpy."[20] Erasmus, however, called their marriage happy.[12]:144

 

More had no children from his second marriage, although he raised Alice's daughter from her previous marriage as his own. More also became the guardian of two young girls: Anne Cresacre would eventually marry his son, John More;[12]:146 and Margaret Giggs (later Clement) would be the only member of his family to witness his execution (she died on the 35th anniversary of that execution, and her daughter married More's nephew William Rastell). An affectionate father, More wrote letters to his children whenever he was away on legal or government business, and encouraged them to write to him often.[12]:150[21]:xiv

 

More insisted upon giving his daughters the same classical education as his son, a highly unusual attitude at the time.[12]:146–47 His eldest daughter, Margaret, attracted much admiration for her erudition, especially her fluency in Greek and Latin.[12]:147 More told his daughter of his pride in her academic accomplishment in September 1522, after he showed the bishop a letter she had written:

 

When he saw from the signature that it was the letter of a lady, his surprise led him to read it more eagerly … he said he would never have believed it to be your work unless I had assured him of the fact, and he began to praise it in the highest terms … for its pure Latinity, its correctness, its erudition, and its expressions of tender affection. He took out at once from his pocket a portague [A Portuguese gold coin] … to send to you as a pledge and token of his good will towards you.[21]:152

 

More's decision to educate his daughters set an example for other noble families. Even Erasmus became much more favourable once he witnessed their accomplishments.[12]:149

 

A portrait of More and his family was painted by Holbein, but it was lost in a fire in the 18th century. More's grandson commissioned a copy, two versions of which survive.

 

In 1504 More was elected to Parliament to represent Great Yarmouth, and in 1510 began representing London.[22]

 

From 1510, More served as one of the two undersheriffs of the City of London, a position of considerable responsibility in which he earned a reputation as an honest and effective public servant. More became Master of Requests in 1514,[23] the same year in which he was appointed as a Privy Counsellor.[24] After undertaking a diplomatic mission to the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, accompanying Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal Archbishop of York, to Calais and Bruges, More was knighted and made under-treasurer of the Exchequer in 1521.[24]

 

As secretary and personal adviser to King Henry VIII, More became increasingly influential: welcoming foreign diplomats, drafting official documents, and serving as a liaison between the King and Lord Chancellor Wolsey. More later served as High Steward for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.

 

In 1523 More was elected as knight of the shire (MP) for Middlesex and, on Wolsey's recommendation, the House of Commons elected More its Speaker.[24] In 1525 More became Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, with executive and judicial responsibilities over much of northern England.

 

More supported the Catholic Church and saw the Protestant Reformation as heresy, a threat to the unity of both church and society. More believed in the theology, polemics, and ecclesiastical laws of the church, and "heard Luther's call to destroy the Catholic Church as a call to war."[25]

 

His early actions against the Reformation included aiding Wolsey in preventing Lutheran books from being imported into England, spying on and investigating suspected Protestants, especially publishers, and arresting anyone holding in his possession, transporting, or selling the books of the Protestant Reformation. More vigorously suppressed the travelling country ministers who used Tyndale's English translation of the New Testament.[citation needed] It contained controversial translations of certain words; for example, Tyndale used "senior" and "elder" rather than "priest" for the Greek "presbyteros", and some of the marginal glosses challenged Catholic doctrine.[26] It was during this time that most of his literary polemics appeared.

 

Rumours circulated during and after More's lifetime regarding ill-treatment of heretics during his time as Lord Chancellor. The popular anti-Catholic polemicist John Foxe, who "placed Protestant sufferings against the background of... the Antichrist",[27] was instrumental in publicising accusations of torture in his famous Book of Martyrs, claiming that More had often personally used violence or torture while interrogating heretics. Later authors such as Brian Moynahan and Michael Farris cite Foxe when repeating these allegations.[28] More himself denied these allegations:

 

Stories of a similar nature were current even in More's lifetime and he denied them forcefully. He admitted that he did imprison heretics in his house – 'theyr sure kepynge' – he called it – but he utterly rejected claims of torture and whipping... 'so helpe me God.'[12]:298

 

However, More writes in his "Apology" (1533) that he only applied corporal punishment to two heretics: a child who was caned in front of his family for heresy regarding the Eucharist, and a "feeble-minded" man who was whipped for disrupting prayers.[29]:404 During More's chancellorship, six people were burned at the stake for heresy; they were Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbery, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.[12]:299–306 Moynahan has argued that More was influential in the burning of Tyndale, as More's agents had long pursued him, even though this took place over a year after his own death.[30] Burning at the stake had long been a standard punishment for heresy; about thirty burnings had taken place in the century before More's elevation to Chancellor, and burning continued to be used by both Catholics and Protestants during the religious upheaval of the following decades.[31] His biographer Peter Ackroyd notes that More explicitly "approved of Burning".[12]:298

 

John Tewkesbury was a London leather seller found guilty by Bishop of London John Stokesley[32] of harbouring banned books; he was sentenced to burning for refusing to recant. More declared: he "burned as there was neuer wretche I wene better worthy."[33]

 

