The title explains everything. I took fifteen versions of this photo last February 28, from nearly as many angles.

 

==========

 

At this point I'd been using the Panasonic 12-60 mm f3.5-5.6 lens on my camera pretty much exclusively for two months. Time to move on....

 

==========

 

This photograph is an outtake from my 2021 photo-a-day project, 365^4.

 

Number of project photos taken: 17

Title of folder: In the Basement

Other photos taken on 2/28/2021: When Joan got finished with the shelves we loaded them with paper products. (Hoarders!) I grabbed the phone and took a couple pix. Neither's worth sharing.

Difficult to explain, fascinating to try. Is that a cheese curl beating on an owl with a cane?

__________________________________________________

Summer 2015: "Up was Down"

 

June 9th: Comb Ridge

 

Understanding The Moon Phases

 

Have you ever wondered what causes the moon phases?

 

Diagram Explanation

The illustration may look a little complex at first, but it's easy to explain.

 

Sunlight is shown coming in from the right. The earth, of course, is at the center of the diagram. The moon is shown at 8 key stages during its rotation around the earth. The dotted line from the earth to the moon represents your line of sight when looking at the moon. To help you visualize how the moon would appear at that point in the cycle, you can look at the larger moon image. The moon phase name is shown alongside the image.

 

One important thing to notice is that exactly one half of the moon is always illuminated by the sun. However, at certain times we see both the sunlit portion and the shadowed portion -- and that creates the various moon phase shapes we are all familiar with. Also note that the shadowed part of the moon is invisible to the naked eye; in the diagram above, it is only shown for clarification purposes.

 

So the basic explanation is that the lunar phases are created by changing angles (relative positions) of the earth, the moon and the sun, as the moon orbits the earth.

  

Moon Phases Simplified

It's probably easiest to understand the moon cycle in this order: new moon and full moon, first quarter and third quarter, and the phases in between.

 

As shown in the above diagram, the new moon occurs when the moon is positioned between the earth and sun. The three objects are in approximate alignment (why "approximate" is explained below). The entire illuminated portion of the moon is on the back side of the moon, the half that we cannot see.

 

At a full moon, the earth, moon, and sun are in approximate alignment, just as the new moon, but the moon is on the opposite side of the earth, so the entire sunlit part of the moon is facing us. The shadowed portion is entirely hidden from view.

 

The first quarter and third quarter moons (both often called a "half moon"), happen when the moon is at a 90 degree angle with respect to the earth and sun. So we are seeing exactly half of the moon illuminated and half in shadow.

 

Once you understand those four key moon phases, the phases between should be fairly easy to visualize, as the illuminated portion gradually transitions between them.

 

An easy way to remember and understand those "between" lunar phase names is by breaking out and defining 4 words: crescent, gibbous, waxing, and waning. The word crescent refers to the phases where the moon is less that half illuminated. The word gibbous refers to phases where the moon is more than half illuminated. Waxing essentially means "growing" or expanding in illumination, and waning means "shrinking" or decreasing in illumination.

 

Thus you can simply combine the two words to create the phase name, as follows:

 

After the new moon, the sunlit portion is increasing, but less than half, so it is waxing crescent. After the first quarter, the sunlit portion is still increasing, but now it is more than half, so it is waxing gibbous. After the full moon (maximum illumination), the light continually decreases. So the waning gibbous phase occurs next. Following the third quarter is the waning crescent, which wanes until the light is completely gone -- a new moon.

  

The Moon's Orbit

You may have personally observed that the moon goes through a complete moon phases cycle in about one month. That's true, but it's not exactly one month. The synodic period or lunation is exactly 29.5305882 days. It's the time required for the moon to move to the same position as seen by an observer on earth. If you were to view the moon cycling the earth from outside our solar system (the viewpoint of the stars), the time required is 27.3217 days, roughly two days less. This figure is called the sidereal period or orbital period. Why is the synodic period different from the sidereal period? The short answer is because we see the sunlit moon from a slowly moving position: the earth! During the moon cycle, the earth has moved approximately one month along its year-long orbit around the sun, altering our angle of viewpoint, and thus, the phase. The earth's orbital direction is such that it lengthens the period for earthbound observers.

 

Although the synodic and sidereal periods are exact numbers, the moon phase can't be precisely calculated by simple division of days because the moon's motion (orbital speed and position) is affected and perturbed by various forces of different strengths. Hence, complex equations are used to determine the exact position and phase of the moon at any given point in time.

 

Also, looking at the diagram, you may have wondered why, at a new moon, the moon doesn't block the sun, and at a full moon, why the earth doesn't block sunlight from reaching the moon. The reason is because the moon's orbit about the earth is about 5 degrees off from the earth-sun orbital plane.

 

However, at special times during the year, the earth, moon, and sun do in fact "line up". When the moon blocks the sun or a part of it, it's called a solar eclipse, and it can only happen during the new moon phase. When the earth casts a shadow on the moon, it's called a lunar eclipse, and can only happen during the full moon phase. Roughly 4 to 7 eclipses happen in any given year, but most of them minor or "partial" eclipses. Major lunar or solar eclipses are relatively uncommon.

 

278|365 As a kid, the tooth fairy would drop off cash when I lost a tooth. Now, as an adult, it costs money to have them removed, and way more than I ever earned as a kid.

In western Oregon, a good pair of rubber boots is much more useful than a pith helmet.

His words, copied from a post on social media....

 

"This is the floor of a formerly underground sandstone cave that was exhumed and eroded away including the ceiling and walls. The sandstone has various dissolution textures (vertical pipes, polished surface, lots of eroded fracture sets) than can only happen by groundwater. It’s a very unique rock and unlike the weathering textures seen in sea or ice caves. There’s more of this a few other places. I like this spot the best."

   

I don't know why but unusual things happen to me very often. My best friend usually say that I'm a "magnet of crazy people"... hahaha

I don't think so but I definitely cannot explain some things. If you have some spare time here goes a tale from today's encounter.

 

I went out to photograph the sunset today but I missed it. Something very special happened instead. =D

For some reason I was drawn to take a new path that I've never been before. I was walking by the river and I started to take pictures when I saw an old lady sitting across the road. I smile at her... I do that a lot. I usually smile to strangers I can't control myself... hahahah I wanted to take her picture but I'm usually very shy to approach people and ask them to take their picture as I said before in other posts. And she waved at me, making a sign for me to come closer. I went there and she started to talk to me straight away... in Portuguese. Don't forget that I'm in London, right? And I haven't said a word.

She said " How are you, dear? Do you come here very often?" and I said " Oh Hi, You are Portuguese (I recognized her accent). I'm Brazilian, nice meeting you!". I sat down beside her and she started talking non-stop. For 45min she told me about her past life in her village in Portugal, about the friends she lost, her struggles, how her brother-in-law used to hit and verbally abuse her all the time and about how much she missed her youngest daughter that stopped calling her years ago. Every time she changed subjects she said "I'm not gonna lie to you... I do lie sometimes but I'm telling you the truth now". hahahaha I haven't said much. Her name is Gracinda. I nodded and tried my best to understand her strong Portuguese accent, which is very different from my Brazilian Portuguese. I realized that she needed someone to talk to... to just listen to her stories. So that's what I did. The sun was already down, it started to get very cold and I was running late so I had to tell her that I needed to go. I wanted to take her picture as I had nothing for today's project but I just couldn't ask. She gave me so much already. She opened her heart, shared her history, cried and even showed me her heart surgery scars. We hugged and while I was holding her hand I said "I think you should call your daughter". She just replied with a very sad face "I'm shy to do that. I don't think I should and I don't like to ask people for favors." And I said "What do you think it's more important: shyness or showing love to your daughter?". She stared at me for some time and said kindly "I think you are an angel. I'm always here. Come and visit me more often." And then she left.

 

I stood there thinking how amazing was that situation. I was drawn to take that path, I met this Portuguese woman in the middle of nowhere, that needed someone to listen in her language, and she gave me such a beautiful gift. I'm not religious but every time someone calls me an angel it fills my heart with joy because I believe I have helped that person somehow. This kind of situation has happened before and it always amazes me how intense these encounters are.

I just hope that she calls her daughter. I really do.... After all, it's never too late to let people know we love them, right?

 

Thanks a lot for all the comments and faves on my pictures, Flickr Friends! Hope you all have a great weekend. =D

 

Facebook | Instagram | Site | Blog

froknowsphoto.com/?p=3795

This image is part of explaining how f stops work going from 1.4 to f16. You will get a feel for how the image is effected.

Been a while since I did a decent self portrait. I was looking scruffy and my hair is getting out of control long, so what better time to capture the essence.

 

Shirt from woot or shirt.woot.com shirt.woot.com/friends.aspx?k=18917

Star Trek: The Motion Picture (Paramount, 1979).

putlocker.bz/watch-star-trek-the-motion-picture-online-fr... Full Feature

 

Starring William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, James Doohan, George Takei, Majel Barrett, Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols, Persis Khambatta, Stephen Collins, Grace Lee Whitney, Mark Lenard. Directed by Robert Wise.

  

In Klingon space, three Klingon battle cruisers encounter a huge cloud-like anomaly. On the bridge of one of the ships, the captain (Mark Lenard) orders his crew to fire torpedoes at it, but they have no effect. The ships take evasive action.

 

Meanwhile, in Federation space, a monitoring station, Epsilon 9, picks up a distress signal from one of the Klingon ships. As the three ships are attempting to escape the cloud, energy beams shoot out and engulf each ship one by one, and they vanish. On Epsilon 9, the crew tracks the course of the cloud and discovers that it is headed for Earth.

 

On Vulcan, Spock (Leonard Nimoy) has been undergoing the kohlinahr ritual, in which he has been learning how to purge all of his emotions, and is nearly finished with his training. A female Vulcan Master (Edna Glover), surrounded by two men, is about to give him an ornate necklace as a symbol of pure logic, when Spock holds out his hand to stop her. Confused, she mind-melds with him and senses a consciousness calling to him from space that is affecting his human side. She drops the necklace. "You have not yet achieved kohlinahr. You must look elsewhere for your answer," she says as they leave Spock. "You will not find it here."

 

In San Francisco, Admiral James T. Kirk (William Shatner) arrives at Starfleet Headquarters in a shuttlecraft. He sees Commander Sonak (Jon Rashad Kamal), a Vulcan science officer who is joining the Enterprise crew and recommended for the position by Kirk himself. Kirk is bothered as to why Sonak is not on board yet. Sonak explains that Captain Willard Decker (Stephen Collins), the new captain of the Enterprise, wanted him to complete his science briefing at Headquarters before they left on their mission. The Enterprise has been undergoing a complete "refitting" for the past 18 months and is now under final preparations to leave, which would take at least 20 hours, but Kirk informs him that they only have 12. He tells Sonak to report to him on the Enterprise in one hour; he has a short meeting with Admiral Nogura and is intent on being on the ship.

 

Kirk transports to an office complex orbiting Earth and meets Montgomery Scott (James Doohan), the Enterprise's chief engineer. Scotty expresses his concern about the tight departure time. The cloud is less than three days away from Earth, and the Enterprise has been ordered to intercept it because they are the only ship in range. Scotty says that the refit can't be finished in 12 hours, and tries to convince him that the ship needs more work done as well as a shakedown cruise. Kirk insists that they are leaving, ready or not. They board a travel pod and begin the journey over to the drydock in orbit that houses the Enterprise.

 

Scotty tells Kirk that the crew hasn't had enough transition time with all the new equipment and that the engines haven't even been tested at warp power, not to mention that they have an untried captain. Kirk tells Scotty that two and a half years as Chief of Starfleet Operations may have made him a little stale, but that he wouldn't exactly consider himself untried. Kirk then tells a surprised Scotty that Starfleet gave him back his command of the Enterprise. Scotty doubts it, saying that he doesn't think it was that easy with Admiral Nogura, who gave Kirk his orders. They arrive at the Enterprise, and Scotty indulges Kirk with a brief tour of the new exterior of the ship.

 

Upon docking with the ship, Scotty is summoned to Engineering. Kirk goes up to the bridge, and is informed by Lt. Uhura (Nichelle Nichols) that Starfleet has just transferred command from Captain Decker over to him. Kirk finds Decker in engineering, whom is visibly upset when Kirk breaks the news that he is assuming command, but recognizes it is because Kirk has more experience. Decker will remain on the ship as 2nd officer. As Decker storms off, an alarm sounds. Someone is trying to beam over to the ship, but the transporter is malfunctioning. Kirk and Scotty race to the transporter room. Transporter operator Janice Rand (Grace Lee Whitney) is frantically trying to tell Starfleet to abort the transport, but it is too late. Commander Sonak and an unknown female officer are beaming in, but their bodies aren't re-forming properly in the beam. The female officer screams, and then their bodies disappear. Starfleet signals to them that they have died. Kirk tells Starfleet to express his sympathies to their families.

 

In the corridor, Kirk sees Decker and tells him they will have to replace Commander Sonak and wants another Vulcan. Decker tells him that no one is available that is familiar with the ship's new design. Kirk tells Decker he will have to double his duties as science officer as well.

 

In the recreation room, as Kirk briefs the assembled crew on the mission, they receive a transmission from Epsilon 9. Commander Branch (David Gautreaux) tells them they have analyzed the mysterious cloud. It generates an immense amount of energy and measures 2 A.U.s (300 million km) in diameter. There is also a vessel of some kind in the center. They've tried to communicate with it and have performed scans, but the cloud reflects them back. It seems to think of the scans as hostile and attacks them. Like the Klingon ships earlier, Epsilon 9 disappears.

 

Later on the bridge, Uhura informs Kirk that the transporter is working now. Lt. Ilia, (Persis Khambatta), a bald being from the planet Delta IV, arrives. Decker is happy to see her, as they developed a romantic relationship when he was assigned to her planet several years earlier. Ilia is curious about Decker's reduction in rank and Kirk interrupts and tells her about Decker being the executive and science officer. Decker tells her, with slight sarcasm, that Kirk has the utmost confidence in him. Ilia tells Kirk that her oath of celibacy is on record and asks permission to assume her duties. Uhura tells Kirk that one of the last few crew members to arrive is refusing to beam up. Kirk goes to the transporter room to ensure that "he" beams up.

 

Kirk tells Starfleet to beam the officer aboard. Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy (DeForest Kelley) materializes on the platform. McCoy is angry that his Starfleet commission was reactivated and that it was Kirk's idea for him to be brought along on the mission. His attitude changes, however, when Kirk says he desperately needs him. McCoy leaves to check out the new sickbay.

 

The crew finishes its repairs and the Enterprise leaves drydock and into the solar system. Dr. McCoy comes up to the bridge and complains that the new sickbay is nothing but a computer center. Kirk is anxious to intercept the cloud intruder, and orders Hikaru Sulu (George Takei) to go to warp speed. Suddenly, the ship enters a wormhole, which was created by an engine imbalance, and is about to collide with an asteroid that has been pulled inside. Kirk orders the phasers to be fired on it, but Decker tells Pavel Chekov (Walter Koenig) to fire photon torpedoes instead. The asteroid and the wormhole are destroyed. Annoyed, Kirk wants to meet with Decker in his quarters. Dr. McCoy decides to go along.

 

Kirk demands an explanation from Decker. Decker pointed out that the redesigned Enterprise channeled the phasers through the main engines and because they were imbalanced, the phasers were cut off. Kirk acknowledged that he had saved the ship; however, he accuses Decker of competing with him. Decker tells Kirk that, because of his unfamiliarity with the ship's new design, the mission is in jeopardy. Decker tells Kirk that he will gladly help Kirk understand the new design. Kirk then dismisses him from the room. In the corridor, Decker runs into Ilia. Ilia asked if the confrontation was difficult, and he tells her that it was about as difficult as seeing her again, and apologizes. She asked if he was sorry for leaving Delta IV, or for not saying goodbye. He said that if he had seen her again, would she be able to say goodbye? She says "no," and walked around him and entered her quarters nearby.

 

Back in Kirk's quarters, McCoy accuses Kirk of being the one who was competing, and the fact that it was Kirk who used the emergency to pressure Starfleet into letting him get command of the Enterprise. McCoy thinks that Kirk is obsessed with keeping his command. On Kirk's console viewscreen, Uhura informs Kirk that a shuttlecraft is approaching and that the occupant wishes to dock. Chekov also pipes in and replies that it appears to be a courier vessel. Kirk tells Chekov to handle the situation.

 

The shuttle approaches the Enterprise from behind, and the top portion of it detaches and docks at an airlock behind the bridge. Chekov is waiting by the airlock doors and is surprised to see Spock come aboard. Moments later, Spock arrives on the bridge, and everyone is shocked and pleased to see him, yet Spock ignores them. He moves over to the science station and tells Kirk that he is aware of the crisis and knows about the ship's engine design difficulties. He offers to step in as the science officer. McCoy and Dr. Christine Chapel (Majel Barret Roddenberry) come to the bridge to greet Spock, but Spock just stares alarmingly at their emotional outburst. Spock leaves to discuss fuel equations with Scotty in engineering.

 

With Spock's assistance, the engines are now rebalanced for full warp capacity. The ship successfully goes to warp to intercept the cloud. In the officers lounge, Spock meets with Kirk and McCoy. They discuss Spock's kohlinahr training on Vulcan, and how Spock broke off from his training to join them. Spock describes how he sensed the consciousness of the intruder, from a source more powerful that he has ever encountered, with perfect, logical thought patterns. He believes that it holds the answers he seeks. Uhura tells Kirk over the intercom that they have visual contact with the intruder.

 

The cloud scans the ship, but Kirk orders no return scans. Spock determines that the scans are coming from the center of the cloud. Uhura tries sending "linguacode" messages, but there is no response. Decker suggests raising the shields for protection, but Kirk determines that that might be considered hostile to the cloud. Spock analyzes the clouds composition, and discovers it has a 12-power energy field, the equivalent of power generated by thousands of starships.

 

Sitting at the science station, Spock awakens from a brief trance. He reveals to Kirk that the alien was communicating with him. The alien is puzzled; it contacted the Enterprise--why has the Enterprise not replied? A red alert sounds, and an energy beam from within the cloud touches the ship, and begins to overload the ship's systems. Bolts of lightning surround the warp core and nearly injure some engineering officers, and Chekov is also hurt--his hand is burned while sitting at the weapons station on the bridge. The energy beam then disappears. A medical team is summoned to the bridge, and Ilia is able to use her telepathic powers to soothe Chekov's pain.

 

Spock confirms to Kirk that the alien has been attempting to communicate. It communicates at a frequency of more than one million megahertz, and at such a high rate of speed, the message only lasts a millisecond. Spock programs to computer to send linguacode messages at that frequency. Another energy beam is sent out, but Spock transmits a message just in time, and the beam disappears. The ship continues on course through the cloud. They pass through many expansive and colorful cloud layers and upon clearing these, a giant vessel is revealed. It is roughly cylindrical in shape, with large spikes jutting out from the surface at equidistant angles between each other, forming a hexagon-like shape.

 

Kirk tells Uhura to transmit an image of the alien to Starfleet, but she explains that any transmission sent out of the cloud is being reflected back to them. Kirk orders Sulu to fly above and along the top of the vessel. The Enterprise is so small compared to the size of the alien vessel that it appears only as a little white dot next to it. The ship travels past many oddly-shaped structures, including a sunken area where the energy beams originate.