Modern commentators are divided over More's religious actions as Chancellor. Some biographers, including Ackroyd, have taken a relatively tolerant view of More's campaign against Protestantism by placing his actions within the turbulent religious climate of the time. Others have been more critical, such as Richard Marius, an American scholar of the Reformation, believing that persecutions were a betrayal of More's earlier humanist convictions, including More's zealous and well-documented advocacy of extermination for Protestants.[29]:386–406

 

Some Protestants take a different view. In 1980, More was added to the Church of England's calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church, despite being a fierce opponent of the English Reformation that created the Church of England. He was added jointly with John Fisher, to be commemorated every 6 July (the date of More's execution) as "Thomas More, Scholar, and John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, Reformation Martyrs, 1535".[5] Pope John Paul II honoured him by making him patron saint of statesmen and politicians in October 2000, stating: "It can be said that he demonstrated in a singular way the value of a moral conscience... even if, in his actions against heretics, he reflected the limits of the culture of his time".

 

As the conflict over supremacy between the Papacy and the King reached its apogee, More continued to remain steadfast in supporting the supremacy of the Pope as Successor of Peter over that of the King of England. In 1530, More refused to sign a letter by the leading English churchmen and aristocrats asking Pope Clement VII to annul Henry's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, and also quarrelled with Henry VIII over the heresy laws. In 1531, Henry had isolated More by purging most clergy who supported the papal stance from senior positions in the church. Parliament's reinstatement of the charge of praemunire in 1529 had made it a crime to support in public or office the claim of any authority outside the realm (such as the Papacy) to have a legal jurisdiction superior to the King's. In 1531, a royal decree required the clergy to take an oath acknowledging the King as "Supreme Head" of the Church in England. As a layperson, More did not need to take the oath and the clergy, after some initial resistance, took the oath with the addition of the clause "as far as the law of Christ allows." However, More saw he could not render the support Henry expected from his Lord Chancellor for the policy the King was developing to support the annulment of his marriage with Catherine. In 1532 he petitioned the King to relieve him of his office, alleging failing health. Henry granted his request.

 

In 1533, More refused to attend the coronation of Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. Technically, this was not an act of treason, as More had written to Henry acknowledging Anne's queenship and expressing his desire for the King's happiness and the new Queen's health.[34] Despite this, his refusal to attend was widely interpreted as a snub against Anne, and Henry took action against him.

 

Shortly thereafter, More was charged with accepting bribes, but the charges had to be dismissed for lack of any evidence. In early 1534, More was accused of conspiring with the "Holy Maid of Kent," Elizabeth Barton, a nun who had prophesied against the king's annulment, but More was able to produce a letter in which he had instructed Barton not to interfere with state matters.[citation needed]

 

On 13 April 1534, More was asked to appear before a commission and swear his allegiance to the parliamentary Act of Succession. More accepted Parliament's right to declare Anne Boleyn the legitimate Queen of England, but, holding fast to the teaching of papal supremacy, he steadfastly refused to take the oath of supremacy of the Crown in the relationship between the kingdom and the church in England. More furthermore publicly refused to uphold Henry's annulment from Catherine. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, refused the oath along with More. The oath reads:[35]

 

...By reason whereof the Bishop of Rome and See Apostolic, contrary to the great and inviolable grants of jurisdictions given by God immediately to emperors, kings and princes in succession to their heirs, hath presumed in times past to invest who should please them to inherit in other men's kingdoms and dominions, which thing we your most humble subjects, both spiritual and temporal, do most abhor and detest...

 

With his refusal to support the King's annulment, More's enemies had enough evidence to have the King arrest him on treason. Four days later, Henry had More imprisoned in the Tower of London. There More prepared a devotional Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation. While More was imprisoned in the Tower, Thomas Cromwell made several visits, urging More to take the oath, which he continued to refuse.

 

On 1 July 1535, More was tried before a panel of judges that included the new Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas Audley, as well as Anne Boleyn's father, brother, and uncle. He was charged with high treason for denying the validity of the Act of Supremacy and was tried under the following section of the Treasons Act 1534:

 

If any person or persons, after the first day of February next coming, do maliciously wish, will or desire, by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king's most royal person, the queen's, or their heirs apparent, or to deprive them or any of them of their dignity, title, or name of their royal estates …

 

That then every such person and persons so offending … shall have and suffer such pains of death and other penalties, as is limited and accustomed in cases of high treason.[36]

 

More, relying on legal precedent and the maxim "qui tacet consentire videtur" (literally, who (is) silent is seen to consent), understood that he could not be convicted as long as he did not explicitly deny that the King was Supreme Head of the Church, and he therefore refused to answer all questions regarding his opinions on the subject.

 

Thomas Cromwell, at the time the most powerful of the King's advisors, brought forth the Solicitor General, Richard Rich, to testify that More had, in his presence, denied that the King was the legitimate head of the church. This testimony was characterised by More as being extremely dubious. Witnesses Richard Southwell and Mr. Palmer both denied having heard the details of the reported conversation, and as More himself pointed out:

 

Can it therefore seem likely to your Lordships, that I should in so weighty an Affair as this, act so unadvisedly, as to trust Mr. Rich, a Man I had always so mean an Opinion of, in reference to his Truth and Honesty, … that I should only impart to Mr. Rich the Secrets of my Conscience in respect to the King's Supremacy, the particular Secrets, and only Point about which I have been so long pressed to explain my self? which I never did, nor never would reveal; when the Act was once made, either to the King himself, or any of his Privy Councillors, as is well known to your Honours, who have been sent upon no other account at several times by his Majesty to me in the Tower. I refer it to your Judgments, my Lords, whether this can seem credible to any of your Lordships.

 

The jury took only fifteen minutes, however, to find More guilty.

 

After the jury's verdict was delivered and before his sentencing, More spoke freely of his belief that "no temporal man may be the head of the spirituality". He was sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered (the usual punishment for traitors who were not the nobility), but the King commuted this to execution by decapitation. The execution took place on 6 July 1535. When he came to mount the steps to the scaffold, he is widely quoted as saying (to the officials): "I pray you, I pray you, Mr Lieutenant, see me safe up and for my coming down, I can shift for myself"; while on the scaffold he declared that he died "the king's good servant, but God's first."

 

Another comment he is believed to have made to the executioner is that his beard was completely innocent of any crime, and did not deserve the axe; he then positioned his beard so that it would not be harmed.[39] More asked that his foster/adopted daughter Margaret Clement (née Giggs) be given his headless corpse to bury.[40] She was the only member of his family to witness his execution. He was buried at the Tower of London, in the chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in an unmarked grave. His head was fixed upon a pike over London Bridge for a month, according to the normal custom for traitors. His daughter Margaret (Meg) Roper rescued it, possibly by bribery, before it could be thrown in the River Thames.[citation needed]

 

The skull is believed to rest in the Roper Vault of St Dunstan's Church, Canterbury, though some researchers[who?] have claimed it might be within the tomb he erected for More in Chelsea Old Church (see below). The evidence,[clarification needed] however, seems to be in favour of its placement in St Dunstan's, with the remains of his daughter, Margaret Roper, and her husband's family, whose vault it was.[citation needed]

 

Among other surviving relics is his hair shirt, presented for safe keeping by Margaret Clement.[41] This was long in the custody of the community of Augustinian canonesses who until 1983 lived at the convent at Abbotskerswell Priory, Devon. It is now preserved at Syon Abbey, near South Brent.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

Kids of all ages covered a long interior wall of the Central Library with paint Saturday. For one day, the wall vibrated with the creativity of young and old alike, ranging from graffiti to doodles to just plain colorful scribbles. Whether it was the semi-illicit pleasure of being able to violate the inviolable, or just the sheer joy of playing with paint, the Painting Wall was one of the most popular interactive features at "Bookless," the 1-day art and music festival, celebration and fundraiser at the downtown branch of the Madison Public Library, now closed for renovation. It was the best kind of participatory art.

A few years ago, early on Saturday morning, I tried to enter St Dunstan's, with no luck. It was locked fast.

 

Which was a shame, as it looked a very interesting church from the outside, and with its location, just outside the city gate on the crossing of two main roads.

 

Anyway, I logged this away in my meory banks, detirmed to go back one day. And for a change this Heritage Weekend, we returned to Canterbury not once, but twice. And on the second day was rewarded with entry to three of the city churches.

 

St Dunstan is most famous for being the final resting place of Sir Thomas More's head, in the family tomb of his wife. There is fine glass commemorating this.

 

Some minor work is being carried out at the rear of the church, so a return will be needed to see the full restored church.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Dedicated to a former Archbishop of Canterbury, St Dunstan's stands outside the city walls. There is structural evidence of the Norman period, but most of the church is fourteenth century. The west tower dates from this time and is very oddly proportioned - about twice the height that its width can really cope with. The south chapel is constructed of brick and was completed in the early sixteenth century. It contains monuments to the More family and is the burial place of St. Thomas More's head, - brought here by his daughter after his execution. The family home stood opposite the church where its brick gateway may still be seen. There are two twentieth-century windows of note in the chapel, by Lawrence Lee and John Hayward.

  

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Canterbury+2

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

St. Dunstan's is an Anglican church in Canterbury, Kent, at the junction of London Road and Whitstable Road. It is dedicated to St. Dunstan (909-988) and gives its name to the part of the city on the left bank of the River Stour. The parish has been held in plurality with others nearby at different times, in a way that is confusing and difficult to document. In 2010 the parish was joined with the parishes of the City Centre Parish in a new pastoral grouping, City Centre with St. Dunstan.

 

The church dates from the 11th century and is a grade I listed building. It was restored in 1878-80 by church architect Ewan Christian. Its association with the deaths of Thomas Becket and Thomas More make it a place of pilgrimage.

 

Dunstan was Archbishop of Canterbury from 960 to 978 and was canonised soon after his death, becoming the favourite saint of the English until he was supplanted by Thomas Becket.[2] He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral but his tomb was destroyed during the Reformation.

 

In 1174, when Henry II began his penitential pilgrimage in reparation for the murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket, he changed his clothing into sackcloth at St. Dunstan’s Church and began his pilgrimage from here to Thomas Becket's tomb at Canterbury Cathedral on foot.