 

An alarm sounds, and yet another energy bolt approaches the ship. It appears on the bridge as a column of bright light that emits a very loud noise. The crew struggles to shield their eyes from its brilliant glow. Chekov asks Spock if it is one of the alien's crew, and Spock replies that it is a probe sent from the vessel. The probe slowly moves around the room and stops in front of the science station. Bolts of lightning shoot out from it and surround the console--it is trying to access the ship's computer. Spock manages to smash the controls to prevent further access, and the probe gives him an electric shock that sends him rolling onto the floor. The probe approaches the helm/navigation console and it scans Lt. Ilia. Suddenly, she vanishes, along with the probe.

 

Ahead of the ship looms another giant section of the vessel. A tractor beam is drawing the Enterprise toward an opening aperture. Decker calls for Chief DiFalco (Marcy Lafferty) to come up to the bridge as Ilia's replacement. The ship travels deep into the next chamber. Decker wonders why they were brought inside--they could have been easily destroyed outside. Spock deduces that the alien is curious about them. Uhura's monitor shows that the aperture is closing; they are trapped. The ship is released from the tractor beam and suddenly, an intruder alert goes off. Someone has come aboard the ship and is in the crew quarters section.

 

Kirk and Spock arrive inside a crewman's quarters to discover that the intruder is inside the sonic shower. It is revealed to be Ilia, although it isn't really her--there is a small red device attached to her neck. In a mechanized voice, she replies "You are the Kirk unit--you will listen to me." She explains that she has been programmed by an entity called "V'Ger" to observe and record the normal functions of the carbon-based units (humans) "infesting" the Enterprise. Kirk opens the shower door and "Ilia" steps out, wearing a small white garment that just materialized around her. Dr. McCoy and a security officer enter the room, and Kirk tells McCoy to scan her with a tricorder.

 

Kirk asks her who V'Ger is. She replies "V'Ger is that which programmed me." McCoy tells Kirk that Ilia is a mechanism and Spock confirms she is a probe that assumed Ilia's physical form. Kirk asks where the real Ilia is, and the probe states that "that unit" no longer functions. Kirk also asks why V'Ger is traveling to Earth, and the probe answers that it wishes to find the Creator, join with him, and become one with it. Spock suggests that McCoy perform a complete examination of the probe.

 

In sickbay, the Ilia probe lays on a diagnostic table, its sensors slowly taking readings. All normal body functions, down to the microscopic level, are exactly duplicated by the probe. Decker arrives and is stunned to see her there. She looks up at him and addresses him as "Decker", rather than "Decker unit," which intrigues Spock. Spock talks with Kirk and Decker in an adjoining room, and Spock locks the door. Spock theorizes that the real Ilia's memories and feelings have been duplicated by the probe as well as her body. Decker is angry that the probe killed Ilia, but Kirk convinces him that their only contact with the vessel is through the probe, and they need to use that advantage to find out more about the alien. Suddenly, the probe bursts through the door, and demands that Kirk assist her with her observations. He tells her that Decker will do it with more efficiency.

 

Decker and Ilia are seen walking around in the recreation room. He shows her pictures of previous ships that were named Enterprise. Decker has been trying to see if Ilia's memories or emotions can resurface, but to no avail. Kirk and McCoy are observing them covertly on a monitor from his quarters. Decker shows her a game that the crew enjoys playing. She is not interested and states that recreation and enjoyment has no meaning to her programming. At another game, which Ilia enjoyed and nearly always won, they both press one of their hands down onto a table to play it. The table lights up, indicating she won the game, and she gazes into Deckers eyes. This moment of emotion ends suddenly, and she returns to normal. "This device serves no purpose."

 

"Why does the Enterprise require the presence of carbon units?" she asks. Decker tells her the ship couldn't function without them. She tells him that more information is needed before the crew can be patterned for data storage. Horrified, he asks her what this means. "When my examination is complete, all carbon units will be reduced to data patterns." He tells her that within her are the memory patterns of a certain carbon unit. He convinces her to let him help her revive those patterns so that she can understand their functions better. She allows him to proceed.

 

Spock slowly enters an airlock room. He sees an officer standing at a console, his back to Spock. Spock quietly approaches him, and gives him the Vulcan nerve pinch to render him unconscious.

 

Decker, the probe, Dr. McCoy, and Dr. Chapel are in Ilia's quarters. Dr. Chapel gives the probe a decorative headband that Ilia used to wear. Chapel puts it over "Ilia's" head and turns her toward a mirror. Decker asks her if she remembers wearing it on Delta IV. The probe shows another moment of emotion, saying Dr. Chapel's name, and putting her hand on Decker's face, calling him Will. Behind them, McCoy reminds Decker that she is a mechanism. Decker asks "Ilia" to help them make contact with V'Ger. She says that she can't, and Decker asks her who the Creator is. She says V'Ger does not know. The probe becomes emotionless again and removes the headband.

 

Spock is now outside the ship in a space suit with an attached thruster pack. He begins recording a log entry for Kirk detailing his attempt to contact the alien. He activates a panel on the suit and calculates thruster ignition and acceleration to coincide with the opening of an aperture ahead of him. He hopes to get a better view of the spacecraft interior.

 

Kirk comes up to the bridge and Uhura tells him that Starfleet signals are growing stronger, indicating they are very close to Earth. Starfleet is monitoring the intruder and notifies Uhura that it is slowing down in its approach. Sulu confirms this and says that lunar beacons show the intruder is entering into orbit. Chekov tells Kirk that Airlock 4 has been opened and a thruster suit is missing. Kirk figures out that Spock has done it, and orders Chekov to get Spock back on the ship. He changes his mind, and instead tells him to determine his position.

 

Spock touches a button on his thruster panel and his thruster engine ignites. He is propelled forward rapidly, and enters the next chamber of the vessel just before the aperture closes behind him. The thruster engine shuts down, and the momentum carries Spock ahead further. He disconnects the thruster pack from his suit and it falls away from him.

 

Continuing his log entry, Spock sees an image of what he believes to be V'Gers home planet. He passes through a tunnel filled with crackling plasma energy, possibly a power source for a gigantic imaging system. Next, he sees several more images of planets, moons, stars, and galaxies stored and recorded. Spock theorizes that this may be a visual representation of V'Gers entire journey. "But who or what are we dealing with?" he ponders.

 

He sees the Epsilon 9 station, and notes to Kirk that he is convinced that all of what he is seeing is V'Ger; and that they are inside a living machine. Then he sees a giant image of Lt. Ilia with the sensor on her neck. Spock decides it must have some special meaning, so he attempts to mind-meld with it. He is quickly overwhelmed by the multitude of images flooding his mind, and is thrown backward.

 

Kirk is now in a space suit and has exited the ship. The aperture in front of the Enterprise opens, and Spock's unconscious body floats toward him. Later, Dr. Chapel and Dr. McCoy are examining Spock in sickbay. Dr. McCoy performs scans and determines that Spock endured massive neurological trauma from the mind-meld. Spock tells Kirk he should have known and Kirk asks if he was right about V'Ger. Spock calls it a conscious, living entity. Kirk explains that V'Ger considers the Enterprise a living machine and it's why "Ilia" refers to the ship as an entity and the crew as an infestation.

 

Spock describes V'Ger's homeworld as a planet populated by living machines with unbelievable technology. But with all that logic and knowledge, V'Ger is barren, with no mystery or meaning. He momentarily lapses into sleep but Kirk rouses him awake to ask what Spock should have known. Spock grasps Kirk's hand and tells him "This simple feeling is beyond V'Ger's comprehension. No meaning, no hope. And Jim, no answers. It's asking questions. 'Is this all that I am? Is there nothing more?'"

 

Uhura chimes in and tells Kirk that they are getting a faint signal from Starfleet. The intruder has been on their monitors for a while and the cloud is rapidly dissipating as it approaches. Sulu also comments that the intruder has slowed to sub-warp speed and is three minutes from Earth orbit. Kirk acknowledges and he, McCoy and Spock go up to the bridge.

 

Starfleet sends the Enterprise a tactical report on the intruders position. Uhura tells Kirk that V'Ger is transmitting a signal. Decker and "Ilia" come up to the bridge, and she says that V'Ger is signaling the Creator. Spock determines that the transmission is a radio signal. Decker tells Kirk that V'Ger expects an answer, but Kirk doesn't know the question. Then "Ilia" says that the Creator has not responded. An energy bolt is released from V'Ger and positions itself above Earth. Chekov reports that all planetary defense systems have just gone inoperative. Several more bolts are released, and they all split apart to form smaller ones and they assume equidistant positions around the planet.

 

McCoy notices that the bolts are the same ones that hit the ship earlier, and Spock says that these are hundreds of times more powerful, and from those positions, they can destroy all life on Earth. "Why?" Kirk asks "Ilia." She says that the carbon unit infestation will be removed from the Creator's planet as they are interfering with the Creator's ability to respond and accuses the crew of infesting the Enterprise and interfering in the same manner. Kirk tells "Ilia" that carbon units are a natural function of the Creator's planet and they are living things, not infestations. However "Ilia" says they are not true life forms like the Creator. McCoy realizes V'Ger must think its creator is a machine.

 

Spock compares V'Ger to a child, and suggests they treat it like one. McCoy retorts that this child is about to wipe out every living thing on Earth. To get "Ilia's" attention, Kirk says that the carbon units know why the Creator hasn't responded. The Ilia probe demands that the Creator "disclose the information." Kirk won't do it until V'Ger withdraws all the orbiting devices. In response to this, V'Ger cuts off the ship's communications with Starfleet. She tells him again to disclose the information. He refuses, and a plasma energy attack shakes the ship. McCoy tells Spock that the child is having a "tantrum."

 

Kirk tells the probe that if V'Ger destroys the Enterprise, then the information it needs will also be destroyed. Ilia says that it is illogical to withhold the required information, and asks him why he won't disclose it. Kirk explains it is because V'Ger is going to destroy all life on Earth. "Ilia" says that they have oppressed the Creator, and Kirk makes it clear he will not disclose anything. V'Ger needs the information, says "Ilia." Kirk says that V'Ger will have to withdraw all the orbiting devices. "Ilia" says that V'Ger will comply, if the carbon units give the information.

 

Spock tells Kirk that V'Ger must have a central brain complex. Kirk theorizes that the orbiting devices are controlled from there. Kirk tells "Ilia" that the information cant be disclosed to V'Ger's probe, but only to V'Ger itself. "Ilia" stares at the viewscreen, and, in response, the aperture opens and drags the ship forward with a tractor beam into the next chamber. Chekov tells Kirk that the energy bolts will reach their final positions and activate in 27 minutes. Kirk calls to Scotty on the intercom and tells him to stand by to execute Starfleet Order 2005; the self-destruct command. A female crewmember asks Scotty why Kirk ordered self-destruct, and Scotty tells her that Kirk hopes that when they explode, so will the intruder.

 

The countdown is now down to 18 minutes. DiFalco reports that they have traveled 17 kilometers inside the vessel. Kirk goes over to Spock's station, and sees that Spock has been crying. "Not for us," Kirk realizes. Spock tells him he is crying for V'Ger, and that he weeps for V'Ger as he would for a brother. As he was when he came aboard the Enterprise, so is V'Ger now--empty, incomplete, and searching. Logic and knowledge are not enough. McCoy realizes Spock has found what he needed, but that V'Ger hasn't. Decker wonders what V'Ger would need to fulfill itself.

 

Spock comments that each one of us, at some point in our lives asks, "Why am I here?" "What was I meant to be?" V'Ger hopes to touch its Creator and find those answers. DiFalco directs Kirk's attention to the viewscreen. Ahead of them is a structure with a bright light. Sulu reports that forward motion has stopped. Chekov replies that an oxygen/gravity envelope has formed outside of the ship. "Ilia" points to the structure on the screen and identifies it as V'Ger. Uhura has located the source of the radio signal and it is straight ahead. A passageway forms outside the ship as Kirk Spock, McCoy, Decker, and "Ilia" enter a turbolift.

 

The landing party exits an airlock on the top of the saucer section and walks up the passageway. At the end of the path is a concave structure, and in the center of it is an old NASA probe from three centuries earlier. Kirk tries to rub away the smudges on the nameplate and makes out the letters V G E R. He continues to rub, and discovers that the craft is actually Voyager 6. Kirk recalls the history of the Voyager program--it was designed to collect data and transmit it back to Earth. Decker tells Kirk that Voyager 6 disappeared through a black hole.

 

Kirk says that it must have emerged on the far side of the galaxy and got caught in the machine planet's gravity. Spock theorizes that the planet's inhabitants found the probe to be one of their own kind--primitive, yet kindred. They discovered the probe's 20th century programming, which was to collect data and return that information to its creator. The machines interpreted that instruction literally, and constructed the entire vessel so that Voyager could fulfill its programming. Kirk continues by saying that on its journey back, it amassed so much knowledge that it gained its own consciousness.

 

"Ilia" tells Kirk that V'Ger awaits the information. Kirk calls Uhura on his communicator and tells her to find information on the probe in the ship's computer, specifically the NASA code signal, which will allow the probe to transmit its data. Decker realizes that that is what the probe was signaling--it's ready to transmit everything. Kirk then says that there is no one on Earth who recognizes the old-style signal--the Creator does not answer.

 

Kirk calls out to V'Ger and says that they are the Creator. "Ilia" says that is not logical--carbon units are not true life forms. Kirk says they will prove it by allowing V'Ger to complete its programming. Uhura calls Kirk on his communicator and tells him she has retrieved the code. Kirk tells her to set the Enterprise transmitter to the code frequency and to transmit the signal. Decker reads off the numerical code on his tricorder, and is about to read the final sequence, but Voyager's circuitry burns out, an effort by V'Ger itself to prevent the last part of the code from being transmitted.

 

"Ilia" says that the Creator must join with V'Ger, and turns toward Decker. McCoy warns Kirk that they only have 10 minutes left. Decker figures out that V'Ger wanted to bring the Creator here and transmit the code in person. Spock tells Kirk that V'Ger's knowledge has reached the limits of the universe and it must evolve. Kirk says that V'Ger needs a human quality in order to evolve. Decker thinks that V'Ger joining with the Creator will accomplish that. He then goes over to the damaged circuitry and fixes the wires so he can manually enter the rest of the code through the ground test computer. Kirk tries to stop him, but "Ilia" tosses him aside. Decker tells Kirk that he wants this as much as Kirk wanted the Enterprise.

 

Suddenly, a bright light forms around Decker's body. "Ilia" moves over to him, and the light encompasses them both as they merge together. Their bodies disappear, and the light expands and begins to consume the area. Kirk, Spock, and McCoy retreat back to the Enterprise. V'Ger explodes, leaving the Enterprise above Earth, unharmed. On the bridge, Kirk wonders if they just saw the beginning of a new life form, and Spock says yes and that it is possibly the next step in their evolution. McCoy says that its been a while since he "delivered" a baby, and hopes that they got this one off to a good start.

 

Uhura tells Kirk that Starfleet is requesting the ship's damage and injury reports and vessel status. Kirk reports that there were only two casualties: Lt. Ilia and Captain Decker. He quickly corrects his statement and changes their status to "missing." Vessel status: fully operational. Scotty comes on the bridge and agrees with Kirk that it's time to give the Enterprise a proper shakedown. When Scotty offers to have Spock back on Vulcan in four days, Spock says that's unnecessary, as his task on Vulcan is completed.

 

Kirk tells Sulu to proceed ahead at warp factor one. When DiFalco asks for a heading, Kirk simply says "Out there, thataway." With that, the Enterprise flies overhead and engages warp drive.

  

youtu.be/4n2dGwYcp9k?t=8s Star Trek Theme

 

Ganesha, also spelled Ganesh, and also known as Ganapati and Vinayaka, is a widely worshipped deity in the Hindu pantheon. His image is found throughout India and Nepal. Hindu sects worship him regardless of affiliations. Devotion to Ganesha is widely diffused and extends to Jains, Buddhists, and beyond India.

 

Although he is known by many attributes, Ganesha's elephant head makes him easy to identify. Ganesha is widely revered as the remover of obstacles, the patron of arts and sciences and the deva of intellect and wisdom. As the god of beginnings, he is honoured at the start of rituals and ceremonies. Ganesha is also invoked as patron of letters and learning during writing sessions. Several texts relate mythological anecdotes associated with his birth and exploits and explain his distinct iconography.

 

Ganesha emerged as a distinct deity in the 4th and 5th centuries CE, during the Gupta Period, although he inherited traits from Vedic and pre-Vedic precursors. He was formally included among the five primary deities of Smartism (a Hindu denomination) in the 9th century. A sect of devotees called the Ganapatya arose, who identified Ganesha as the supreme deity. The principal scriptures dedicated to Ganesha are the Ganesha Purana, the Mudgala Purana, and the Ganapati Atharvashirsa.

 

ETYMOLOGY AND OTHER NAMES

Ganesha has been ascribed many other titles and epithets, including Ganapati and Vighneshvara. The Hindu title of respect Shri is often added before his name. One popular way Ganesha is worshipped is by chanting a Ganesha Sahasranama, a litany of "a thousand names of Ganesha". Each name in the sahasranama conveys a different meaning and symbolises a different aspect of Ganesha. At least two different versions of the Ganesha Sahasranama exist; one version is drawn from the Ganesha Purana, a Hindu scripture venerating Ganesha.

 

The name Ganesha is a Sanskrit compound, joining the words gana, meaning a group, multitude, or categorical system and isha, meaning lord or master. The word gaņa when associated with Ganesha is often taken to refer to the gaņas, a troop of semi-divine beings that form part of the retinue of Shiva. The term more generally means a category, class, community, association, or corporation. Some commentators interpret the name "Lord of the Gaņas" to mean "Lord of Hosts" or "Lord of created categories", such as the elements. Ganapati, a synonym for Ganesha, is a compound composed of gaṇa, meaning "group", and pati, meaning "ruler" or "lord". The Amarakosha, an early Sanskrit lexicon, lists eight synonyms of Ganesha : Vinayaka, Vighnarāja (equivalent to Vighnesha), Dvaimātura (one who has two mothers), Gaṇādhipa (equivalent to Ganapati and Ganesha), Ekadanta (one who has one tusk), Heramba, Lambodara (one who has a pot belly, or, literally, one who has a hanging belly), and Gajanana; having the face of an elephant).

 

Vinayaka is a common name for Ganesha that appears in the Purāṇas and in Buddhist Tantras. This name is reflected in the naming of the eight famous Ganesha temples in Maharashtra known as the Ashtavinayak (aṣṭavināyaka). The names Vighnesha and Vighneshvara (Lord of Obstacles) refers to his primary function in Hindu theology as the master and remover of obstacles (vighna).

 

A prominent name for Ganesha in the Tamil language is Pillai. A. K. Narain differentiates these terms by saying that pillai means a "child" while pillaiyar means a "noble child". He adds that the words pallu, pella, and pell in the Dravidian family of languages signify "tooth or tusk", also "elephant tooth or tusk". Anita Raina Thapan notes that the root word pille in the name Pillaiyar might have originally meant "the young of the elephant", because the Pali word pillaka means "a young elephant".