 

His daughter Margaret secured the release of Thomas More's head from its spike on London Bridge and brought it back to the family tomb of her husband William Roper.[4] The Roper family lived nearby off what is now St Dunstan's Street. What remains of their home is called Roper Gate, marked with a commemorative plaque, it is all that survives of Place House. The Roper family vault is located underneath the Nicholas Chapel, to the right of the church's main altar. It was sealed in recent years, according to Anglican tradition. A large stone slab marks its location to the immediate left of the chapel's altar. Three impressive stained glass windows line the chapel, the one behind the altar depicts in brilliant detail the major events and symbols in the life of the Saint. Another of the windows commemorates the visit of Pope John Paul II to Canterbury to pray with the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury at the site of the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. The window displays the arms of the Archbishop's diocese and the Pope. Plaques mounted on the walls explain the veracity of the relic of the Saint's head, the sealing of the vault which contains it, and the life of the Saint, including a prayer he wrote.

  

St Dunstan’s has six bells, hung for change ringing in the English style, the heaviest weighing 13cwt (approx. 675 kg). Due to the unusual narrowness of the belfry, the bells are hung in a two-tier frame.

 

The fifth bell of the ring is one of the oldest Christian church bells in the world, believed to have been cast in 1325 by William le Belyetere, making it nearly 690 years old as of 2014 [5]

 

The bells were removed from the tower in 1935 so that a concrete structural beam could be fitted to the tower. At this time the bells were retuned by the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, and rehung in the present frame in 1936.

 

The bells are rung on Friday evenings for practice, and Sunday mornings for the service, by the St Dunstan’s Society of Change Ringers.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Dunstan%27s,_Canterbury

 

----------------------------------------------

 

ir Thomas More (/ˈmɔːr/; 7 February 1478 – 6 July 1535), venerated by Roman Catholics as Saint Thomas More,[1][2] was an English lawyer, social philosopher, author, statesman and noted Renaissance humanist. He was also a councillor to Henry VIII, and Lord High Chancellor of England from October 1529 to 16 May 1532.[3]

 

More opposed the Protestant Reformation, in particular the theology of Martin Luther and William Tyndale. He also wrote Utopia, published in 1516, about the political system of an imaginary ideal island nation. More opposed the King's separation from the Catholic Church, refusing to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church of England and the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. After refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy, he was convicted of treason and beheaded. Ahead of his execution, he was reported saying his famous words: "I die the King's good servant, but God's first."

 

Pope Pius XI canonised More in 1935 as a martyr. Pope John Paul II in 2000 declared him the "heavenly Patron of Statesmen and Politicians."[4] Since 1980, the Church of England has remembered More liturgically as a Reformation martyr.[5] The Soviet Union honoured him for the 'Communistic' attitude toward property rights expressed in Utopia.

 

Born in Milk Street in London, on February 7, 1478, Thomas More was the son of Sir John More,[9] a successful lawyer and later judge, and his wife Agnes (née Graunger). More was educated at St Anthony's School, then considered one of London's finest schools.[10] From 1490 to 1492, More served John Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor of England, as a household page.[11]:xvi Morton enthusiastically supported the "New Learning" (now called the Renaissance), and thought highly of the young More. Believing that More had great potential, Morton nominated him for a place at the University of Oxford (either in St. Mary's Hall or Canterbury College, both now gone).[12]:38

 

More began his studies at Oxford in 1492, and received a classical education. Studying under Thomas Linacre and William Grocyn, he became proficient in both Latin and Greek. More left Oxford after only two years—at his father's insistence—to begin legal training in London at New Inn, one of the Inns of Chancery.[11]:xvii[13] In 1496, More became a student at Lincoln's Inn, one of the Inns of Court, where he remained until 1502, when he was called to the Bar.

 

According to his friend, theologian Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, More once seriously contemplated abandoning his legal career to become a monk.[14][15] Between 1503 and 1504 More lived near the Carthusian monastery outside the walls of London and joined in the monks' spiritual exercises. Although he deeply admired their piety, More ultimately decided to remain a layman, standing for election to Parliament in 1504 and marrying the following year.[11]:xxi

 

In spite of his choice to pursue a secular career, More continued ascetical practices for the rest of his life, such as wearing a hair shirt next to his skin and occasionally engaging in flagellation.[11]:xxi A tradition of the Third Order of Saint Francis honours More as a member of that Order on their calendar of saints.

 

More married Jane Colt in 1505.[12]:118 She was 5 years younger than her husband, quiet and good-natured.[12]:119 Erasmus reported that More wanted to give his young wife a better education than she had previously received at home, and tutored her in music and literature.[12]:119 The couple had four children before Jane died in 1511: Margaret, Elizabeth, Cicely, and John.[12]:132

 

Going "against friends' advice and common custom," within thirty days More had married one of the many eligible women among his wide circle of friends.[17] He certainly expected a mother to take care of his little children and, as the view of his time considered marriage as an "economic union",[18] he chose a rich widow, Alice Harpur Middleton.[19] More is regarded not getting remarried for sexual pleasure, since Alice is much older than himself, and their marriage possibly had not been consummated.[18] The speed of the marriage was so unusual that More had to get a dispensation of the banns, which, due to his good public reputation, he easily obtained.[17] Alice More lacked Jane's docility; More's friend Andrew Ammonius derided Alice as a "hook-nosed harpy."[20] Erasmus, however, called their marriage happy.[12]:144

 

More had no children from his second marriage, although he raised Alice's daughter from her previous marriage as his own. More also became the guardian of two young girls: Anne Cresacre would eventually marry his son, John More;[12]:146 and Margaret Giggs (later Clement) would be the only member of his family to witness his execution (she died on the 35th anniversary of that execution, and her daughter married More's nephew William Rastell). An affectionate father, More wrote letters to his children whenever he was away on legal or government business, and encouraged them to write to him often.[12]:150[21]:xiv

 

More insisted upon giving his daughters the same classical education as his son, a highly unusual attitude at the time.[12]:146–47 His eldest daughter, Margaret, attracted much admiration for her erudition, especially her fluency in Greek and Latin.[12]:147 More told his daughter of his pride in her academic accomplishment in September 1522, after he showed the bishop a letter she had written:

 

When he saw from the signature that it was the letter of a lady, his surprise led him to read it more eagerly … he said he would never have believed it to be your work unless I had assured him of the fact, and he began to praise it in the highest terms … for its pure Latinity, its correctness, its erudition, and its expressions of tender affection. He took out at once from his pocket a portague [A Portuguese gold coin] … to send to you as a pledge and token of his good will towards you.[21]:152

 

More's decision to educate his daughters set an example for other noble families. Even Erasmus became much more favourable once he witnessed their accomplishments.[12]:149

 

A portrait of More and his family was painted by Holbein, but it was lost in a fire in the 18th century. More's grandson commissioned a copy, two versions of which survive.

 

In 1504 More was elected to Parliament to represent Great Yarmouth, and in 1510 began representing London.[22]

 

From 1510, More served as one of the two undersheriffs of the City of London, a position of considerable responsibility in which he earned a reputation as an honest and effective public servant. More became Master of Requests in 1514,[23] the same year in which he was appointed as a Privy Counsellor.[24] After undertaking a diplomatic mission to the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, accompanying Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal Archbishop of York, to Calais and Bruges, More was knighted and made under-treasurer of the Exchequer in 1521.[24]

 

As secretary and personal adviser to King Henry VIII, More became increasingly influential: welcoming foreign diplomats, drafting official documents, and serving as a liaison between the King and Lord Chancellor Wolsey. More later served as High Steward for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.

 

In 1523 More was elected as knight of the shire (MP) for Middlesex and, on Wolsey's recommendation, the House of Commons elected More its Speaker.[24] In 1525 More became Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, with executive and judicial responsibilities over much of northern England.

 

More supported the Catholic Church and saw the Protestant Reformation as heresy, a threat to the unity of both church and society. More believed in the theology, polemics, and ecclesiastical laws of the church, and "heard Luther's call to destroy the Catholic Church as a call to war."[25]

 

His early actions against the Reformation included aiding Wolsey in preventing Lutheran books from being imported into England, spying on and investigating suspected Protestants, especially publishers, and arresting anyone holding in his possession, transporting, or selling the books of the Protestant Reformation. More vigorously suppressed the travelling country ministers who used Tyndale's English translation of the New Testament.[citation needed] It contained controversial translations of certain words; for example, Tyndale used "senior" and "elder" rather than "priest" for the Greek "presbyteros", and some of the marginal glosses challenged Catholic doctrine.[26] It was during this time that most of his literary polemics appeared.

 

Rumours circulated during and after More's lifetime regarding ill-treatment of heretics during his time as Lord Chancellor. The popular anti-Catholic polemicist John Foxe, who "placed Protestant sufferings against the background of... the Antichrist",[27] was instrumental in publicising accusations of torture in his famous Book of Martyrs, claiming that More had often personally used violence or torture while interrogating heretics. Later authors such as Brian Moynahan and Michael Farris cite Foxe when repeating these allegations.[28] More himself denied these allegations:

 

Stories of a similar nature were current even in More's lifetime and he denied them forcefully. He admitted that he did imprison heretics in his house – 'theyr sure kepynge' – he called it – but he utterly rejected claims of torture and whipping... 'so helpe me God.'[12]:298

 

However, More writes in his "Apology" (1533) that he only applied corporal punishment to two heretics: a child who was caned in front of his family for heresy regarding the Eucharist, and a "feeble-minded" man who was whipped for disrupting prayers.[29]:404 During More's chancellorship, six people were burned at the stake for heresy; they were Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbery, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.[12]:299–306 Moynahan has argued that More was influential in the burning of Tyndale, as More's agents had long pursued him, even though this took place over a year after his own death.[30] Burning at the stake had long been a standard punishment for heresy; about thirty burnings had taken place in the century before More's elevation to Chancellor, and burning continued to be used by both Catholics and Protestants during the religious upheaval of the following decades.[31] His biographer Peter Ackroyd notes that More explicitly "approved of Burning".[12]:298