 

In the Burmese language, Ganesha is known as Maha Peinne, derived from Pali Mahā Wināyaka. The widespread name of Ganesha in Thailand is Phra Phikhanet or Phra Phikhanesuan, both of which are derived from Vara Vighnesha and Vara Vighneshvara respectively, whereas the name Khanet (from Ganesha) is rather rare.

 

In Sri Lanka, in the North-Central and North Western areas with predominantly Buddhist population, Ganesha is known as Aiyanayaka Deviyo, while in other Singhala Buddhist areas he is known as Gana deviyo.

 

ICONOGRAPHY

Ganesha is a popular figure in Indian art. Unlike those of some deities, representations of Ganesha show wide variations and distinct patterns changing over time. He may be portrayed standing, dancing, heroically taking action against demons, playing with his family as a boy, sitting down or on an elevated seat, or engaging in a range of contemporary situations.

 

Ganesha images were prevalent in many parts of India by the 6th century. The 13th century statue pictured is typical of Ganesha statuary from 900–1200, after Ganesha had been well-established as an independent deity with his own sect. This example features some of Ganesha's common iconographic elements. A virtually identical statue has been dated between 973–1200 by Paul Martin-Dubost, and another similar statue is dated c. 12th century by Pratapaditya Pal. Ganesha has the head of an elephant and a big belly. This statue has four arms, which is common in depictions of Ganesha. He holds his own broken tusk in his lower-right hand and holds a delicacy, which he samples with his trunk, in his lower-left hand. The motif of Ganesha turning his trunk sharply to his left to taste a sweet in his lower-left hand is a particularly archaic feature. A more primitive statue in one of the Ellora Caves with this general form has been dated to the 7th century. Details of the other hands are difficult to make out on the statue shown. In the standard configuration, Ganesha typically holds an axe or a goad in one upper arm and a pasha (noose) in the other upper arm.

 

The influence of this old constellation of iconographic elements can still be seen in contemporary representations of Ganesha. In one modern form, the only variation from these old elements is that the lower-right hand does not hold the broken tusk but is turned towards the viewer in a gesture of protection or fearlessness (abhaya mudra). The same combination of four arms and attributes occurs in statues of Ganesha dancing, which is a very popular theme.

 

COMMON ATTRIBUTES

Ganesha has been represented with the head of an elephant since the early stages of his appearance in Indian art. Puranic myths provide many explanations for how he got his elephant head. One of his popular forms, Heramba-Ganapati, has five elephant heads, and other less-common variations in the number of heads are known. While some texts say that Ganesha was born with an elephant head, he acquires the head later in most stories. The most recurrent motif in these stories is that Ganesha was created by Parvati using clay to protect her and Shiva beheaded him when Ganesha came between Shiva and Parvati. Shiva then replaced Ganesha's original head with that of an elephant. Details of the battle and where the replacement head came from vary from source to source. Another story says that Ganesha was created directly by Shiva's laughter. Because Shiva considered Ganesha too alluring, he gave him the head of an elephant and a protruding belly.

 

Ganesha's earliest name was Ekadanta (One Tusked), referring to his single whole tusk, the other being broken. Some of the earliest images of Ganesha show him holding his broken tusk. The importance of this distinctive feature is reflected in the Mudgala Purana, which states that the name of Ganesha's second incarnation is Ekadanta. Ganesha's protruding belly appears as a distinctive attribute in his earliest statuary, which dates to the Gupta period (4th to 6th centuries). This feature is so important that, according to the Mudgala Purana, two different incarnations of Ganesha use names based on it: Lambodara (Pot Belly, or, literally, Hanging Belly) and Mahodara (Great Belly). Both names are Sanskrit compounds describing his belly. The Brahmanda Purana says that Ganesha has the name Lambodara because all the universes (i.e., cosmic eggs) of the past, present, and future are present in him. The number of Ganesha's arms varies; his best-known forms have between two and sixteen arms. Many depictions of Ganesha feature four arms, which is mentioned in Puranic sources and codified as a standard form in some iconographic texts. His earliest images had two arms. Forms with 14 and 20 arms appeared in Central India during the 9th and the 10th centuries. The serpent is a common feature in Ganesha iconography and appears in many forms. According to the Ganesha Purana, Ganesha wrapped the serpent Vasuki around his neck. Other depictions of snakes include use as a sacred thread wrapped around the stomach as a belt, held in a hand, coiled at the ankles, or as a throne. Upon Ganesha's forehead may be a third eye or the Shaivite sectarian mark , which consists of three horizontal lines. The Ganesha Purana prescribes a tilaka mark as well as a crescent moon on the forehead. A distinct form of Ganesha called Bhalachandra includes that iconographic element. Ganesha is often described as red in color. Specific colors are associated with certain forms. Many examples of color associations with specific meditation forms are prescribed in the Sritattvanidhi, a treatise on Hindu iconography. For example, white is associated with his representations as Heramba-Ganapati and Rina-Mochana-Ganapati (Ganapati Who Releases from Bondage). Ekadanta-Ganapati is visualized as blue during meditation in that form.

 

VAHANAS

The earliest Ganesha images are without a vahana (mount/vehicle). Of the eight incarnations of Ganesha described in the Mudgala Purana, Ganesha uses a mouse (shrew) in five of them, a lion in his incarnation as Vakratunda, a peacock in his incarnation as Vikata, and Shesha, the divine serpent, in his incarnation as Vighnaraja. Mohotkata uses a lion, Mayūreśvara uses a peacock, Dhumraketu uses a horse, and Gajanana uses a mouse, in the four incarnations of Ganesha listed in the Ganesha Purana. Jain depictions of Ganesha show his vahana variously as a mouse, elephant, tortoise, ram, or peacock.

 

Ganesha is often shown riding on or attended by a mouse, shrew or rat. Martin-Dubost says that the rat began to appear as the principal vehicle in sculptures of Ganesha in central and western India during the 7th century; the rat was always placed close to his feet. The mouse as a mount first appears in written sources in the Matsya Purana and later in the Brahmananda Purana and Ganesha Purana, where Ganesha uses it as his vehicle in his last incarnation. The Ganapati Atharvashirsa includes a meditation verse on Ganesha that describes the mouse appearing on his flag. The names Mūṣakavāhana (mouse-mount) and Ākhuketana (rat-banner) appear in the Ganesha Sahasranama.

 

The mouse is interpreted in several ways. According to Grimes, "Many, if not most of those who interpret Gaṇapati's mouse, do so negatively; it symbolizes tamoguṇa as well as desire". Along these lines, Michael Wilcockson says it symbolizes those who wish to overcome desires and be less selfish. Krishan notes that the rat is destructive and a menace to crops. The Sanskrit word mūṣaka (mouse) is derived from the root mūṣ (stealing, robbing). It was essential to subdue the rat as a destructive pest, a type of vighna (impediment) that needed to be overcome. According to this theory, showing Ganesha as master of the rat demonstrates his function as Vigneshvara (Lord of Obstacles) and gives evidence of his possible role as a folk grāma-devatā (village deity) who later rose to greater prominence. Martin-Dubost notes a view that the rat is a symbol suggesting that Ganesha, like the rat, penetrates even the most secret places.

 

ASSOCIATIONS

 

OBSTACLES

Ganesha is Vighneshvara or Vighnaraja or Vighnaharta (Marathi), the Lord of Obstacles, both of a material and spiritual order. He is popularly worshipped as a remover of obstacles, though traditionally he also places obstacles in the path of those who need to be checked. Paul Courtright says that "his task in the divine scheme of things, his dharma, is to place and remove obstacles. It is his particular territory, the reason for his creation."

 

Krishan notes that some of Ganesha's names reflect shadings of multiple roles that have evolved over time. Dhavalikar ascribes the quick ascension of Ganesha in the Hindu pantheon, and the emergence of the Ganapatyas, to this shift in emphasis from vighnakartā (obstacle-creator) to vighnahartā (obstacle-averter). However, both functions continue to be vital to his character.

 

BUDDHI (KNOWLEDGE)

Ganesha is considered to be the Lord of letters and learning. In Sanskrit, the word buddhi is a feminine noun that is variously translated as intelligence, wisdom, or intellect. The concept of buddhi is closely associated with the personality of Ganesha, especially in the Puranic period, when many stories stress his cleverness and love of intelligence. One of Ganesha's names in the Ganesha Purana and the Ganesha Sahasranama is Buddhipriya. This name also appears in a list of 21 names at the end of the Ganesha Sahasranama that Ganesha says are especially important. The word priya can mean "fond of", and in a marital context it can mean "lover" or "husband", so the name may mean either "Fond of Intelligence" or "Buddhi's Husband".

 

AUM

Ganesha is identified with the Hindu mantra Aum, also spelled Om. The term oṃkārasvarūpa (Aum is his form), when identified with Ganesha, refers to the notion that he personifies the primal sound. The Ganapati Atharvashirsa attests to this association. Chinmayananda translates the relevant passage as follows:

 

(O Lord Ganapati!) You are (the Trinity) Brahma, Vishnu, and Mahesa. You are Indra. You are fire [Agni] and air [Vāyu]. You are the sun [Sūrya] and the moon [Chandrama]. You are Brahman. You are (the three worlds) Bhuloka [earth], Antariksha-loka [space], and Swargaloka [heaven]. You are Om. (That is to say, You are all this).

 

Some devotees see similarities between the shape of Ganesha's body in iconography and the shape of Aum in the Devanāgarī and Tamil scripts.

 

FIRST CHAKRA

According to Kundalini yoga, Ganesha resides in the first chakra, called Muladhara (mūlādhāra). Mula means "original, main"; adhara means "base, foundation". The muladhara chakra is the principle on which the manifestation or outward expansion of primordial Divine Force rests. This association is also attested to in the Ganapati Atharvashirsa. Courtright translates this passage as follows: "[O Ganesha,] You continually dwell in the sacral plexus at the base of the spine [mūlādhāra cakra]." Thus, Ganesha has a permanent abode in every being at the Muladhara. Ganesha holds, supports and guides all other chakras, thereby "governing the forces that propel the wheel of life".

 

FAMILY AND CONSORTS

Though Ganesha is popularly held to be the son of Shiva and Parvati, the Puranic myths give different versions about his birth. In some he was created by Parvati, in another he was created by Shiva and Parvati, in another he appeared mysteriously and was discovered by Shiva and Parvati or he was born from the elephant headed goddess Malini after she drank Parvati's bath water that had been thrown in the river.

 

The family includes his brother the war god Kartikeya, who is also called Subramanya, Skanda, Murugan and other names. Regional differences dictate the order of their births. In northern India, Skanda is generally said to be the elder, while in the south, Ganesha is considered the first born. In northern India, Skanda was an important martial deity from about 500 BCE to about 600 CE, when worship of him declined significantly in northern India. As Skanda fell, Ganesha rose. Several stories tell of sibling rivalry between the brothers and may reflect sectarian tensions.

 

Ganesha's marital status, the subject of considerable scholarly review, varies widely in mythological stories. One pattern of myths identifies Ganesha as an unmarried brahmacari. This view is common in southern India and parts of northern India. Another pattern associates him with the concepts of Buddhi (intellect), Siddhi (spiritual power), and Riddhi (prosperity); these qualities are sometimes personified as goddesses, said to be Ganesha's wives. He also may be shown with a single consort or a nameless servant (Sanskrit: daşi). Another pattern connects Ganesha with the goddess of culture and the arts, Sarasvati or Śarda (particularly in Maharashtra). He is also associated with the goddess of luck and prosperity, Lakshmi. Another pattern, mainly prevalent in the Bengal region, links Ganesha with the banana tree, Kala Bo.

 

The Shiva Purana says that Ganesha had begotten two sons: Kşema (prosperity) and Lābha (profit). In northern Indian variants of this story, the sons are often said to be Śubha (auspiciouness) and Lābha. The 1975 Hindi film Jai Santoshi Maa shows Ganesha married to Riddhi and Siddhi and having a daughter named Santoshi Ma, the goddess of satisfaction. This story has no Puranic basis, but Anita Raina Thapan and Lawrence Cohen cite Santoshi Ma's cult as evidence of Ganesha's continuing evolution as a popular deity.

 

WOSHIP AND FESTIVALS

Ganesha is worshipped on many religious and secular occasions; especially at the beginning of ventures such as buying a vehicle or starting a business. K.N. Somayaji says, "there can hardly be a [Hindu] home [in India] which does not house an idol of Ganapati. [..] Ganapati, being the most popular deity in India, is worshipped by almost all castes and in all parts of the country". Devotees believe that if Ganesha is propitiated, he grants success, prosperity and protection against adversity.

 

Ganesha is a non-sectarian deity, and Hindus of all denominations invoke him at the beginning of prayers, important undertakings, and religious ceremonies. Dancers and musicians, particularly in southern India, begin performances of arts such as the Bharatnatyam dance with a prayer to Ganesha. Mantras such as Om Shri Gaṇeshāya Namah (Om, salutation to the Illustrious Ganesha) are often used. One of the most famous mantras associated with Ganesha is Om Gaṃ Ganapataye Namah (Om, Gaṃ, Salutation to the Lord of Hosts).

 

Devotees offer Ganesha sweets such as modaka and small sweet balls (laddus). He is often shown carrying a bowl of sweets, called a modakapātra. Because of his identification with the color red, he is often worshipped with red sandalwood paste (raktacandana) or red flowers. Dūrvā grass (Cynodon dactylon) and other materials are also used in his worship.

 

Festivals associated with Ganesh are Ganesh Chaturthi or Vināyaka chaturthī in the śuklapakṣa (the fourth day of the waxing moon) in the month of bhādrapada (August/September) and the Gaṇeśa jayanti (Gaṇeśa's birthday) celebrated on the cathurthī of the śuklapakṣa (fourth day of the waxing moon) in the month of māgha (January/February)."

 

GANESH CHATURTI

An annual festival honours Ganesha for ten days, starting on Ganesha Chaturthi, which typically falls in late August or early September. The festival begins with people bringing in clay idols of Ganesha, symbolising Ganesha's visit. The festival culminates on the day of Ananta Chaturdashi, when idols (murtis) of Ganesha are immersed in the most convenient body of water. Some families have a tradition of immersion on the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, or 7th day. In 1893, Lokmanya Tilak transformed this annual Ganesha festival from private family celebrations into a grand public event. He did so "to bridge the gap between the Brahmins and the non-Brahmins and find an appropriate context in which to build a new grassroots unity between them" in his nationalistic strivings against the British in Maharashtra. Because of Ganesha's wide appeal as "the god for Everyman", Tilak chose him as a rallying point for Indian protest against British rule. Tilak was the first to install large public images of Ganesha in pavilions, and he established the practice of submerging all the public images on the tenth day. Today, Hindus across India celebrate the Ganapati festival with great fervour, though it is most popular in the state of Maharashtra. The festival also assumes huge proportions in Mumbai, Pune, and in the surrounding belt of Ashtavinayaka temples.

 

TEMPLES

In Hindu temples, Ganesha is depicted in various ways: as an acolyte or subordinate deity (pãrśva-devatã); as a deity related to the principal deity (parivāra-devatã); or as the principal deity of the temple (pradhāna), treated similarly as the highest gods of the Hindu pantheon. As the god of transitions, he is placed at the doorway of many Hindu temples to keep out the unworthy, which is analogous to his role as Parvati’s doorkeeper. In addition, several shrines are dedicated to Ganesha himself, of which the Ashtavinayak (lit. "eight Ganesha (shrines)") in Maharashtra are particularly well known. Located within a 100-kilometer radius of the city of Pune, each of these eight shrines celebrates a particular form of Ganapati, complete with its own lore and legend. The eight shrines are: Morgaon, Siddhatek, Pali, Mahad, Theur, Lenyadri, Ozar and Ranjangaon.

 

There are many other important Ganesha temples at the following locations: Wai in Maharashtra; Ujjain in Madhya Pradesh; Jodhpur, Nagaur and Raipur (Pali) in Rajasthan; Baidyanath in Bihar; Baroda, Dholaka, and Valsad in Gujarat and Dhundiraj Temple in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. Prominent Ganesha temples in southern India include the following: Kanipakam in Chittoor; the Jambukeśvara Temple at Tiruchirapalli; at Rameshvaram and Suchindram in Tamil Nadu; at Malliyur, Kottarakara, Pazhavangadi, Kasargod in Kerala, Hampi, and Idagunji in Karnataka; and Bhadrachalam in Andhra Pradesh.

 

T. A. Gopinatha notes, "Every village however small has its own image of Vighneśvara (Vigneshvara) with or without a temple to house it in. At entrances of villages and forts, below pīpaḹa (Sacred fig) trees [...], in a niche [...] in temples of Viṣṇu (Vishnu) as well as Śiva (Shiva) and also in separate shrines specially constructed in Śiva temples [...]; the figure of Vighneśvara is invariably seen." Ganesha temples have also been built outside of India, including southeast Asia, Nepal (including the four Vinayaka shrines in the Kathmandu valley), and in several western countries.

 

RISE TO PROMINENCE

 

FIRST APEARANCE

Ganesha appeared in his classic form as a clearly recognizable deity with well-defined iconographic attributes in the early 4th to 5th centuries. Shanti Lal Nagar says that the earliest known iconic image of Ganesha is in the niche of the Shiva temple at Bhumra, which has been dated to the Gupta period. His independent cult appeared by about the 10th century. Narain summarizes the controversy between devotees and academics regarding the development of Ganesha as follows:

 

What is inscrutable is the somewhat dramatic appearance of Gaņeśa on the historical scene. His antecedents are not clear. His wide acceptance and popularity, which transcend sectarian and territorial limits, are indeed amazing. On the one hand there is the pious belief of the orthodox devotees in Gaņeśa's Vedic origins and in the Purāṇic explanations contained in the confusing, but nonetheless interesting, mythology. On the other hand there are doubts about the existence of the idea and the icon of this deity" before the fourth to fifth century A.D. ... [I]n my opinion, indeed there is no convincing evidence of the existence of this divinity prior to the fifth century.

 

POSSIBLE INFLUENCES

Courtright reviews various speculative theories about the early history of Ganesha, including supposed tribal traditions and animal cults, and dismisses all of them in this way:

 

In the post 600 BC period there is evidence of people and places named after the animal. The motif appears on coins and sculptures.

 

Thapan's book on the development of Ganesha devotes a chapter to speculations about the role elephants had in early India but concludes that, "although by the second century CE the elephant-headed yakṣa form exists it cannot be presumed to represent Gaṇapati-Vināyaka. There is no evidence of a deity by this name having an elephant or elephant-headed form at this early stage. Gaṇapati-Vināyaka had yet to make his debut."

 

One theory of the origin of Ganesha is that he gradually came to prominence in connection with the four Vinayakas (Vināyakas). In Hindu mythology, the Vināyakas were a group of four troublesome demons who created obstacles and difficulties but who were easily propitiated. The name Vināyaka is a common name for Ganesha both in the Purāṇas and in Buddhist Tantras. Krishan is one of the academics who accepts this view, stating flatly of Ganesha, "He is a non-vedic god. His origin is to be traced to the four Vināyakas, evil spirits, of the Mānavagŗhyasūtra (7th–4th century BCE) who cause various types of evil and suffering". Depictions of elephant-headed human figures, which some identify with Ganesha, appear in Indian art and coinage as early as the 2nd century. According to Ellawala, the elephant-headed Ganesha as lord of the Ganas was known to the people of Sri Lanka in the early pre-Christian era.