 

John Tewkesbury was a London leather seller found guilty by Bishop of London John Stokesley[32] of harbouring banned books; he was sentenced to burning for refusing to recant. More declared: he "burned as there was neuer wretche I wene better worthy."[33]

 

Modern commentators are divided over More's religious actions as Chancellor. Some biographers, including Ackroyd, have taken a relatively tolerant view of More's campaign against Protestantism by placing his actions within the turbulent religious climate of the time. Others have been more critical, such as Richard Marius, an American scholar of the Reformation, believing that persecutions were a betrayal of More's earlier humanist convictions, including More's zealous and well-documented advocacy of extermination for Protestants.[29]:386–406

 

Some Protestants take a different view. In 1980, More was added to the Church of England's calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church, despite being a fierce opponent of the English Reformation that created the Church of England. He was added jointly with John Fisher, to be commemorated every 6 July (the date of More's execution) as "Thomas More, Scholar, and John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, Reformation Martyrs, 1535".[5] Pope John Paul II honoured him by making him patron saint of statesmen and politicians in October 2000, stating: "It can be said that he demonstrated in a singular way the value of a moral conscience... even if, in his actions against heretics, he reflected the limits of the culture of his time".

 

As the conflict over supremacy between the Papacy and the King reached its apogee, More continued to remain steadfast in supporting the supremacy of the Pope as Successor of Peter over that of the King of England. In 1530, More refused to sign a letter by the leading English churchmen and aristocrats asking Pope Clement VII to annul Henry's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, and also quarrelled with Henry VIII over the heresy laws. In 1531, Henry had isolated More by purging most clergy who supported the papal stance from senior positions in the church. Parliament's reinstatement of the charge of praemunire in 1529 had made it a crime to support in public or office the claim of any authority outside the realm (such as the Papacy) to have a legal jurisdiction superior to the King's. In 1531, a royal decree required the clergy to take an oath acknowledging the King as "Supreme Head" of the Church in England. As a layperson, More did not need to take the oath and the clergy, after some initial resistance, took the oath with the addition of the clause "as far as the law of Christ allows." However, More saw he could not render the support Henry expected from his Lord Chancellor for the policy the King was developing to support the annulment of his marriage with Catherine. In 1532 he petitioned the King to relieve him of his office, alleging failing health. Henry granted his request.

 

In 1533, More refused to attend the coronation of Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. Technically, this was not an act of treason, as More had written to Henry acknowledging Anne's queenship and expressing his desire for the King's happiness and the new Queen's health.[34] Despite this, his refusal to attend was widely interpreted as a snub against Anne, and Henry took action against him.

 

Shortly thereafter, More was charged with accepting bribes, but the charges had to be dismissed for lack of any evidence. In early 1534, More was accused of conspiring with the "Holy Maid of Kent," Elizabeth Barton, a nun who had prophesied against the king's annulment, but More was able to produce a letter in which he had instructed Barton not to interfere with state matters.[citation needed]

 

On 13 April 1534, More was asked to appear before a commission and swear his allegiance to the parliamentary Act of Succession. More accepted Parliament's right to declare Anne Boleyn the legitimate Queen of England, but, holding fast to the teaching of papal supremacy, he steadfastly refused to take the oath of supremacy of the Crown in the relationship between the kingdom and the church in England. More furthermore publicly refused to uphold Henry's annulment from Catherine. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, refused the oath along with More. The oath reads:[35]

 

...By reason whereof the Bishop of Rome and See Apostolic, contrary to the great and inviolable grants of jurisdictions given by God immediately to emperors, kings and princes in succession to their heirs, hath presumed in times past to invest who should please them to inherit in other men's kingdoms and dominions, which thing we your most humble subjects, both spiritual and temporal, do most abhor and detest...

 

With his refusal to support the King's annulment, More's enemies had enough evidence to have the King arrest him on treason. Four days later, Henry had More imprisoned in the Tower of London. There More prepared a devotional Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation. While More was imprisoned in the Tower, Thomas Cromwell made several visits, urging More to take the oath, which he continued to refuse.

 

On 1 July 1535, More was tried before a panel of judges that included the new Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas Audley, as well as Anne Boleyn's father, brother, and uncle. He was charged with high treason for denying the validity of the Act of Supremacy and was tried under the following section of the Treasons Act 1534:

 

If any person or persons, after the first day of February next coming, do maliciously wish, will or desire, by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king's most royal person, the queen's, or their heirs apparent, or to deprive them or any of them of their dignity, title, or name of their royal estates …

 

That then every such person and persons so offending … shall have and suffer such pains of death and other penalties, as is limited and accustomed in cases of high treason.[36]

 

More, relying on legal precedent and the maxim "qui tacet consentire videtur" (literally, who (is) silent is seen to consent), understood that he could not be convicted as long as he did not explicitly deny that the King was Supreme Head of the Church, and he therefore refused to answer all questions regarding his opinions on the subject.