 

A metal plate depiction of Ganesha had been discovered in 1993, in Iran, it dated back to 1,200 BCE. Another one was discovered much before, in Lorestan Province of Iran.

 

First Ganesha's terracotta images are from 1st century CE found in Ter, Pal, Verrapuram and Chandraketugarh. These figures are small, with elephant head, two arms, and chubby physique. The earliest Ganesha icons in stone were carved in Mathura during Kushan times (2nd-3rd centuries CE).

 

VEDIC AND EPIC LITERATURE

The title "Leader of the group" (Sanskrit: gaṇapati) occurs twice in the Rig Veda, but in neither case does it refer to the modern Ganesha. The term appears in RV 2.23.1 as a title for Brahmanaspati, according to commentators. While this verse doubtless refers to Brahmanaspati, it was later adopted for worship of Ganesha and is still used today. In rejecting any claim that this passage is evidence of Ganesha in the Rig Veda, Ludo Rocher says that it "clearly refers to Bṛhaspati—who is the deity of the hymn—and Bṛhaspati only". Equally clearly, the second passage (RV 10.112.9) refers to Indra, who is given the epithet 'gaṇapati', translated "Lord of the companies (of the Maruts)." However, Rocher notes that the more recent Ganapatya literature often quotes the Rigvedic verses to give Vedic respectability to Ganesha .

 

Two verses in texts belonging to Black Yajurveda, Maitrāyaṇīya Saṃhitā (2.9.1) and Taittirīya Āraṇyaka (10.1), appeal to a deity as "the tusked one" (Dantiḥ), "elephant-faced" (Hastimukha), and "with a curved trunk" (Vakratuņḍa). These names are suggestive of Ganesha, and the 14th century commentator Sayana explicitly establishes this identification. The description of Dantin, possessing a twisted trunk (vakratuṇḍa) and holding a corn-sheaf, a sugar cane, and a club, is so characteristic of the Puranic Ganapati that Heras says "we cannot resist to accept his full identification with this Vedic Dantin". However, Krishan considers these hymns to be post-Vedic additions. Thapan reports that these passages are "generally considered to have been interpolated". Dhavalikar says, "the references to the elephant-headed deity in the Maitrāyaṇī Saṃhitā have been proven to be very late interpolations, and thus are not very helpful for determining the early formation of the deity".

 

Ganesha does not appear in Indian epic literature that is dated to the Vedic period. A late interpolation to the epic poem Mahabharata says that the sage Vyasa (Vyāsa) asked Ganesha to serve as his scribe to transcribe the poem as he dictated it to him. Ganesha agreed but only on condition that Vyasa recite the poem uninterrupted, that is, without pausing. The sage agreed, but found that to get any rest he needed to recite very complex passages so Ganesha would have to ask for clarifications. The story is not accepted as part of the original text by the editors of the critical edition of the Mahabharata, in which the twenty-line story is relegated to a footnote in an appendix. The story of Ganesha acting as the scribe occurs in 37 of the 59 manuscripts consulted during preparation of the critical edition. Ganesha's association with mental agility and learning is one reason he is shown as scribe for Vyāsa's dictation of the Mahabharata in this interpolation. Richard L. Brown dates the story to the 8th century, and Moriz Winternitz concludes that it was known as early as c. 900, but it was not added to the Mahabharata some 150 years later. Winternitz also notes that a distinctive feature in South Indian manuscripts of the Mahabharata is their omission of this Ganesha legend. The term vināyaka is found in some recensions of the Śāntiparva and Anuśāsanaparva that are regarded as interpolations. A reference to Vighnakartṛīṇām ("Creator of Obstacles") in Vanaparva is also believed to be an interpolation and does not appear in the critical edition.

 

PURANIC PERIOD

Stories about Ganesha often occur in the Puranic corpus. Brown notes while the Puranas "defy precise chronological ordering", the more detailed narratives of Ganesha's life are in the late texts, c. 600–1300. Yuvraj Krishan says that the Puranic myths about the birth of Ganesha and how he acquired an elephant's head are in the later Puranas, which were composed from c. 600 onwards. He elaborates on the matter to say that references to Ganesha in the earlier Puranas, such as the Vayu and Brahmanda Puranas, are later interpolations made during the 7th to 10th centuries.

 

In his survey of Ganesha's rise to prominence in Sanskrit literature, Ludo Rocher notes that:

 

Above all, one cannot help being struck by the fact that the numerous stories surrounding Gaṇeśa concentrate on an unexpectedly limited number of incidents. These incidents are mainly three: his birth and parenthood, his elephant head, and his single tusk. Other incidents are touched on in the texts, but to a far lesser extent.

 

Ganesha's rise to prominence was codified in the 9th century, when he was formally included as one of the five primary deities of Smartism. The 9th-century philosopher Adi Shankara popularized the "worship of the five forms" (Panchayatana puja) system among orthodox Brahmins of the Smarta tradition. This worship practice invokes the five deities Ganesha, Vishnu, Shiva, Devi, and Surya. Adi Shankara instituted the tradition primarily to unite the principal deities of these five major sects on an equal status. This formalized the role of Ganesha as a complementary deity.

 

SCRIPTURES

Once Ganesha was accepted as one of the five principal deities of Brahmanism, some Brahmins (brāhmaṇas) chose to worship Ganesha as their principal deity. They developed the Ganapatya tradition, as seen in the Ganesha Purana and the Mudgala Purana.

 

The date of composition for the Ganesha Purana and the Mudgala Purana - and their dating relative to one another - has sparked academic debate. Both works were developed over time and contain age-layered strata. Anita Thapan reviews comments about dating and provides her own judgement. "It seems likely that the core of the Ganesha Purana appeared around the twelfth and thirteenth centuries", she says, "but was later interpolated." Lawrence W. Preston considers the most reasonable date for the Ganesha Purana to be between 1100 and 1400, which coincides with the apparent age of the sacred sites mentioned by the text.

 

R.C. Hazra suggests that the Mudgala Purana is older than the Ganesha Purana, which he dates between 1100 and 1400. However, Phyllis Granoff finds problems with this relative dating and concludes that the Mudgala Purana was the last of the philosophical texts concerned with Ganesha. She bases her reasoning on the fact that, among other internal evidence, the Mudgala Purana specifically mentions the Ganesha Purana as one of the four Puranas (the Brahma, the Brahmanda, the Ganesha, and the Mudgala Puranas) which deal at length with Ganesha. While the kernel of the text must be old, it was interpolated until the 17th and 18th centuries as the worship of Ganapati became more important in certain regions. Another highly regarded scripture, the Ganapati Atharvashirsa, was probably composed during the 16th or 17th centuries.

 

BEYOND INDIA AND HINDUISM

Commercial and cultural contacts extended India's influence in western and southeast Asia. Ganesha is one of a number of Hindu deities who reached foreign lands as a result.

 

Ganesha was particularly worshipped by traders and merchants, who went out of India for commercial ventures. From approximately the 10th century onwards, new networks of exchange developed including the formation of trade guilds and a resurgence of money circulation. During this time, Ganesha became the principal deity associated with traders. The earliest inscription invoking Ganesha before any other deity is associated with the merchant community.

 

Hindus migrated to Maritime Southeast Asia and took their culture, including Ganesha, with them. Statues of Ganesha are found throughout the region, often beside Shiva sanctuaries. The forms of Ganesha found in Hindu art of Java, Bali, and Borneo show specific regional influences. The spread of Hindu culture to southeast Asia established Ganesha in modified forms in Burma, Cambodia, and Thailand. In Indochina, Hinduism and Buddhism were practiced side by side, and mutual influences can be seen in the iconography of Ganesha in the region. In Thailand, Cambodia, and among the Hindu classes of the Chams in Vietnam, Ganesha was mainly thought of as a remover of obstacles. Today in Buddhist Thailand, Ganesha is regarded as a remover of obstacles, the god of success.

 

Before the arrival of Islam, Afghanistan had close cultural ties with India, and the adoration of both Hindu and Buddhist deities was practiced. Examples of sculptures from the 5th to the 7th centuries have survived, suggesting that the worship of Ganesha was then in vogue in the region.

 

Ganesha appears in Mahayana Buddhism, not only in the form of the Buddhist god Vināyaka, but also as a Hindu demon form with the same name. His image appears in Buddhist sculptures during the late Gupta period. As the Buddhist god Vināyaka, he is often shown dancing. This form, called Nṛtta Ganapati, was popular in northern India, later adopted in Nepal, and then in Tibet. In Nepal, the Hindu form of Ganesha, known as Heramba, is popular; he has five heads and rides a lion. Tibetan representations of Ganesha show ambivalent views of him. A Tibetan rendering of Ganapati is tshogs bdag. In one Tibetan form, he is shown being trodden under foot by Mahākāla, (Shiva) a popular Tibetan deity. Other depictions show him as the Destroyer of Obstacles, and sometimes dancing. Ganesha appears in China and Japan in forms that show distinct regional character. In northern China, the earliest known stone statue of Ganesha carries an inscription dated to 531. In Japan, where Ganesha is known as Kangiten, the Ganesha cult was first mentioned in 806.

 

The canonical literature of Jainism does not mention the worship of Ganesha. However, Ganesha is worshipped by most Jains, for whom he appears to have taken over certain functions of Kubera. Jain connections with the trading community support the idea that Jainism took up Ganesha worship as a result of commercial connections. The earliest known Jain Ganesha statue dates to about the 9th century. A 15th-century Jain text lists procedures for the installation of Ganapati images. Images of Ganesha appear in the Jain temples of Rajasthan and Gujarat.

 

WIKIPEDIA

It is some years, maybe 5 or more, since we last visited the cathedral in Canterbury. In the spring, I found the entrance to St Augustine's Abbey, so the plan yesterday was to visit them both.

 

I arrived just after ten, soon after it opened its doors, and was shocked to find that the multi-entry you used to get after paying your entrance fee had been discontinued. When I tried to ask the young man at the ticket office, he wasn't really able to speak much English to explain this to me, repeatedly holding one finger up at me as I asked the questions. £10.50, is not bad, I guess, especially as photography is allowed everywhere, except in the crypt, so I don't mind paying.

 

The site has been a place of worship probably since Roman times, and in the grounds of St Augustine's, just a short distance away, remains of a 7th century church still remain. What we see now in the cathedral is largely Norman, but with many improvements over the centuries.

 

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

 

Canterbury Cathedral in Canterbury, Kent, is one of the oldest and most famous Christian structures in England and forms part of a World Heritage Site. It is the cathedral of the Archbishop of Canterbury, leader of the Church of England and symbolic leader of the worldwide Anglican Communion; the archbishop, being suitably occupied with national and international matters, delegates the most of his functions as diocesan bishop to the Bishop suffragan of Dover. Its formal title is the Cathedral and Metropolitical Church of Christ at Canterbury.

 

Founded in 597, the cathedral was completely rebuilt from 1070 to 1077. The east end was greatly enlarged at the beginning of the twelfth century, and largely rebuilt in the Gothic style following a fire in 1174, with significant eastward extensions to accommodate the flow of pilgrims visiting the shrine of Thomas Becket, the archbishop who was murdered in the cathedral in 1170. The Norman nave and transepts survived until the late fourteenth century, when they were demolished to make way for the present structures.

 

Christianity had started to become powerful in the Roman Empire around the third century. Following the conversion of Augustine of Hippo in the 4th century, the influence of Christianity grew steadily .[2] The cathedral's first archbishop was Augustine of Canterbury, previously abbot of St. Andrew's Benedictine Abbey in Rome. He was sent by Pope Gregory the Great in 596 as a missionary to the Anglo-Saxons. Augustine founded the cathedral in 597 and dedicated it to Jesus Christ, the Holy Saviour.[3]

 

Augustine also founded the Abbey of St. Peter and Paul outside the city walls. This was later rededicated to St. Augustine himself and was for many centuries the burial place of the successive archbishops. The abbey is part of the World Heritage Site of Canterbury, along with the cathedral and the ancient Church of St Martin.

 

Bede recorded that Augustine reused a former Roman church. The oldest remains found during excavations beneath the present nave in 1993 were, however, parts of the foundations of an Anglo-Saxon building, which had been constructed across a Roman road.[5][6] They indicate that the original church consisted of a nave, possibly with a narthex, and side-chapels to the north and south. A smaller subsidiary building was found to the south-west of these foundations.[6] During the ninth or tenth century this church was replaced by a larger structure (49 m. by 23 m.) with a squared west end. It appears to have had a square central tower.[6] The eleventh century chronicler Eadmer, who had known the Saxon cathedral as a boy, wrote that, in its arrangement, it resembled St Peter's in Rome, indicating that it was of basilican form, with an eastern apse.[7]

 

During the reforms of Dunstan, archbishop from 960 until his death in 988,[8] a Benedictine abbey named Christ Church Priory was added to the cathedral. But the formal establishment as a monastery seems to date only to c.997 and the community only became fully monastic from Lanfranc's time onwards (with monastic constitutions addressed by him to prior Henry). Dunstan was buried on the south side of the high altar.

 

The cathedral was badly damaged during Danish raids on Canterbury in 1011. The Archbishop, Alphege, was taken hostage by the raiders and eventually killed at Greenwich on 19 April 1012, the first of Canterbury's five martyred archbishops. After this a western apse was added as an oratory of St. Mary, probably during the archbishopric of Lyfing (1013–1020) or Aethelnoth (1020–1038).

 

The 1993 excavations revealed that the new western apse was polygonal, and flanked by hexagonal towers, forming a westwork. It housed the archbishop's throne, with the altar of St Mary just to the east. At about the same time that the westwork was built, the arcade walls were strengthened and towers added to the eastern corners of the church.

 

The cathedral was destroyed by fire in 1067, a year after the Norman Conquest. Rebuilding began in 1070 under the first Norman archbishop, Lanfranc (1070–77). He cleared the ruins and reconstructed the cathedral to a design based closely on that of the Abbey of St. Etienne in Caen, where he had previously been abbot, using stone brought from France.[9] The new church, its central axis about 5m south of that of its predecessor,[6] was a cruciform building, with an aisled nave of nine bays, a pair of towers at the west end, aiseless transepts with apsidal chapels, a low crossing tower, and a short choir ending in three apses. It was dedicated in 1077.[10]

  

The Norman cathedral, after its expansion by Ernulf and Conrad.

Under Lanfranc's successor Anselm, who was twice exiled from England, the responsibility for the rebuilding or improvement of the cathedral's fabric was largely left in the hands of the priors.[11] Following the election of Prior Ernulf in 1096, Lanfranc's inadequate east end was demolished, and replaced with an eastern arm 198 feet long, doubling the length of the cathedral. It was raised above a large and elaborately decorated crypt. Ernulf was succeeded in 1107 by Conrad, who completed the work by 1126.[12] The new choir took the form of a complete church in itself, with its own transepts; the east end was semicircular in plan, with three chapels opening off an ambulatory.[12] A free standing campanile was built on a mound in the cathedral precinct in about 1160.[13]

 

As with many Romanesque church buildings, the interior of the choir was richly embellished.[14] William of Malmesbury wrote: "Nothing like it could be seen in England either for the light of its glass windows, the gleaming of its marble pavements, or the many-coloured paintings which led the eyes to the panelled ceiling above."[14]

 

Though named after the sixth century founding archbishop, The Chair of St. Augustine, the ceremonial enthronement chair of the Archbishop of Canterbury, may date from the Norman period. Its first recorded use is in 1205.

 

Martyrdom of Thomas Becket

  

Image of Thomas Becket from a stained glass window

 

The 12th-century choir

A pivotal moment in the history of the cathedral was the murder of the archbishop, Thomas Becket, in the north-west transept (also known as the Martyrdom) on Tuesday, 29 December 1170, by knights of King Henry II. The king had frequent conflicts with the strong-willed Becket and is said to have exclaimed in frustration, "Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?" The knights took it literally and murdered Becket in his own cathedral. Becket was the second of four Archbishops of Canterbury who were murdered (see also Alphege).

 

The posthumous veneration of Becket made the cathedral a place of pilgrimage. This brought both the need to expand the cathedral and the wealth that made it possible.

 

Rebuilding of the choir

 

Tomb of the Black Prince

In September 1174 the choir was severely damaged by fire, necessitating a major reconstruction,[15] the progress of which was recorded in detail by a monk named Gervase.[16] The crypt survived the fire intact,[17] and it was found possible to retain the outer walls of the choir, which were increased in height by 12 feet (3.7 m) in the course of the rebuilding, but with the round-headed form of their windows left unchanged.[18] Everything else was replaced in the new Gothic style, with pointed arches, rib vaulting and flying buttresses. The limestone used was imported from Caen in Normandy, and Purbeck marble was used for the shafting. The choir was back in use by 1180 and in that year the remains of St Dunstan and St Alphege were moved there from the crypt.[19]

 

The master-mason appointed to rebuild the choir was a Frenchman, William of Sens. Following his injury in a fall from the scaffolding in 1179 he was replaced by one of his former assistants, known as "William the Englishman".

 

The shrine in the Trinity Chapel was placed directly above Becket's original tomb in the crypt. A marble plinth, raised on columns, supported what an early visitor, Walter of Coventry, described as "a coffin wonderfully wrought of gold and silver, and marvellously adorned with precious gems".[22] Other accounts make clear that the gold was laid over a wooden chest, which in turn contained an iron-bound box holding Becket's remains.[23] Further votive treasures were added to the adornments of the chest over the years, while others were placed on pedestals or beams nearby, or attached to hanging drapery.[24] For much of the time the chest (or "ferotory") was kept concealed by a wooden cover, which would be theatrically raised by ropes once a crowd of pilgrims had gathered.[21][23] Erasmus, who visited in 1512–4, recorded that, once the cover was raised, "the Prior ... pointed out each jewel, telling its name in French, its value, and the name of its donor; for the principal of them were offerings sent by sovereign princes."[25]

 

The income from pilgrims (such as those portrayed in Geoffrey Chaucer's Canterbury Tales) who visited Becket's shrine, which was regarded as a place of healing, largely paid for the subsequent rebuilding of the cathedral and its associated buildings. This revenue included the profits from the sale of pilgrim badges depicting Becket, his martyrdom, or his shrine.

 

The shrine was removed in 1538. Henry VIII summoned the dead saint to court to face charges of treason. Having failed to appear, he was found guilty in his absence and the treasures of his shrine were confiscated, carried away in two coffers and twenty-six carts.

 

Monastic buildings

 

Cloisters

A bird's-eye view of the cathedral and its monastic buildings, made in about 1165[27] and known as the "waterworks plan" is preserved in the Eadwine Psalter in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge.[28] It shows that Canterbury employed the same general principles of arrangement common to all Benedictine monasteries, although, unusually, the cloister and monastic buildings were to the north, rather than the south of the church. There was a separate chapter-house.[27]

 

The buildings formed separate groups around the church. Adjoining it, on the north side, stood the cloister and the buildings devoted to the monastic life. To the east and west of these were those devoted to the exercise of hospitality. To the north a large open court divided the monastic buildings from menial ones, such as the stables, granaries, barn, bakehouse, brew house and laundries, inhabited by the lay servants of the establishment. At the greatest possible distance from the church, beyond the precinct of the monastery, was the eleemosynary department. The almonry for the relief of the poor, with a great hall annexed, formed the paupers' hospitium.

 

The group of buildings devoted to monastic life included two cloisters. The great cloister was surrounded by the buildings essentially connected with the daily life of the monks,-- the church to the south, with the refectory placed as always on the side opposite, the dormitory, raised on a vaulted undercroft, and the chapter-house adjacent, and the lodgings of the cellarer, responsible for providing both monks and guests with food, to the west. A passage under the dormitory lead eastwards to the smaller or infirmary cloister, appropriated to sick and infirm monks.[27]

 

The hall and chapel of the infirmary extended east of this cloister, resembling in form and arrangement the nave and chancel of an aisled church. Beneath the dormitory, overlooking the green court or herbarium, lay the "pisalis" or "calefactory," the common room of the monks. At its north-east corner access was given from the dormitory to the necessarium, a building in the form of a Norman hall, 145 ft (44 m) long by 25 broad (44.2 m × 7.6 m), containing fifty-five seats. It was constructed with careful regard to hygiene, with a stream of water running through it from end to end.[27]

 

A second smaller dormitory for the conventual officers ran from east to west. Close to the refectory, but outside the cloisters, were the domestic offices connected with it: to the north, the kitchen, 47 ft (14 m) square (200 m2), with a pyramidal roof, and the kitchen court; to the west, the butteries, pantries, etc. The infirmary had a small kitchen of its own. Opposite the refectory door in the cloister were two lavatories, where the monks washed before and after eating.

 

[27]

 

Priors of Christ Church Priory included John of Sittingbourne (elected 1222, previously a monk of the priory) and William Chillenden, (elected 1264, previously monk and treasurer of the priory).[29] The monastery was granted the right to elect their own prior if the seat was vacant by the pope, and — from Gregory IX onwards — the right to a free election (though with the archbishop overseeing their choice). Monks of the priory have included Æthelric I, Æthelric II, Walter d'Eynsham, Reginald fitz Jocelin (admitted as a confrater shortly before his death), Nigel de Longchamps and Ernulf. The monks often put forward candidates for Archbishop of Canterbury, either from among their number or outside, since the archbishop was nominally their abbot, but this could lead to clashes with the king and/or pope should they put forward a different man — examples are the elections of Baldwin of Forde and Thomas Cobham.

 

Early in the fourteenth century, Prior Eastry erected a stone choir screen and rebuilt the chapter house, and his successor, Prior Oxenden inserted a large five-light window into St Anselm's chapel. [30]

 

The cathedral was seriously damaged by an earthquake of 1382, losing its bells and campanile.

 

From the late fourteenth century the nave and transepts were rebuilt, on the Norman foundations in the Perpendicular style under the direction of the noted master mason Henry Yevele.[31] In contrast to the contemporary rebuilding of the nave at Winchester, where much of the existing fabric was retained and remodelled, the piers were entirely removed, and replaced with less bulky Gothic ones, and the old aisle walls completely taken down except for a low "plinth" left on the south side. [32][6] More Norman fabric was retained in the transepts, especially in the east walls,[32] and the old apsidal chapels were not replaced until the mid-15th century.[30] The arches of the new nave arcade were exceptionally high in proportion to the clerestory.[30] The new transepts, aisles and nave were roofed with lierne vaults, enriched with bosses. Most of the work was done during the priorate of Thomas Chillenden (1391–1411): Chillenden also built a new choir screen at the east end of the nave, into which Eastry's existing screen was incorporated.[30] The Norman stone floor of the nave, however survived until its replacement in 1786.

 

From 1396 the cloisters were repaired and remodelled by Yevele's pupil Stephen Lote who added the lierne vaulting. It was during this period that the wagon-vaulting of the chapter house was created.

 

A shortage of money, and the priority given to the rebuilding of the cloisters and chapter-house meant that the rebuilding of the west towers was neglected. The south-west tower was not replaced until 1458, and the Norman north-west tower survived until 1834, when it was replaced by a replica of its Perpendicular companion.[30]

 

In about 1430 the south transept apse was removed to make way for a chapel, founded by Lady Margaret Holland and dedicated to St Michael and All Angels. The north transept apse was replaced by a Lady Chapel, built in 1448–55.[30]

 

The 235-foot crossing tower was begun in 1433, although preparations had already been made during Chillenden's priorate, when the piers had been reinforced. Further strengthening was found necessary around the beginning of the sixteenth century, when buttressing arches were added under the southern and western tower arches. The tower is often known as the "Angel Steeple", after a gilded angel that once stood on one of its pinnacles.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canterbury_Cathedral

Ganesha, also spelled Ganesh, and also known as Ganapati and Vinayaka, is a widely worshipped deity in the Hindu pantheon. His image is found throughout India and Nepal. Hindu sects worship him regardless of affiliations. Devotion to Ganesha is widely diffused and extends to Jains, Buddhists, and beyond India.

 

Although he is known by many attributes, Ganesha's elephant head makes him easy to identify. Ganesha is widely revered as the remover of obstacles, the patron of arts and sciences and the deva of intellect and wisdom. As the god of beginnings, he is honoured at the start of rituals and ceremonies. Ganesha is also invoked as patron of letters and learning during writing sessions. Several texts relate mythological anecdotes associated with his birth and exploits and explain his distinct iconography.

 

Ganesha emerged as a distinct deity in the 4th and 5th centuries CE, during the Gupta Period, although he inherited traits from Vedic and pre-Vedic precursors. He was formally included among the five primary deities of Smartism (a Hindu denomination) in the 9th century. A sect of devotees called the Ganapatya arose, who identified Ganesha as the supreme deity. The principal scriptures dedicated to Ganesha are the Ganesha Purana, the Mudgala Purana, and the Ganapati Atharvashirsa.

 

ETYMOLOGY AND OTHER NAMES

Ganesha has been ascribed many other titles and epithets, including Ganapati and Vighneshvara. The Hindu title of respect Shri is often added before his name. One popular way Ganesha is worshipped is by chanting a Ganesha Sahasranama, a litany of "a thousand names of Ganesha". Each name in the sahasranama conveys a different meaning and symbolises a different aspect of Ganesha. At least two different versions of the Ganesha Sahasranama exist; one version is drawn from the Ganesha Purana, a Hindu scripture venerating Ganesha.

 

The name Ganesha is a Sanskrit compound, joining the words gana, meaning a group, multitude, or categorical system and isha, meaning lord or master. The word gaņa when associated with Ganesha is often taken to refer to the gaņas, a troop of semi-divine beings that form part of the retinue of Shiva. The term more generally means a category, class, community, association, or corporation. Some commentators interpret the name "Lord of the Gaņas" to mean "Lord of Hosts" or "Lord of created categories", such as the elements. Ganapati, a synonym for Ganesha, is a compound composed of gaṇa, meaning "group", and pati, meaning "ruler" or "lord". The Amarakosha, an early Sanskrit lexicon, lists eight synonyms of Ganesha : Vinayaka, Vighnarāja (equivalent to Vighnesha), Dvaimātura (one who has two mothers), Gaṇādhipa (equivalent to Ganapati and Ganesha), Ekadanta (one who has one tusk), Heramba, Lambodara (one who has a pot belly, or, literally, one who has a hanging belly), and Gajanana; having the face of an elephant).

 

Vinayaka is a common name for Ganesha that appears in the Purāṇas and in Buddhist Tantras. This name is reflected in the naming of the eight famous Ganesha temples in Maharashtra known as the Ashtavinayak (aṣṭavināyaka). The names Vighnesha and Vighneshvara (Lord of Obstacles) refers to his primary function in Hindu theology as the master and remover of obstacles (vighna).

 

A prominent name for Ganesha in the Tamil language is Pillai. A. K. Narain differentiates these terms by saying that pillai means a "child" while pillaiyar means a "noble child". He adds that the words pallu, pella, and pell in the Dravidian family of languages signify "tooth or tusk", also "elephant tooth or tusk". Anita Raina Thapan notes that the root word pille in the name Pillaiyar might have originally meant "the young of the elephant", because the Pali word pillaka means "a young elephant".

 

In the Burmese language, Ganesha is known as Maha Peinne, derived from Pali Mahā Wināyaka. The widespread name of Ganesha in Thailand is Phra Phikhanet or Phra Phikhanesuan, both of which are derived from Vara Vighnesha and Vara Vighneshvara respectively, whereas the name Khanet (from Ganesha) is rather rare.

 

In Sri Lanka, in the North-Central and North Western areas with predominantly Buddhist population, Ganesha is known as Aiyanayaka Deviyo, while in other Singhala Buddhist areas he is known as Gana deviyo.

 

ICONOGRAPHY

Ganesha is a popular figure in Indian art. Unlike those of some deities, representations of Ganesha show wide variations and distinct patterns changing over time. He may be portrayed standing, dancing, heroically taking action against demons, playing with his family as a boy, sitting down or on an elevated seat, or engaging in a range of contemporary situations.

 

Ganesha images were prevalent in many parts of India by the 6th century. The 13th century statue pictured is typical of Ganesha statuary from 900–1200, after Ganesha had been well-established as an independent deity with his own sect. This example features some of Ganesha's common iconographic elements. A virtually identical statue has been dated between 973–1200 by Paul Martin-Dubost, and another similar statue is dated c. 12th century by Pratapaditya Pal. Ganesha has the head of an elephant and a big belly. This statue has four arms, which is common in depictions of Ganesha. He holds his own broken tusk in his lower-right hand and holds a delicacy, which he samples with his trunk, in his lower-left hand. The motif of Ganesha turning his trunk sharply to his left to taste a sweet in his lower-left hand is a particularly archaic feature. A more primitive statue in one of the Ellora Caves with this general form has been dated to the 7th century. Details of the other hands are difficult to make out on the statue shown. In the standard configuration, Ganesha typically holds an axe or a goad in one upper arm and a pasha (noose) in the other upper arm.

 

The influence of this old constellation of iconographic elements can still be seen in contemporary representations of Ganesha. In one modern form, the only variation from these old elements is that the lower-right hand does not hold the broken tusk but is turned towards the viewer in a gesture of protection or fearlessness (abhaya mudra). The same combination of four arms and attributes occurs in statues of Ganesha dancing, which is a very popular theme.

 

COMMON ATTRIBUTES

Ganesha has been represented with the head of an elephant since the early stages of his appearance in Indian art. Puranic myths provide many explanations for how he got his elephant head. One of his popular forms, Heramba-Ganapati, has five elephant heads, and other less-common variations in the number of heads are known. While some texts say that Ganesha was born with an elephant head, he acquires the head later in most stories. The most recurrent motif in these stories is that Ganesha was created by Parvati using clay to protect her and Shiva beheaded him when Ganesha came between Shiva and Parvati. Shiva then replaced Ganesha's original head with that of an elephant. Details of the battle and where the replacement head came from vary from source to source. Another story says that Ganesha was created directly by Shiva's laughter. Because Shiva considered Ganesha too alluring, he gave him the head of an elephant and a protruding belly.

 

Ganesha's earliest name was Ekadanta (One Tusked), referring to his single whole tusk, the other being broken. Some of the earliest images of Ganesha show him holding his broken tusk. The importance of this distinctive feature is reflected in the Mudgala Purana, which states that the name of Ganesha's second incarnation is Ekadanta. Ganesha's protruding belly appears as a distinctive attribute in his earliest statuary, which dates to the Gupta period (4th to 6th centuries). This feature is so important that, according to the Mudgala Purana, two different incarnations of Ganesha use names based on it: Lambodara (Pot Belly, or, literally, Hanging Belly) and Mahodara (Great Belly). Both names are Sanskrit compounds describing his belly. The Brahmanda Purana says that Ganesha has the name Lambodara because all the universes (i.e., cosmic eggs) of the past, present, and future are present in him. The number of Ganesha's arms varies; his best-known forms have between two and sixteen arms. Many depictions of Ganesha feature four arms, which is mentioned in Puranic sources and codified as a standard form in some iconographic texts. His earliest images had two arms. Forms with 14 and 20 arms appeared in Central India during the 9th and the 10th centuries. The serpent is a common feature in Ganesha iconography and appears in many forms. According to the Ganesha Purana, Ganesha wrapped the serpent Vasuki around his neck. Other depictions of snakes include use as a sacred thread wrapped around the stomach as a belt, held in a hand, coiled at the ankles, or as a throne. Upon Ganesha's forehead may be a third eye or the Shaivite sectarian mark , which consists of three horizontal lines. The Ganesha Purana prescribes a tilaka mark as well as a crescent moon on the forehead. A distinct form of Ganesha called Bhalachandra includes that iconographic element. Ganesha is often described as red in color. Specific colors are associated with certain forms. Many examples of color associations with specific meditation forms are prescribed in the Sritattvanidhi, a treatise on Hindu iconography. For example, white is associated with his representations as Heramba-Ganapati and Rina-Mochana-Ganapati (Ganapati Who Releases from Bondage). Ekadanta-Ganapati is visualized as blue during meditation in that form.

 

VAHANAS

The earliest Ganesha images are without a vahana (mount/vehicle). Of the eight incarnations of Ganesha described in the Mudgala Purana, Ganesha uses a mouse (shrew) in five of them, a lion in his incarnation as Vakratunda, a peacock in his incarnation as Vikata, and Shesha, the divine serpent, in his incarnation as Vighnaraja. Mohotkata uses a lion, Mayūreśvara uses a peacock, Dhumraketu uses a horse, and Gajanana uses a mouse, in the four incarnations of Ganesha listed in the Ganesha Purana. Jain depictions of Ganesha show his vahana variously as a mouse, elephant, tortoise, ram, or peacock.

 

Ganesha is often shown riding on or attended by a mouse, shrew or rat. Martin-Dubost says that the rat began to appear as the principal vehicle in sculptures of Ganesha in central and western India during the 7th century; the rat was always placed close to his feet. The mouse as a mount first appears in written sources in the Matsya Purana and later in the Brahmananda Purana and Ganesha Purana, where Ganesha uses it as his vehicle in his last incarnation. The Ganapati Atharvashirsa includes a meditation verse on Ganesha that describes the mouse appearing on his flag. The names Mūṣakavāhana (mouse-mount) and Ākhuketana (rat-banner) appear in the Ganesha Sahasranama.

 

The mouse is interpreted in several ways. According to Grimes, "Many, if not most of those who interpret Gaṇapati's mouse, do so negatively; it symbolizes tamoguṇa as well as desire". Along these lines, Michael Wilcockson says it symbolizes those who wish to overcome desires and be less selfish. Krishan notes that the rat is destructive and a menace to crops. The Sanskrit word mūṣaka (mouse) is derived from the root mūṣ (stealing, robbing). It was essential to subdue the rat as a destructive pest, a type of vighna (impediment) that needed to be overcome. According to this theory, showing Ganesha as master of the rat demonstrates his function as Vigneshvara (Lord of Obstacles) and gives evidence of his possible role as a folk grāma-devatā (village deity) who later rose to greater prominence. Martin-Dubost notes a view that the rat is a symbol suggesting that Ganesha, like the rat, penetrates even the most secret places.

 

ASSOCIATIONS

 

OBSTACLES

Ganesha is Vighneshvara or Vighnaraja or Vighnaharta (Marathi), the Lord of Obstacles, both of a material and spiritual order. He is popularly worshipped as a remover of obstacles, though traditionally he also places obstacles in the path of those who need to be checked. Paul Courtright says that "his task in the divine scheme of things, his dharma, is to place and remove obstacles. It is his particular territory, the reason for his creation."

 

Krishan notes that some of Ganesha's names reflect shadings of multiple roles that have evolved over time. Dhavalikar ascribes the quick ascension of Ganesha in the Hindu pantheon, and the emergence of the Ganapatyas, to this shift in emphasis from vighnakartā (obstacle-creator) to vighnahartā (obstacle-averter). However, both functions continue to be vital to his character.

 

BUDDHI (KNOWLEDGE)

Ganesha is considered to be the Lord of letters and learning. In Sanskrit, the word buddhi is a feminine noun that is variously translated as intelligence, wisdom, or intellect. The concept of buddhi is closely associated with the personality of Ganesha, especially in the Puranic period, when many stories stress his cleverness and love of intelligence. One of Ganesha's names in the Ganesha Purana and the Ganesha Sahasranama is Buddhipriya. This name also appears in a list of 21 names at the end of the Ganesha Sahasranama that Ganesha says are especially important. The word priya can mean "fond of", and in a marital context it can mean "lover" or "husband", so the name may mean either "Fond of Intelligence" or "Buddhi's Husband".

 

AUM

Ganesha is identified with the Hindu mantra Aum, also spelled Om. The term oṃkārasvarūpa (Aum is his form), when identified with Ganesha, refers to the notion that he personifies the primal sound. The Ganapati Atharvashirsa attests to this association. Chinmayananda translates the relevant passage as follows:

 

(O Lord Ganapati!) You are (the Trinity) Brahma, Vishnu, and Mahesa. You are Indra. You are fire [Agni] and air [Vāyu]. You are the sun [Sūrya] and the moon [Chandrama]. You are Brahman. You are (the three worlds) Bhuloka [earth], Antariksha-loka [space], and Swargaloka [heaven]. You are Om. (That is to say, You are all this).

 

Some devotees see similarities between the shape of Ganesha's body in iconography and the shape of Aum in the Devanāgarī and Tamil scripts.

 

FIRST CHAKRA

According to Kundalini yoga, Ganesha resides in the first chakra, called Muladhara (mūlādhāra). Mula means "original, main"; adhara means "base, foundation". The muladhara chakra is the principle on which the manifestation or outward expansion of primordial Divine Force rests. This association is also attested to in the Ganapati Atharvashirsa. Courtright translates this passage as follows: "[O Ganesha,] You continually dwell in the sacral plexus at the base of the spine [mūlādhāra cakra]." Thus, Ganesha has a permanent abode in every being at the Muladhara. Ganesha holds, supports and guides all other chakras, thereby "governing the forces that propel the wheel of life".

 

FAMILY AND CONSORTS

Though Ganesha is popularly held to be the son of Shiva and Parvati, the Puranic myths give different versions about his birth. In some he was created by Parvati, in another he was created by Shiva and Parvati, in another he appeared mysteriously and was discovered by Shiva and Parvati or he was born from the elephant headed goddess Malini after she drank Parvati's bath water that had been thrown in the river.

 

The family includes his brother the war god Kartikeya, who is also called Subramanya, Skanda, Murugan and other names. Regional differences dictate the order of their births. In northern India, Skanda is generally said to be the elder, while in the south, Ganesha is considered the first born. In northern India, Skanda was an important martial deity from about 500 BCE to about 600 CE, when worship of him declined significantly in northern India. As Skanda fell, Ganesha rose. Several stories tell of sibling rivalry between the brothers and may reflect sectarian tensions.

 

Ganesha's marital status, the subject of considerable scholarly review, varies widely in mythological stories. One pattern of myths identifies Ganesha as an unmarried brahmacari. This view is common in southern India and parts of northern India. Another pattern associates him with the concepts of Buddhi (intellect), Siddhi (spiritual power), and Riddhi (prosperity); these qualities are sometimes personified as goddesses, said to be Ganesha's wives. He also may be shown with a single consort or a nameless servant (Sanskrit: daşi). Another pattern connects Ganesha with the goddess of culture and the arts, Sarasvati or Śarda (particularly in Maharashtra). He is also associated with the goddess of luck and prosperity, Lakshmi. Another pattern, mainly prevalent in the Bengal region, links Ganesha with the banana tree, Kala Bo.