 

Thomas Cromwell, at the time the most powerful of the King's advisors, brought forth the Solicitor General, Richard Rich, to testify that More had, in his presence, denied that the King was the legitimate head of the church. This testimony was characterised by More as being extremely dubious. Witnesses Richard Southwell and Mr. Palmer both denied having heard the details of the reported conversation, and as More himself pointed out:

 

Can it therefore seem likely to your Lordships, that I should in so weighty an Affair as this, act so unadvisedly, as to trust Mr. Rich, a Man I had always so mean an Opinion of, in reference to his Truth and Honesty, … that I should only impart to Mr. Rich the Secrets of my Conscience in respect to the King's Supremacy, the particular Secrets, and only Point about which I have been so long pressed to explain my self? which I never did, nor never would reveal; when the Act was once made, either to the King himself, or any of his Privy Councillors, as is well known to your Honours, who have been sent upon no other account at several times by his Majesty to me in the Tower. I refer it to your Judgments, my Lords, whether this can seem credible to any of your Lordships.

 

The jury took only fifteen minutes, however, to find More guilty.

 

After the jury's verdict was delivered and before his sentencing, More spoke freely of his belief that "no temporal man may be the head of the spirituality". He was sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered (the usual punishment for traitors who were not the nobility), but the King commuted this to execution by decapitation. The execution took place on 6 July 1535. When he came to mount the steps to the scaffold, he is widely quoted as saying (to the officials): "I pray you, I pray you, Mr Lieutenant, see me safe up and for my coming down, I can shift for myself"; while on the scaffold he declared that he died "the king's good servant, but God's first."

 

Another comment he is believed to have made to the executioner is that his beard was completely innocent of any crime, and did not deserve the axe; he then positioned his beard so that it would not be harmed.[39] More asked that his foster/adopted daughter Margaret Clement (née Giggs) be given his headless corpse to bury.[40] She was the only member of his family to witness his execution. He was buried at the Tower of London, in the chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in an unmarked grave. His head was fixed upon a pike over London Bridge for a month, according to the normal custom for traitors. His daughter Margaret (Meg) Roper rescued it, possibly by bribery, before it could be thrown in the River Thames.[citation needed]

 

The skull is believed to rest in the Roper Vault of St Dunstan's Church, Canterbury, though some researchers[who?] have claimed it might be within the tomb he erected for More in Chelsea Old Church (see below). The evidence,[clarification needed] however, seems to be in favour of its placement in St Dunstan's, with the remains of his daughter, Margaret Roper, and her husband's family, whose vault it was.[citation needed]

 

Among other surviving relics is his hair shirt, presented for safe keeping by Margaret Clement.[41] This was long in the custody of the community of Augustinian canonesses who until 1983 lived at the convent at Abbotskerswell Priory, Devon. It is now preserved at Syon Abbey, near South Brent.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

HKFP: Thousands gathered at Edinburgh Place on Wednesday evening calling on G20 countries to raise concerns about Hong Kong at the leaders’ summit on Friday, hours after staging a mass march to foreign consulates to lobby country representatives directly.

Crowds wearing all-black spilt out of the public square, many holding signs that read “Free Hong Kong” and “Democracy Now.”

Organisers, the Civil Human Rights Front (CHRF), issued a statement urging a withdrawal of the government’s suspended extradition bill.

“If you believe in values like democracy, freedom, human rights and the rule of law like we do, please, we urge all of you to voice out during the G20 summit, and defend our rights together with Hong Kong people,” it read.

The pro-democracy coalition have led millions on marches over recent weeks against the bill, as demands have evolved into calling for universal suffrage ahead of the July 1 pro-democracy rally.

 

CHRF manifesto :

 

"Withdraw the Extradition Bill! Free Hong Kong!

 

A time when democracy and freedom are universal values that are inviolable.

 

Hong Kong people had urged for democratisation for over 30 years. When Hong Kong was handed over to China since 1997, as written in the Sino-British Joint Declaration, China promised that Hong Kong can enjoy One Country Two Systems and a high degree of autonomy. The Basic Law also promised universal suffrage to be implemented in the year of 2007 to 2008. But China broke these promises, and gradually intervened deeply in Hong Kong’s internal affairs.

 

Hong Kong people have always insisted on having universal suffrage – to let Hong Kong people rule Hong Kong. Unfortunately, we seem to be further and further away from genuine democracy. In merely 22 years after the hand-over, the One Country Two Systems principle barely survives. During the [legislative] process of the “Extradition Bill”, the Hong Kong Liaison Office blatantly intervened in Hong Kong’s internal affairs and scrapped the promises of [a] high degree of autonomy.

 

This year, the government decided to put the Extradition Bill through Legislative Council, in order to make all people in Hong Kong, including local citizens and expats, to be potentially extradited to China, or to countries which have less protection on human rights and the rule of law. This will destroy existing protection on human rights and the rule of law in Hong Kong and will crack down the last defence to freedom and safety.

 

In our current political system, Hong Kong does not have genuine democracy. To stop this evil law from passing, 1.03 million followed by 2 million Hongkongers courageously took to the streets in the past two weeks. Some were even cracked down by the police with excessive, disproportionate force and lethal weapons. But the government only gave a shallow apology, without making any tangible changes.