 

The Shiva Purana says that Ganesha had begotten two sons: Kşema (prosperity) and Lābha (profit). In northern Indian variants of this story, the sons are often said to be Śubha (auspiciouness) and Lābha. The 1975 Hindi film Jai Santoshi Maa shows Ganesha married to Riddhi and Siddhi and having a daughter named Santoshi Ma, the goddess of satisfaction. This story has no Puranic basis, but Anita Raina Thapan and Lawrence Cohen cite Santoshi Ma's cult as evidence of Ganesha's continuing evolution as a popular deity.

 

WOSHIP AND FESTIVALS

Ganesha is worshipped on many religious and secular occasions; especially at the beginning of ventures such as buying a vehicle or starting a business. K.N. Somayaji says, "there can hardly be a [Hindu] home [in India] which does not house an idol of Ganapati. [..] Ganapati, being the most popular deity in India, is worshipped by almost all castes and in all parts of the country". Devotees believe that if Ganesha is propitiated, he grants success, prosperity and protection against adversity.

 

Ganesha is a non-sectarian deity, and Hindus of all denominations invoke him at the beginning of prayers, important undertakings, and religious ceremonies. Dancers and musicians, particularly in southern India, begin performances of arts such as the Bharatnatyam dance with a prayer to Ganesha. Mantras such as Om Shri Gaṇeshāya Namah (Om, salutation to the Illustrious Ganesha) are often used. One of the most famous mantras associated with Ganesha is Om Gaṃ Ganapataye Namah (Om, Gaṃ, Salutation to the Lord of Hosts).

 

Devotees offer Ganesha sweets such as modaka and small sweet balls (laddus). He is often shown carrying a bowl of sweets, called a modakapātra. Because of his identification with the color red, he is often worshipped with red sandalwood paste (raktacandana) or red flowers. Dūrvā grass (Cynodon dactylon) and other materials are also used in his worship.

 

Festivals associated with Ganesh are Ganesh Chaturthi or Vināyaka chaturthī in the śuklapakṣa (the fourth day of the waxing moon) in the month of bhādrapada (August/September) and the Gaṇeśa jayanti (Gaṇeśa's birthday) celebrated on the cathurthī of the śuklapakṣa (fourth day of the waxing moon) in the month of māgha (January/February)."

 

GANESH CHATURTI

An annual festival honours Ganesha for ten days, starting on Ganesha Chaturthi, which typically falls in late August or early September. The festival begins with people bringing in clay idols of Ganesha, symbolising Ganesha's visit. The festival culminates on the day of Ananta Chaturdashi, when idols (murtis) of Ganesha are immersed in the most convenient body of water. Some families have a tradition of immersion on the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, or 7th day. In 1893, Lokmanya Tilak transformed this annual Ganesha festival from private family celebrations into a grand public event. He did so "to bridge the gap between the Brahmins and the non-Brahmins and find an appropriate context in which to build a new grassroots unity between them" in his nationalistic strivings against the British in Maharashtra. Because of Ganesha's wide appeal as "the god for Everyman", Tilak chose him as a rallying point for Indian protest against British rule. Tilak was the first to install large public images of Ganesha in pavilions, and he established the practice of submerging all the public images on the tenth day. Today, Hindus across India celebrate the Ganapati festival with great fervour, though it is most popular in the state of Maharashtra. The festival also assumes huge proportions in Mumbai, Pune, and in the surrounding belt of Ashtavinayaka temples.

 

TEMPLES

In Hindu temples, Ganesha is depicted in various ways: as an acolyte or subordinate deity (pãrśva-devatã); as a deity related to the principal deity (parivāra-devatã); or as the principal deity of the temple (pradhāna), treated similarly as the highest gods of the Hindu pantheon. As the god of transitions, he is placed at the doorway of many Hindu temples to keep out the unworthy, which is analogous to his role as Parvati’s doorkeeper. In addition, several shrines are dedicated to Ganesha himself, of which the Ashtavinayak (lit. "eight Ganesha (shrines)") in Maharashtra are particularly well known. Located within a 100-kilometer radius of the city of Pune, each of these eight shrines celebrates a particular form of Ganapati, complete with its own lore and legend. The eight shrines are: Morgaon, Siddhatek, Pali, Mahad, Theur, Lenyadri, Ozar and Ranjangaon.

 

There are many other important Ganesha temples at the following locations: Wai in Maharashtra; Ujjain in Madhya Pradesh; Jodhpur, Nagaur and Raipur (Pali) in Rajasthan; Baidyanath in Bihar; Baroda, Dholaka, and Valsad in Gujarat and Dhundiraj Temple in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. Prominent Ganesha temples in southern India include the following: Kanipakam in Chittoor; the Jambukeśvara Temple at Tiruchirapalli; at Rameshvaram and Suchindram in Tamil Nadu; at Malliyur, Kottarakara, Pazhavangadi, Kasargod in Kerala, Hampi, and Idagunji in Karnataka; and Bhadrachalam in Andhra Pradesh.

 

T. A. Gopinatha notes, "Every village however small has its own image of Vighneśvara (Vigneshvara) with or without a temple to house it in. At entrances of villages and forts, below pīpaḹa (Sacred fig) trees [...], in a niche [...] in temples of Viṣṇu (Vishnu) as well as Śiva (Shiva) and also in separate shrines specially constructed in Śiva temples [...]; the figure of Vighneśvara is invariably seen." Ganesha temples have also been built outside of India, including southeast Asia, Nepal (including the four Vinayaka shrines in the Kathmandu valley), and in several western countries.

 

RISE TO PROMINENCE

 

FIRST APEARANCE

Ganesha appeared in his classic form as a clearly recognizable deity with well-defined iconographic attributes in the early 4th to 5th centuries. Shanti Lal Nagar says that the earliest known iconic image of Ganesha is in the niche of the Shiva temple at Bhumra, which has been dated to the Gupta period. His independent cult appeared by about the 10th century. Narain summarizes the controversy between devotees and academics regarding the development of Ganesha as follows:

 

What is inscrutable is the somewhat dramatic appearance of Gaņeśa on the historical scene. His antecedents are not clear. His wide acceptance and popularity, which transcend sectarian and territorial limits, are indeed amazing. On the one hand there is the pious belief of the orthodox devotees in Gaņeśa's Vedic origins and in the Purāṇic explanations contained in the confusing, but nonetheless interesting, mythology. On the other hand there are doubts about the existence of the idea and the icon of this deity" before the fourth to fifth century A.D. ... [I]n my opinion, indeed there is no convincing evidence of the existence of this divinity prior to the fifth century.

 

POSSIBLE INFLUENCES

Courtright reviews various speculative theories about the early history of Ganesha, including supposed tribal traditions and animal cults, and dismisses all of them in this way:

 

In the post 600 BC period there is evidence of people and places named after the animal. The motif appears on coins and sculptures.

 

Thapan's book on the development of Ganesha devotes a chapter to speculations about the role elephants had in early India but concludes that, "although by the second century CE the elephant-headed yakṣa form exists it cannot be presumed to represent Gaṇapati-Vināyaka. There is no evidence of a deity by this name having an elephant or elephant-headed form at this early stage. Gaṇapati-Vināyaka had yet to make his debut."

 

One theory of the origin of Ganesha is that he gradually came to prominence in connection with the four Vinayakas (Vināyakas). In Hindu mythology, the Vināyakas were a group of four troublesome demons who created obstacles and difficulties but who were easily propitiated. The name Vināyaka is a common name for Ganesha both in the Purāṇas and in Buddhist Tantras. Krishan is one of the academics who accepts this view, stating flatly of Ganesha, "He is a non-vedic god. His origin is to be traced to the four Vināyakas, evil spirits, of the Mānavagŗhyasūtra (7th–4th century BCE) who cause various types of evil and suffering". Depictions of elephant-headed human figures, which some identify with Ganesha, appear in Indian art and coinage as early as the 2nd century. According to Ellawala, the elephant-headed Ganesha as lord of the Ganas was known to the people of Sri Lanka in the early pre-Christian era.

 

A metal plate depiction of Ganesha had been discovered in 1993, in Iran, it dated back to 1,200 BCE. Another one was discovered much before, in Lorestan Province of Iran.

 

First Ganesha's terracotta images are from 1st century CE found in Ter, Pal, Verrapuram and Chandraketugarh. These figures are small, with elephant head, two arms, and chubby physique. The earliest Ganesha icons in stone were carved in Mathura during Kushan times (2nd-3rd centuries CE).

 

VEDIC AND EPIC LITERATURE

The title "Leader of the group" (Sanskrit: gaṇapati) occurs twice in the Rig Veda, but in neither case does it refer to the modern Ganesha. The term appears in RV 2.23.1 as a title for Brahmanaspati, according to commentators. While this verse doubtless refers to Brahmanaspati, it was later adopted for worship of Ganesha and is still used today. In rejecting any claim that this passage is evidence of Ganesha in the Rig Veda, Ludo Rocher says that it "clearly refers to Bṛhaspati—who is the deity of the hymn—and Bṛhaspati only". Equally clearly, the second passage (RV 10.112.9) refers to Indra, who is given the epithet 'gaṇapati', translated "Lord of the companies (of the Maruts)." However, Rocher notes that the more recent Ganapatya literature often quotes the Rigvedic verses to give Vedic respectability to Ganesha .

 

Two verses in texts belonging to Black Yajurveda, Maitrāyaṇīya Saṃhitā (2.9.1) and Taittirīya Āraṇyaka (10.1), appeal to a deity as "the tusked one" (Dantiḥ), "elephant-faced" (Hastimukha), and "with a curved trunk" (Vakratuņḍa). These names are suggestive of Ganesha, and the 14th century commentator Sayana explicitly establishes this identification. The description of Dantin, possessing a twisted trunk (vakratuṇḍa) and holding a corn-sheaf, a sugar cane, and a club, is so characteristic of the Puranic Ganapati that Heras says "we cannot resist to accept his full identification with this Vedic Dantin". However, Krishan considers these hymns to be post-Vedic additions. Thapan reports that these passages are "generally considered to have been interpolated". Dhavalikar says, "the references to the elephant-headed deity in the Maitrāyaṇī Saṃhitā have been proven to be very late interpolations, and thus are not very helpful for determining the early formation of the deity".

 

Ganesha does not appear in Indian epic literature that is dated to the Vedic period. A late interpolation to the epic poem Mahabharata says that the sage Vyasa (Vyāsa) asked Ganesha to serve as his scribe to transcribe the poem as he dictated it to him. Ganesha agreed but only on condition that Vyasa recite the poem uninterrupted, that is, without pausing. The sage agreed, but found that to get any rest he needed to recite very complex passages so Ganesha would have to ask for clarifications. The story is not accepted as part of the original text by the editors of the critical edition of the Mahabharata, in which the twenty-line story is relegated to a footnote in an appendix. The story of Ganesha acting as the scribe occurs in 37 of the 59 manuscripts consulted during preparation of the critical edition. Ganesha's association with mental agility and learning is one reason he is shown as scribe for Vyāsa's dictation of the Mahabharata in this interpolation. Richard L. Brown dates the story to the 8th century, and Moriz Winternitz concludes that it was known as early as c. 900, but it was not added to the Mahabharata some 150 years later. Winternitz also notes that a distinctive feature in South Indian manuscripts of the Mahabharata is their omission of this Ganesha legend. The term vināyaka is found in some recensions of the Śāntiparva and Anuśāsanaparva that are regarded as interpolations. A reference to Vighnakartṛīṇām ("Creator of Obstacles") in Vanaparva is also believed to be an interpolation and does not appear in the critical edition.

 

PURANIC PERIOD

Stories about Ganesha often occur in the Puranic corpus. Brown notes while the Puranas "defy precise chronological ordering", the more detailed narratives of Ganesha's life are in the late texts, c. 600–1300. Yuvraj Krishan says that the Puranic myths about the birth of Ganesha and how he acquired an elephant's head are in the later Puranas, which were composed from c. 600 onwards. He elaborates on the matter to say that references to Ganesha in the earlier Puranas, such as the Vayu and Brahmanda Puranas, are later interpolations made during the 7th to 10th centuries.

 

In his survey of Ganesha's rise to prominence in Sanskrit literature, Ludo Rocher notes that:

 

Above all, one cannot help being struck by the fact that the numerous stories surrounding Gaṇeśa concentrate on an unexpectedly limited number of incidents. These incidents are mainly three: his birth and parenthood, his elephant head, and his single tusk. Other incidents are touched on in the texts, but to a far lesser extent.

 

Ganesha's rise to prominence was codified in the 9th century, when he was formally included as one of the five primary deities of Smartism. The 9th-century philosopher Adi Shankara popularized the "worship of the five forms" (Panchayatana puja) system among orthodox Brahmins of the Smarta tradition. This worship practice invokes the five deities Ganesha, Vishnu, Shiva, Devi, and Surya. Adi Shankara instituted the tradition primarily to unite the principal deities of these five major sects on an equal status. This formalized the role of Ganesha as a complementary deity.

 

SCRIPTURES

Once Ganesha was accepted as one of the five principal deities of Brahmanism, some Brahmins (brāhmaṇas) chose to worship Ganesha as their principal deity. They developed the Ganapatya tradition, as seen in the Ganesha Purana and the Mudgala Purana.

 

The date of composition for the Ganesha Purana and the Mudgala Purana - and their dating relative to one another - has sparked academic debate. Both works were developed over time and contain age-layered strata. Anita Thapan reviews comments about dating and provides her own judgement. "It seems likely that the core of the Ganesha Purana appeared around the twelfth and thirteenth centuries", she says, "but was later interpolated." Lawrence W. Preston considers the most reasonable date for the Ganesha Purana to be between 1100 and 1400, which coincides with the apparent age of the sacred sites mentioned by the text.

 

R.C. Hazra suggests that the Mudgala Purana is older than the Ganesha Purana, which he dates between 1100 and 1400. However, Phyllis Granoff finds problems with this relative dating and concludes that the Mudgala Purana was the last of the philosophical texts concerned with Ganesha. She bases her reasoning on the fact that, among other internal evidence, the Mudgala Purana specifically mentions the Ganesha Purana as one of the four Puranas (the Brahma, the Brahmanda, the Ganesha, and the Mudgala Puranas) which deal at length with Ganesha. While the kernel of the text must be old, it was interpolated until the 17th and 18th centuries as the worship of Ganapati became more important in certain regions. Another highly regarded scripture, the Ganapati Atharvashirsa, was probably composed during the 16th or 17th centuries.

 

BEYOND INDIA AND HINDUISM

Commercial and cultural contacts extended India's influence in western and southeast Asia. Ganesha is one of a number of Hindu deities who reached foreign lands as a result.

 

Ganesha was particularly worshipped by traders and merchants, who went out of India for commercial ventures. From approximately the 10th century onwards, new networks of exchange developed including the formation of trade guilds and a resurgence of money circulation. During this time, Ganesha became the principal deity associated with traders. The earliest inscription invoking Ganesha before any other deity is associated with the merchant community.

 

Hindus migrated to Maritime Southeast Asia and took their culture, including Ganesha, with them. Statues of Ganesha are found throughout the region, often beside Shiva sanctuaries. The forms of Ganesha found in Hindu art of Java, Bali, and Borneo show specific regional influences. The spread of Hindu culture to southeast Asia established Ganesha in modified forms in Burma, Cambodia, and Thailand. In Indochina, Hinduism and Buddhism were practiced side by side, and mutual influences can be seen in the iconography of Ganesha in the region. In Thailand, Cambodia, and among the Hindu classes of the Chams in Vietnam, Ganesha was mainly thought of as a remover of obstacles. Today in Buddhist Thailand, Ganesha is regarded as a remover of obstacles, the god of success.

 

Before the arrival of Islam, Afghanistan had close cultural ties with India, and the adoration of both Hindu and Buddhist deities was practiced. Examples of sculptures from the 5th to the 7th centuries have survived, suggesting that the worship of Ganesha was then in vogue in the region.

 

Ganesha appears in Mahayana Buddhism, not only in the form of the Buddhist god Vināyaka, but also as a Hindu demon form with the same name. His image appears in Buddhist sculptures during the late Gupta period. As the Buddhist god Vināyaka, he is often shown dancing. This form, called Nṛtta Ganapati, was popular in northern India, later adopted in Nepal, and then in Tibet. In Nepal, the Hindu form of Ganesha, known as Heramba, is popular; he has five heads and rides a lion. Tibetan representations of Ganesha show ambivalent views of him. A Tibetan rendering of Ganapati is tshogs bdag. In one Tibetan form, he is shown being trodden under foot by Mahākāla, (Shiva) a popular Tibetan deity. Other depictions show him as the Destroyer of Obstacles, and sometimes dancing. Ganesha appears in China and Japan in forms that show distinct regional character. In northern China, the earliest known stone statue of Ganesha carries an inscription dated to 531. In Japan, where Ganesha is known as Kangiten, the Ganesha cult was first mentioned in 806.

 

The canonical literature of Jainism does not mention the worship of Ganesha. However, Ganesha is worshipped by most Jains, for whom he appears to have taken over certain functions of Kubera. Jain connections with the trading community support the idea that Jainism took up Ganesha worship as a result of commercial connections. The earliest known Jain Ganesha statue dates to about the 9th century. A 15th-century Jain text lists procedures for the installation of Ganapati images. Images of Ganesha appear in the Jain temples of Rajasthan and Gujarat.

 

WIKIPEDIA

ECB President Christine Lagarde explains the Governing Council's monetary policy decisions and answers questions from journalists at the Governing Council press conference held on 10 September 2020 at 14:30 CEST in Frankfurt am Main.

 

Photo by Martin Lamberts / European Central Bank

I could see the tower of a church from the main road. I saw it from a good two miles away, towering over the mature trees of a wood.

 

It must be one heck of a church I thought, turning down the lane leading to it, to find the lane lead to Worstead.

 

Worstead: that explained it. A village so associated with wool, a type of woolen cloth is named after it.

 

Beside the church is the market square, lined with fine buildings, and to the west, St Mary. A huge cathedral of a church. After snapping the village, I walk to the porch on the south side and go in, smiling.

 

I was met by a warden who saw the look of delight on my face, and took me on a grand tour. How lucky was I?

 

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

 

In the reign of Edward the Confessor, the lordship of this town belonged to the abbot of St. Bennet of Holm, with 2 carucates and an half of land, 8 villains, 30 borderers, 2 carucates in demean, 3 among the tenants, 8 acres of meadow, paunage for 16 swine, a mill, and 3 socmen, valued at 60s. and at the survey at 4l.

 

There were 2 churches with 28 acres, valued therein, and was for the provision of the monks.

 

At the survey, Robert, an officer of the cross-bow-men, held it of the abbot; it was one leuca long, and half a leuca broad and a perch, and paid 18d. gelt. St. Bennet's abbey held also in the said town, in King Edward's time, a carucate of land, with 2 villains, 10 borderers, one carucate in demean, and 2 among the tenants and 2 acres of meadow, &c. valued at 40s. (fn. 1)

 

Odo, son of Robert, the cross-bowman, assumed, according to the custom of that age, the name of Warsted, from this his town and lordship; he held it of the abbot by one knight's fee, being the gift of King Canute to the abbey on his foundation of it. (fn. 2)

 

This Odo. and Robert his son, gave lands to the abbey, and the mill at Bordestede. He was father of Peter, whose son Philip held one fee in the 20th of Henry III.

 

Nicholas son of Philip de Wursted, gave to the abbot all his lands here by deed, dated in the 2d of Edward I. Henry being then abbot.

 

Richard de Worstede was also a son of Odo, and had by Margaret his wife, daughter of Robert de Manteby, Sir Robert de Worstede, who died sans issue.—This Sir Robert and Sir John de Worstede, were witnesses to a deed of confirmation, of Jeffrey, son of Bartholomew de Glanvile, to Bromholm priory.

 

The temporalities of the abbot in 1428, were 3l. 12s. ob. q. This came at the Dissolution, to the see of Norwich; and in the 3d and 4th of Philip and Mary, was farmed of the Bishop, at 41s. and 3d. per ann. by Bertram Themilthorp.

 

The prior of Pentney had a lordship, granted to that house by John de Worstede, containing a messuage, a carucate of land, a mill, 50s. rent, 10 acres of wood, with the whole pond of Worstede and Crowbeck, and the whole alder carr, regranted by Simon the prior, to John for life.

 

In the year 1328, the temporalities of this prory were valued at 8l. 10s. 4d.—On the Dissolution, May 22, in the 36th of Henry VIII. it was granted to John Spencer.

 

The prior also of Hempton had a manor, valued with a mill, &c. at 4l. 8s. 11d. which on the Dissolution was granted as above, to John Spencer. Leonard Spencer and Catherina his wife, sold both these lordships to Robert Paston, and Thomas Thimblethorp, with their appertenances in Sloley, Westwick, &c. on June 3, in the 8th of Elizabeth; and after they are said to be aliened to — Utber, and so to — Mitson.

 

Matthew de Gunton had a manor here which he granted to William, son of William de Stalham, on his marriage with Isabel his daughter, being 49s. 3d. rent. This came to Sir Jeffrey Wythe, by his marriage with the daughter and heir of Sir William Stalham.

 

In the 9th of Edward II. Nicholas de Salicibus or of the Willows, and Elen his wife, conveyed to Jeffrey Wythe, and Isabel his wife, the 5th part of 28 messuages, 114 acres of land, 5 of turbary, with 27s. and 8d. rent here, in Dilham and Smalburgh, settled on Isabel; and Wynesia, widow of Sir Oliver Wythe, released to William Dunning of this town, all her right of dower in this town, and Westwick.

 

After this it came to Sir William Calthorp, by the marriage of Amy, daughter and heir of Sir John Wythe, and was sold by Edward Calthorp, Esq. of Kirby Cane, December 8, in the 21st of Henry VIII. to Leonard Spencer of Blofield, Gent. for 40l. in hand paid, and 40 marks more on full assurance being made. John Spencer was lord in the 2d of Edward VI. and Leonard Spencer in 1572.

 

Erpingham and Gaines's manor in Irstede, held by John Gross, Esq. at his death in 1408, which he left to his widow Margaret, extended into this town. John Skarburgh, Gent. had a prœcipe to deliver it to Miles Bayspoole, Gent. in the first of James I.

 

Before this, in the 17th of Elizabeth, William Chytham conveyed it to William Tymberley. The Grosses were early enfeoffed of a lordship under the abbot of Holm. Reginald le Gross was lord in the reign of Henry III. and had a charter for a weekly mercate on Friday.

 

Sir Oliver de Ingham held here and in Ingham, a knight's fee of Robert de Tateshale, in the first of Edward I. This came afterwards by the heiress of Ingham to the Stapletons; and in the 2d of Richard II. Sir Roger Boys, &c. trustees, aliened to the prior of the Holy Trinity of Ingham, a messuage, with 84 acres of land, 3 of meadow, one of pasture, in Worstede and Scothow, by license.

 

Thomas Moore, &c. aliened to the said convent, in the 16th of that King, 8 messuages, 221 acres of land, 22 of meadow, 4 of moor, and the rent of 11s. 11d. per ann. in this town, Ingham, Walcot, &c. held of the honour of Eye.

 

In the 3d of Henry IV. the prior's manor, late Sir Oliver de Ingham's, was held of Sir Constantine Clifton, of the barony of Tateshale.

 

The prior of Bromholm had also a lordship. In the 3d of Henry IV. the heirs of William Smalburgh held here and in Barton, &c. half a fee of the prior, with William Sywardby, and they of the Earl of Suffolk, as part of the honour of Eye, in 1428. The temporalities of this monastery were 104s. 2d. ob.

 

After the Dissolution, on May 26, in the 6th year of Edward VI. it was granted to Henry Grey Duke of Suffolk.

 

William Gillet, son and heir of William, had a messuage, a garden, 100 acres of land, 6 of meadow, 20 of pasture, and 2 of wood, called Fenn's and Skitt's, in the 23d of Elizabeth. John Kempt aliened it September 1, in the 7th of King James I. to Edmund Themilthorpe.

 

Thomas Seive of Worsted, had land here by the marriage of Margarel, one of the daughters of Sir James de Ilketeshale, Knt. of Suffolk, in the reign of Henry VI. she dying about the 30th of that King, left 3 daughters and coheirs; Cecilia, married to John Ovy, who left his lands here by will, in 1472, to Thomas his son, &c. by Emme his wife. Jane, a daughter and coheir of Seive, married William Smith; and Margaret, the 3d, Thomas Jeffrey.

 

The tenths were 14l. 10s. ob. q Deducted 1l. 19s. 1d. ob.

 

The town is seated in a flat country, and has a weekly mercate on Saturday

 

Worsted stuffs are said to have taken that name from their being first manufactured here. I find them mentioned in the 2d year of Edward III. and the weavers and workers were then by parliament enjoined to work them up to a better assise than they had done; and an enquiry was to be made after the behaviour of Robert P - - - the alnager for these stuffs.

 

Many privileges were after granted to the workers of them, Ao. 1 Richard II. &c. the merchants came into England, as appears in the 37th of Edward III. to purchase them.

 

The Church is dedicated to St. Mary, has a nave, 2 isles, and a chancel covered with lead, and a square tower with 6 bells, and was a rectory in the patronage of the family of De Worstede.

 

Sir Robert de Worsted, son of Richard de Worstede, gave by deed, (fn. 3) sans date, to the priory of Norwich, the patronage of this church, about the beginning of the reign of King Henry III. to which Sir John de Wirstede, Bartholomew de Reedham, Eustace de Berningham, &c. were witnesses; and by another deed, he gave to them the chapel of St. Andrew, in this town: witnesses, Sir G. de Bocland, John de Wirstede, Jordan de Soukeville, then an itinerant justice in Norfolk, which was confirmed by Pandulf Bishop of Norwich.

 

He also gave them lands with certain villains, the abbot of Holm also confirmed it.

 

Sir Reginald le Gross quitclaimed all his right in the aforesaid church and chapel, to Simon the prior, and the convent of Norwich.

 

Thomas de Blundevile Bishop of Norwich, also confirmed to them the said church, to take place on the decease of John de Wurchestede, and Adam de Wurchestede, who then held it in 1226; and in 1256, on the 8th of the calends of August, a vicarage was settled on the appropriation of the said church to the monks of Norwich, when a manse or house was given to the vicar, with an acre of land, by the chapel of St. Andrew with all the altarage of the church, (except the tithes of the mills) and the rents of assise belonging to the said chapel, and the oblations thereof; but if the oblations and profits of the said chapel exceeded 5 marks, the remainder was to go to the prior and convent, and the vicar was to repair the said chapel, and to find all ornaments, &c.

 

The vicar was also to have tithe of flax, hemp, and all other small tithes, it was appropriated to the prior's table, and to the cellarer of the priory; but after this, in the first of April following, it was appropriated entirely to the prior's table, and the church of Hemlington in Norfolk, appropriated to him instead of this.

 

In the reign of Edward I. there belonged to the appropriated rectory, a house, with 27 acres and a rood of land, and the church was valued at 25 marks, the vicarage at 5l. Peter-pence, 12d. and the portion of Kerbrook preceptory was 3s.—The prior had also a manor, Edward I. in his 35th year granting him free warren.

 

Vicars.

 

1256, Warin de Festorton, instituted vicar, presented by the prior and convent of Norwich.

 

John occurs vicar in 1299.

 

1304, Edmund Johnes, vicar.

 

Peter de Reynham, vicar.

 

1346, William de Aldeby.

 

1353, Oliver de Wytton.

 

1355, Roger de Felthorp.

 

1357, John de Massingham.

 

1365, John de Kynneburle; in his time, Ao. 2d of Richard II. the chancel of this church was new built; the prior granted 13 oaks out of Plumsted wood, and timber also out of St. Leonard's wood; and the expenses in money were 24l. 4l. 4d.

 

1386, Edmund Martyn, vicar.

 

On the dissolution of the priory, the manor belonging to it, with the rectory, and the patronage of the vicarage, were granted to the dean and chapter of Norwich; and the vicarage is valued at 10l. per ann.

 

Mr. Henry Aldred, vicar.

 

In 1603, William Fleming, vicar, returned 296 communicants 1730.

 

1660, Edmund Wharton, (fn. 4) occurs vicar.

 

Mr. William Berney.

 

Richard Oram, by the dean and chapter of Norwich.

 

1762, Ephr. Megoe.

 

On a gravestone in the chancel,

 

Hic lapis in pannis Spicer tenet ossa Johannis Qui Quadringentesimo pius XL et iii - - - - Anno.

 

Hic jacet D'ns. Johs. Yop. quo'da' Rector. Ecclie de Boton.

 

¶Sir Robert Camownde, priest, was buried in 1482, in the chapel of St. John, of this church, and wills that all the said chapel be paved with marbyll stone, and to the gravestone of John Ovy, with his goods. (fn. 5) —Richard Watls buried in St. John Baptist's chapel 1509, and I will have a prest to sing and pray 6 years in the church except the Fryday in ev'ry week, in the chapel of St. Andrew of Worsted. Agnes Watts, his widow, buried in the said chapel, 1529, and benefactrix to the guilds of our Lady and St. Thomas, and to the repair of St. Andrew's chapel, and gives meadow land to find two lamps in the church for ever, if the King's laws will permit, otherwise to be sold and to buy cattle for that purpose.

 

Here was also St. John Baptist's guild. In the church were these arms; Gules, on a fess, argent, three flowers, azure, between three popinjays, borne by—prior of Norwich. Argent, a cross, sable, the priory arms. Calthorp and Stapleton.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/topographical-hist-norfolk/vol1...

 

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

 

As a measure of how civilised East Anglia is, it is a simple and cheap matter to explore the region by train and bicycle. There is a flat rate of nine pounds a day for unlimited travel between stations in Suffolk, Norfolk and East Cambridgeshire. You can take a bike on any train for a pound, although in reality conductors rarely charge for this service. This practice dates back to pre-privatisation days, and Anglia Railways and One Trains have continued to honour it, for which I am mightily grateful. The Suffolk and Norfolk Churches sites would not be so extensive without it.

 

I left Ipswich at twenty to eight. It was a thinly bright April morning, the sun without power beyond dazzling through the haze in the eastern sky. I was glad of my jacket, but also glad I had sun glasses with me - it was going to be a perfect day for a bike ride.

 

As the train plodded through Ipswich's monotonous northern suburbs, I examined the ordnance survey map. I flicked through Pevsner and Mortlock, as industrial units gave way to green fields, copses and the winding Gipping. Restless, I gazed out the window. A swan awoke on a lake near Needham Market, stretching itself and beating its wings into life. Crows raided a skip on rubble near the Stowmarket paint factory. Then we were really in the countryside, rushing headlong through the sleepy fields beyond Haughley and Mendelsham. Near Finningham, a large female deer cowered silently in the hedge, not ten metres from the track. A few minutes later, and a wise old hare huddled in a furrow, flat-eared, patient.

 

The train pulled into the gathering surprise of Norwich. I hauled my bike a couple of platforms over to the Sheringham line. Other people out for the day got on, including a couple dressed in vintage railway costumes. I assumed they were bound for the steam line at Sheringham. Again, the monotony of another city's suburbs petered out into agricultural business, this time in bright sunshine, and so it was that just after nine o'clock we arrived at Worstead station. I was the only person to get off. "See you later" called the conductor cheerily as I rode off of the platform into the lane, and of course he was right. There is only one train that shuttles back and forth along this line all day, and he was in charge of it.

 

I cycled from the station up into the village, a distance of about two miles. I didn't pass anyone, and here in the large village there was nobody about, just a fat cat lazily rolling in the village square. The sun was cutting the haze, the sky wide and blue. It was like being in France.

 

The church is absolutely enormous, and hemmed in a tight little graveyard. My resolution to take more distant shots went right out the window. Like Salle, and Southwold in Suffolk, St Mary was all built in one go, pretty much. This happened in the late 14th century. As at Salle, it is reflective of a large number of bequests from different people over a short period rather than anyone fabulously rich doing it on their own, and the money, of course, came from wool. Worstead is still the name of a fabric today.

 

I said it was pretty much built at one go, but there was still plenty of money about in the 15th century to raise the clerestory and install a hammerbeam roof. This seems to have been such an ambitious project that flying buttresses had to be installed on top of the aisles to hold the top of the nave up, an expedient measure that has left the building both interesting and beautiful.

 

Inside, I feared another Happisburgh, but it was gorgeous. Stepping out of the sunlight into the slight chill of a vast open space, I wandered around feasting on this stunningly lovely building.

 

As regular users of the sites will know, I don't always warm to big churches, but St Mary is so pretty inside that it is hard not to love it. This is partly helped by the removal of all pews and benches from the aisle. Those that remain in the body of the church are lovely 18th century box pews, quite out of keeping with the medieval nature of the rest of the building, but quirky and oddly delightful. The great tower arch is elegant, and is thrown into relief by the towering font cover. The ringing gallery under the tower is dated 1501, and is reminiscent of the one at Cawston. The tower screen below it takes the breath away, and you find yourself looking around to see where it could have come from. In fact, it is almost certainly a work of the Victorians, but it is pretty well perfect. The paintings in the dado are apparently copies of windows by Sir Joshua Reynolds at New College, Oxford.

 

Worstead is rightly famous for its screen, but this is more because of its height, elegance and completeness than it is its authenticity. The figures on the dado have been repainted so recklessly that it is rather hard to see who some of them were ever meant to be. As at Woolpit in Suffolk, the Victorians appear to have repainted them more with an eye to enthusiasm than accuracy. I stood there, fantasising, making up stories, until, alongside familiar figures like St Peter, St James and St Matthew, I had identified St Lassitude, the patron Saint of a quiet night in, depicted reading his book. Other Saints, identified by their symbols, include St Quirinus with his hamster, and St Obligamus with his golden pineapple. Or so it seemed to me.

 

Not much less odd are the two figures on the extreme right. The Victorians do not appear to have repainted them. The first shows a man holding three nails, and is probably St William of Norwich, more familiar from the screen at Loddon. The second shows a figure crucified, arms tied to the spans. This may be the infamous Uncumber, the bearded lady of early medieval mythology - she grew a beard to fend off unwanted suitors, although you can't help thinking there'd be a niche market for that kind of thing somewhere on the internet. Later, she was crucified, probably upside down. This figure is probably a woman, so nothing seems to fit better, although she isn't bearded as far as I could see. Situated on the extreme right, she is reflected by a crucified Christ as the Man of Sorrows on the extreme left.

 

Across the top rail, a dedicatory inscription winds, mysterious and beautiful.

 

Either side of the chancel arch and screen, the two aisle chapels are both in use, which is unusual and lovely. Both have small screens, each with just four figures. That on the north side is particularly lovely, and is where the blessed sacrament is reserved. The four figures are St Peter, St Bartholomew, St John the Baptist and St John the Divine. At least three of these are also on the rood screen, suggesting that either the images there are wholly Victorian, or these aisle screens came originally from elsewhere.

 

The south aisle chapel is simpler - it is here you enter the church through the priest door. The screen features another St Bartholomew, along with St Lawrence, St Philip and a Bishop.

 

St Mary is a building to wander around in, a place to enjoy for its great beauty rather than to interrogate for its medieval authenticity. As you turn corners, vistas open up; the view from the font to the south door, for example, or that back to the west from the chancel. All perfect, all stunning. The high church nature of the modern furnishings chimes perfectly with these architectural treats. And there are other significant medieval survivals - a fine brass of a Catholic priest, scraps of wall painting beside the chancel arch, and so on.

 

As at other churches in this benefice, the war memorial is complemented by photographs of all those commemorated. What a splendid idea, and what a labour of love. Also in common with other churches around here, St Mary has a second hand bookstall. As I explored the Worstead area, I found myself buying more and more of them, until by the time I got back to Ipswich station that evening, my rucksack was laden down with a dozen or more.

 

Simon Knott, April 2005

 

www.norfolkchurches.co.uk/worstead/worstead.htm

But explain to school kids what’s different, because they have to wonder. While establishments of all types are open at full capacity, the classroom routine is little changed: Students must continue to wear masks—a requirement that baffles the frak out of me. Is it possible reason that most of them have not been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2)/COVID-19? For adults, the mask-mandate is only lifted for those people who have had the shot(s). Children are extremely unlikely to be infected, manifest the disease, become seriously sick, or die. So why muzzle them?

 

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, children ages 0-4 account for 2.1 percent of U.S. COVID cases; 10.4 percent for 5-17 year-olds. Deaths: Zero percent and 0.1 percent, respectively. Citizens ages 18-49 account for 4.7 percent of total deaths, so teachers are probably pretty safe—especially if vaccinated. So, again, I ask: Why muzzle the kids? This morning, my wife and I passed by Birney Elementary as kids arrived; they all wore masks, and parents, too!

 

I really felt sorry for the youngsters—and angry for their being punished so severely. Already, they suffered enough from forced isolation and remote-learning during most of 2020 and the first few months of this year. Meanwhile, vaccinated adults emerge to freedom. They can uncover their faces, no longer social distance, and even (gasp) touch one another (someone should sell a line of “Free Hugs—I’m vaccinated T-Shirts”).

 

How does any of this discussion relate to the photo? I’m glad you asked. The Wells Fargo branch in San Diego’s Hillcrest neighborhood closed when Governor Gavin Newsom shut down California in mid-March 2020. Annie and I passed by the arriving school kids on our way to the plaza where is the bank. Today, the financial institution finally reopened—doors flung wide like open arms ready to hug customers. We had no business there, I only stopped for the photo.

 

Someone explain to me: We were all supposed to stop everything for 15 days to “flatten the curve“. So why were we imprisoned for 15 months? Because based on CDC data, people over 65 were highest risk—accounting for 80.1 percent of U.S. COVID-19 deaths but making up only 16.5 percent of the population. By comparison, 64.5 percent are age 49 and younger and considerably lower risk of dying.

 

But that’s a pointless topic for now; future forensic analysis of the pandemic will (hopefully) reveal what were and weren’t effective combative tactics and offer meaningful recommendations for responding to the next outbreak. For the moment, California is open and citizens can feel safe(r).