 

As world leaders meet at the G20 summit, Hong Kong citizens now sincerely urge all of you, including Xi Jinping, to answer our humble questions: Does Hong Kong deserve democracy? Should Hong Kong people enjoy democracy? Can [a] democratic system be implemented in Hong Kong now?

 

Dear friends from around the world. I believe you have seen through media and the Internet, that Hongkongers spared no efforts to safeguard our freedom. Please bear in mind: if the Extradition Bill passes, when you come to Hong Kong to travel, study or for business, you may face unfair trials. If you believe in values like democracy, freedom, human rights and the rule of law like we do, please, we urge all of you to voice out, during the G20 summit and defend our rights together with Hong Kong people."

 

www.hongkongfp.com/2019/06/26/democracy-now-hundreds-gath...

  

民陣昨晚在中環愛丁堡廣場舉行集會，有數以千計市民出席，大會以英語、普通話、日語等，呼籲包括國家主席習近平等各國領袖關注香港情况，集會人群擠滿愛丁堡廣場，更擠出大會堂對出的龍和道，警員需封閉東西行車線。

 

news.mingpao.com/pns/港聞/article/20190627/s00002/15615...

Here is my virtual tour through the city - portfotolio.net/jup3nep/album/72157631887823501

 

The Topkapı Palace (Turkish: Topkapı Sarayı or in Ottoman Turkish: طوپقپو سرايى) is a large palace in Istanbul, Turkey, that was the primary residence of the Ottoman Sultans for approximately 400 years (1465-1856) of their 624-year reign.

 

As well as a royal residence, the palace was a setting for state occasions and royal entertainments. It is now a major tourist attraction and contains important holy relics of the Muslim world, including Muhammed's cloak and sword. The Topkapı Palace is among the monuments contained within the "Historic Areas of Istanbul", which became a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1985, and is described in Criterion iv as "the best example[s] of ensembles of palaces [...] of the Ottoman period."

 

Construction began in 1459, ordered by Sultan Mehmed II, the conqueror of Byzantine Constantinople. The palace complex consists of four main courtyards and many smaller buildings. At its peak, the palace was home to as many as 4,000 people, and covered a large area with a long shoreline. The complex was expanded over the centuries, with major renovations after the 1509 earthquake and the 1665 fire. The palace contained mosques, a hospital, bakeries, and a mint. The name translates as "Cannon gate Palace" from a nearby gate which has since been destroyed.

 

From the end of the 17th century the Topkapı Palace gradually lost its importance as the Sultans preferred to spend more time in their new palaces along the Bosporus. In 1856, Sultan Abdül Mecid I decided to move the court to the newly built Dolmabahçe Palace, the first European-style palace in the city. Some functions, such as the imperial treasury, the library, and the mint were retained in the Topkapı Palace.

 

Following the end of the Ottoman Empire in 1921, the Topkapı Palace was transformed by a government decree dated April 3, 1924 into a museum of the imperial era. The Topkapı Palace Museum is administered by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. The palace complex has hundreds of rooms and chambers, but only the most important are accessible to the public today. The complex is guarded by officials of the ministry as well as armed guards of the Turkish military. The palace includes many fine examples of Ottoman architecture. It contains large collections of porcelain, robes, weapons, shields, armor, Ottoman miniatures, Islamic calligraphic manuscripts and murals, as well as a display of Ottoman treasures and jewelry.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topkap%C4%B1_Palace

  

Harem (pronounced [haˈɾem], Turkish, from Arabic: حرم‎ ḥaram "forbidden place; sacrosanct, sanctum", related to حريم ḥarīm, "a sacred inviolable place; female members of the family" and حرام ḥarām, "forbidden; sacred") refers to the sphere of women in what is usually a polygynous household and their enclosed quarters which are forbidden to men. It originated in the Near East and is typically associated in the Western world with the Ottoman Empire. For the South Asian equivalent, see purdah and zenana.

 

The word harem is strictly applicable to Muslim households only, but the system was common, more or less, to most ancient Oriental communities, especially where polygamy was permitted.

 

The Imperial Harem of the Ottoman sultan, which was also called seraglio in the West, typically housed several dozen women, including wives. It also housed the Sultan's mother, daughters and other female relatives, as well as eunuchs and slave servant girls to serve the aforementioned women. During the later periods, the sons of the Sultan also lived in the Harem until they were 16 years old, when it was considered appropriate for them to appear in the public and administrative areas of the palace. The Topkapı Harem was, in some senses, merely the private living quarters of the Sultan and his family, within the palace complex. Some women of Ottoman harem, especially wives, mothers and sisters of sultans played very important political roles in Ottoman history, and in times it was said that the empire was ruled from harem. Hürrem Sultan (wife of Süleyman The Magnificent, mother of Selim II) and Kösem Sultan (mother of Murad IV) were the two most powerful women in Ottoman history.

 

Moulay Ismail, Alaouite sultan of Morocco from 1672 to 1727, is said to have fathered a total of 525 sons and 342 daughters by 1703 and achieved a 700th son in 1721. He had over 500 concubines.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harem