Ok here it is. I took one image of the model using the strobes . I had the camera on Auto bracket mode , so the dark frame was taken immediately after that, before the flashes could recharge. The dark frame is for the outside detail coming in through the cracks in the door and the first shot is for the model only. LAter.. I had the model walk out and took a bunch of different exposures of the barn by itself. I used photomatix Image blending to compile them. Strobes were used in that image as well but were moved to different places for each frame to ensure an even distribution. later in photoshop I used the pen tool to vector out the model and created a mask ( Bottom Right) since the hair was really difficult, I chopped it off with the pen tool mask and duplicated the original (1) picture, placed it on top and set the blend mode to either overlay or multiply... whatever one leaves lighter (hair) detail and makes darker areas transparent. Thats how I got the hair edges so finite. A separate mask was also used to get the outside detail from the second image and place it on top of layer 3 so that it appears that My camera has that kind of dynamic range. :) YEah.. I cheated :) other than that, I used the basic retouching like skin smoothing and some toning using curves. whole thing took about an hour and a half.

 

Link to final img

www.flickr.com/photos/40889933@N07/4879681429/in/photostr...

Let me see if I can explain what happened this afternoon. I'm walking a path along this slow moving river and as I look on the bank between the river and the path I see this beautiful Pink Lady Slipper slipping in and out of the sunlight. The colours change as the wind moves the leaves causing the sunlight to be in constant motion on this beautiful plant. I edge down the slope of the bank to get a better vantage point and sitting down in the wet moss of the river bank I begin to take photos.one click, 5 clicks and more. Who knows how many shots until I'm brought back to reality by my cell phone ringing. Guess who? My great friend the Dragon Master, I answer and we talk. I tell him I wish he were here to help me capture the beauty of the surroundings.

Here is one of the things I saw DM and its dedicated to you and our continuing friendship.

The words explain how the park area (roundish section) permitted some natural habitat to be created from the soil dredged out of the main shipping channel. All of this 'land' is about one mile further out in the waters of the bay than was originally the case. Over the years, the shoreline has been filled in to a great degree and although it is now being 'managed' in a much more sustainable way than it was for a long time, we cannot call it "original". The white area ringing the central section is the Middle Harbor Shoreline Park managed by the Port of Oakland together with the East Bay Regional Park District and is open for public recreation. It's actually quite nice and was the setting for several large picnic groups when I was there on a Saturday.

how i woke up with a numb arm.

(popular romances of the west of england in the background, which i realized wasn't the book i was reading in bed that afternoon+ my hand)

 

sepa entender ud. que si algo aparece en inglés aquí, no es por snobismo, sólo porque no me queda otra para hacerme entender con determinada/s persona/s con la/s que trato a dia/r/i/o. en particular con la que era destinataria del dibujo, claro.

 

I could see the tower of a church from the main road. I saw it from a good two miles away, towering over the mature trees of a wood.

 

It must be one heck of a church I thought, turning down the lane leading to it, to find the lane lead to Worstead.

 

Worstead: that explained it. A village so associated with wool, a type of woolen cloth is named after it.

 

Beside the church is the market square, lined with fine buildings, and to the west, St Mary. A huge cathedral of a church. After snapping the village, I walk to the porch on the south side and go in, smiling.

 

I was met by a warden who saw the look of delight on my face, and took me on a grand tour. How lucky was I?

 

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

 

In the reign of Edward the Confessor, the lordship of this town belonged to the abbot of St. Bennet of Holm, with 2 carucates and an half of land, 8 villains, 30 borderers, 2 carucates in demean, 3 among the tenants, 8 acres of meadow, paunage for 16 swine, a mill, and 3 socmen, valued at 60s. and at the survey at 4l.

 

There were 2 churches with 28 acres, valued therein, and was for the provision of the monks.

 

At the survey, Robert, an officer of the cross-bow-men, held it of the abbot; it was one leuca long, and half a leuca broad and a perch, and paid 18d. gelt. St. Bennet's abbey held also in the said town, in King Edward's time, a carucate of land, with 2 villains, 10 borderers, one carucate in demean, and 2 among the tenants and 2 acres of meadow, &c. valued at 40s. (fn. 1)

 

Odo, son of Robert, the cross-bowman, assumed, according to the custom of that age, the name of Warsted, from this his town and lordship; he held it of the abbot by one knight's fee, being the gift of King Canute to the abbey on his foundation of it. (fn. 2)

 

This Odo. and Robert his son, gave lands to the abbey, and the mill at Bordestede. He was father of Peter, whose son Philip held one fee in the 20th of Henry III.

 

Nicholas son of Philip de Wursted, gave to the abbot all his lands here by deed, dated in the 2d of Edward I. Henry being then abbot.

 

Richard de Worstede was also a son of Odo, and had by Margaret his wife, daughter of Robert de Manteby, Sir Robert de Worstede, who died sans issue.—This Sir Robert and Sir John de Worstede, were witnesses to a deed of confirmation, of Jeffrey, son of Bartholomew de Glanvile, to Bromholm priory.

 

The temporalities of the abbot in 1428, were 3l. 12s. ob. q. This came at the Dissolution, to the see of Norwich; and in the 3d and 4th of Philip and Mary, was farmed of the Bishop, at 41s. and 3d. per ann. by Bertram Themilthorp.

 

The prior of Pentney had a lordship, granted to that house by John de Worstede, containing a messuage, a carucate of land, a mill, 50s. rent, 10 acres of wood, with the whole pond of Worstede and Crowbeck, and the whole alder carr, regranted by Simon the prior, to John for life.

 

In the year 1328, the temporalities of this prory were valued at 8l. 10s. 4d.—On the Dissolution, May 22, in the 36th of Henry VIII. it was granted to John Spencer.

 

The prior also of Hempton had a manor, valued with a mill, &c. at 4l. 8s. 11d. which on the Dissolution was granted as above, to John Spencer. Leonard Spencer and Catherina his wife, sold both these lordships to Robert Paston, and Thomas Thimblethorp, with their appertenances in Sloley, Westwick, &c. on June 3, in the 8th of Elizabeth; and after they are said to be aliened to — Utber, and so to — Mitson.

 

Matthew de Gunton had a manor here which he granted to William, son of William de Stalham, on his marriage with Isabel his daughter, being 49s. 3d. rent. This came to Sir Jeffrey Wythe, by his marriage with the daughter and heir of Sir William Stalham.

 

In the 9th of Edward II. Nicholas de Salicibus or of the Willows, and Elen his wife, conveyed to Jeffrey Wythe, and Isabel his wife, the 5th part of 28 messuages, 114 acres of land, 5 of turbary, with 27s. and 8d. rent here, in Dilham and Smalburgh, settled on Isabel; and Wynesia, widow of Sir Oliver Wythe, released to William Dunning of this town, all her right of dower in this town, and Westwick.

 

After this it came to Sir William Calthorp, by the marriage of Amy, daughter and heir of Sir John Wythe, and was sold by Edward Calthorp, Esq. of Kirby Cane, December 8, in the 21st of Henry VIII. to Leonard Spencer of Blofield, Gent. for 40l. in hand paid, and 40 marks more on full assurance being made. John Spencer was lord in the 2d of Edward VI. and Leonard Spencer in 1572.

 

Erpingham and Gaines's manor in Irstede, held by John Gross, Esq. at his death in 1408, which he left to his widow Margaret, extended into this town. John Skarburgh, Gent. had a prœcipe to deliver it to Miles Bayspoole, Gent. in the first of James I.

 

Before this, in the 17th of Elizabeth, William Chytham conveyed it to William Tymberley. The Grosses were early enfeoffed of a lordship under the abbot of Holm. Reginald le Gross was lord in the reign of Henry III. and had a charter for a weekly mercate on Friday.

 

Sir Oliver de Ingham held here and in Ingham, a knight's fee of Robert de Tateshale, in the first of Edward I. This came afterwards by the heiress of Ingham to the Stapletons; and in the 2d of Richard II. Sir Roger Boys, &c. trustees, aliened to the prior of the Holy Trinity of Ingham, a messuage, with 84 acres of land, 3 of meadow, one of pasture, in Worstede and Scothow, by license.

 

Thomas Moore, &c. aliened to the said convent, in the 16th of that King, 8 messuages, 221 acres of land, 22 of meadow, 4 of moor, and the rent of 11s. 11d. per ann. in this town, Ingham, Walcot, &c. held of the honour of Eye.

 

In the 3d of Henry IV. the prior's manor, late Sir Oliver de Ingham's, was held of Sir Constantine Clifton, of the barony of Tateshale.

 

The prior of Bromholm had also a lordship. In the 3d of Henry IV. the heirs of William Smalburgh held here and in Barton, &c. half a fee of the prior, with William Sywardby, and they of the Earl of Suffolk, as part of the honour of Eye, in 1428. The temporalities of this monastery were 104s. 2d. ob.

 

After the Dissolution, on May 26, in the 6th year of Edward VI. it was granted to Henry Grey Duke of Suffolk.

 

William Gillet, son and heir of William, had a messuage, a garden, 100 acres of land, 6 of meadow, 20 of pasture, and 2 of wood, called Fenn's and Skitt's, in the 23d of Elizabeth. John Kempt aliened it September 1, in the 7th of King James I. to Edmund Themilthorpe.

 

Thomas Seive of Worsted, had land here by the marriage of Margarel, one of the daughters of Sir James de Ilketeshale, Knt. of Suffolk, in the reign of Henry VI. she dying about the 30th of that King, left 3 daughters and coheirs; Cecilia, married to John Ovy, who left his lands here by will, in 1472, to Thomas his son, &c. by Emme his wife. Jane, a daughter and coheir of Seive, married William Smith; and Margaret, the 3d, Thomas Jeffrey.

 

The tenths were 14l. 10s. ob. q Deducted 1l. 19s. 1d. ob.

 

The town is seated in a flat country, and has a weekly mercate on Saturday

 

Worsted stuffs are said to have taken that name from their being first manufactured here. I find them mentioned in the 2d year of Edward III. and the weavers and workers were then by parliament enjoined to work them up to a better assise than they had done; and an enquiry was to be made after the behaviour of Robert P - - - the alnager for these stuffs.

 

Many privileges were after granted to the workers of them, Ao. 1 Richard II. &c. the merchants came into England, as appears in the 37th of Edward III. to purchase them.

 

The Church is dedicated to St. Mary, has a nave, 2 isles, and a chancel covered with lead, and a square tower with 6 bells, and was a rectory in the patronage of the family of De Worstede.

 

Sir Robert de Worsted, son of Richard de Worstede, gave by deed, (fn. 3) sans date, to the priory of Norwich, the patronage of this church, about the beginning of the reign of King Henry III. to which Sir John de Wirstede, Bartholomew de Reedham, Eustace de Berningham, &c. were witnesses; and by another deed, he gave to them the chapel of St. Andrew, in this town: witnesses, Sir G. de Bocland, John de Wirstede, Jordan de Soukeville, then an itinerant justice in Norfolk, which was confirmed by Pandulf Bishop of Norwich.

 

He also gave them lands with certain villains, the abbot of Holm also confirmed it.

 

Sir Reginald le Gross quitclaimed all his right in the aforesaid church and chapel, to Simon the prior, and the convent of Norwich.

 

Thomas de Blundevile Bishop of Norwich, also confirmed to them the said church, to take place on the decease of John de Wurchestede, and Adam de Wurchestede, who then held it in 1226; and in 1256, on the 8th of the calends of August, a vicarage was settled on the appropriation of the said church to the monks of Norwich, when a manse or house was given to the vicar, with an acre of land, by the chapel of St. Andrew with all the altarage of the church, (except the tithes of the mills) and the rents of assise belonging to the said chapel, and the oblations thereof; but if the oblations and profits of the said chapel exceeded 5 marks, the remainder was to go to the prior and convent, and the vicar was to repair the said chapel, and to find all ornaments, &c.

 

The vicar was also to have tithe of flax, hemp, and all other small tithes, it was appropriated to the prior's table, and to the cellarer of the priory; but after this, in the first of April following, it was appropriated entirely to the prior's table, and the church of Hemlington in Norfolk, appropriated to him instead of this.

 

In the reign of Edward I. there belonged to the appropriated rectory, a house, with 27 acres and a rood of land, and the church was valued at 25 marks, the vicarage at 5l. Peter-pence, 12d. and the portion of Kerbrook preceptory was 3s.—The prior had also a manor, Edward I. in his 35th year granting him free warren.

 

Vicars.

 

1256, Warin de Festorton, instituted vicar, presented by the prior and convent of Norwich.

 

John occurs vicar in 1299.

 

1304, Edmund Johnes, vicar.

 

Peter de Reynham, vicar.

 

1346, William de Aldeby.

 

1353, Oliver de Wytton.

 

1355, Roger de Felthorp.

 

1357, John de Massingham.

 

1365, John de Kynneburle; in his time, Ao. 2d of Richard II. the chancel of this church was new built; the prior granted 13 oaks out of Plumsted wood, and timber also out of St. Leonard's wood; and the expenses in money were 24l. 4l. 4d.

 

1386, Edmund Martyn, vicar.

 

On the dissolution of the priory, the manor belonging to it, with the rectory, and the patronage of the vicarage, were granted to the dean and chapter of Norwich; and the vicarage is valued at 10l. per ann.

 

Mr. Henry Aldred, vicar.

 

In 1603, William Fleming, vicar, returned 296 communicants 1730.

 

1660, Edmund Wharton, (fn. 4) occurs vicar.

 

Mr. William Berney.

 

Richard Oram, by the dean and chapter of Norwich.

 

1762, Ephr. Megoe.

 

On a gravestone in the chancel,

 

Hic lapis in pannis Spicer tenet ossa Johannis Qui Quadringentesimo pius XL et iii - - - - Anno.

 

Hic jacet D'ns. Johs. Yop. quo'da' Rector. Ecclie de Boton.

 

¶Sir Robert Camownde, priest, was buried in 1482, in the chapel of St. John, of this church, and wills that all the said chapel be paved with marbyll stone, and to the gravestone of John Ovy, with his goods. (fn. 5) —Richard Watls buried in St. John Baptist's chapel 1509, and I will have a prest to sing and pray 6 years in the church except the Fryday in ev'ry week, in the chapel of St. Andrew of Worsted. Agnes Watts, his widow, buried in the said chapel, 1529, and benefactrix to the guilds of our Lady and St. Thomas, and to the repair of St. Andrew's chapel, and gives meadow land to find two lamps in the church for ever, if the King's laws will permit, otherwise to be sold and to buy cattle for that purpose.

 

Here was also St. John Baptist's guild. In the church were these arms; Gules, on a fess, argent, three flowers, azure, between three popinjays, borne by—prior of Norwich. Argent, a cross, sable, the priory arms. Calthorp and Stapleton.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/topographical-hist-norfolk/vol1...

 

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

 

As a measure of how civilised East Anglia is, it is a simple and cheap matter to explore the region by train and bicycle. There is a flat rate of nine pounds a day for unlimited travel between stations in Suffolk, Norfolk and East Cambridgeshire. You can take a bike on any train for a pound, although in reality conductors rarely charge for this service. This practice dates back to pre-privatisation days, and Anglia Railways and One Trains have continued to honour it, for which I am mightily grateful. The Suffolk and Norfolk Churches sites would not be so extensive without it.

 

I left Ipswich at twenty to eight. It was a thinly bright April morning, the sun without power beyond dazzling through the haze in the eastern sky. I was glad of my jacket, but also glad I had sun glasses with me - it was going to be a perfect day for a bike ride.

 

As the train plodded through Ipswich's monotonous northern suburbs, I examined the ordnance survey map. I flicked through Pevsner and Mortlock, as industrial units gave way to green fields, copses and the winding Gipping. Restless, I gazed out the window. A swan awoke on a lake near Needham Market, stretching itself and beating its wings into life. Crows raided a skip on rubble near the Stowmarket paint factory. Then we were really in the countryside, rushing headlong through the sleepy fields beyond Haughley and Mendelsham. Near Finningham, a large female deer cowered silently in the hedge, not ten metres from the track. A few minutes later, and a wise old hare huddled in a furrow, flat-eared, patient.

 

The train pulled into the gathering surprise of Norwich. I hauled my bike a couple of platforms over to the Sheringham line. Other people out for the day got on, including a couple dressed in vintage railway costumes. I assumed they were bound for the steam line at Sheringham. Again, the monotony of another city's suburbs petered out into agricultural business, this time in bright sunshine, and so it was that just after nine o'clock we arrived at Worstead station. I was the only person to get off. "See you later" called the conductor cheerily as I rode off of the platform into the lane, and of course he was right. There is only one train that shuttles back and forth along this line all day, and he was in charge of it.

 

I cycled from the station up into the village, a distance of about two miles. I didn't pass anyone, and here in the large village there was nobody about, just a fat cat lazily rolling in the village square. The sun was cutting the haze, the sky wide and blue. It was like being in France.

 

The church is absolutely enormous, and hemmed in a tight little graveyard. My resolution to take more distant shots went right out the window. Like Salle, and Southwold in Suffolk, St Mary was all built in one go, pretty much. This happened in the late 14th century. As at Salle, it is reflective of a large number of bequests from different people over a short period rather than anyone fabulously rich doing it on their own, and the money, of course, came from wool. Worstead is still the name of a fabric today.

 

I said it was pretty much built at one go, but there was still plenty of money about in the 15th century to raise the clerestory and install a hammerbeam roof. This seems to have been such an ambitious project that flying buttresses had to be installed on top of the aisles to hold the top of the nave up, an expedient measure that has left the building both interesting and beautiful.

 

Inside, I feared another Happisburgh, but it was gorgeous. Stepping out of the sunlight into the slight chill of a vast open space, I wandered around feasting on this stunningly lovely building.

 

As regular users of the sites will know, I don't always warm to big churches, but St Mary is so pretty inside that it is hard not to love it. This is partly helped by the removal of all pews and benches from the aisle. Those that remain in the body of the church are lovely 18th century box pews, quite out of keeping with the medieval nature of the rest of the building, but quirky and oddly delightful. The great tower arch is elegant, and is thrown into relief by the towering font cover. The ringing gallery under the tower is dated 1501, and is reminiscent of the one at Cawston. The tower screen below it takes the breath away, and you find yourself looking around to see where it could have come from. In fact, it is almost certainly a work of the Victorians, but it is pretty well perfect. The paintings in the dado are apparently copies of windows by Sir Joshua Reynolds at New College, Oxford.

 

Worstead is rightly famous for its screen, but this is more because of its height, elegance and completeness than it is its authenticity. The figures on the dado have been repainted so recklessly that it is rather hard to see who some of them were ever meant to be. As at Woolpit in Suffolk, the Victorians appear to have repainted them more with an eye to enthusiasm than accuracy. I stood there, fantasising, making up stories, until, alongside familiar figures like St Peter, St James and St Matthew, I had identified St Lassitude, the patron Saint of a quiet night in, depicted reading his book. Other Saints, identified by their symbols, include St Quirinus with his hamster, and St Obligamus with his golden pineapple. Or so it seemed to me.

 

Not much less odd are the two figures on the extreme right. The Victorians do not appear to have repainted them. The first shows a man holding three nails, and is probably St William of Norwich, more familiar from the screen at Loddon. The second shows a figure crucified, arms tied to the spans. This may be the infamous Uncumber, the bearded lady of early medieval mythology - she grew a beard to fend off unwanted suitors, although you can't help thinking there'd be a niche market for that kind of thing somewhere on the internet. Later, she was crucified, probably upside down. This figure is probably a woman, so nothing seems to fit better, although she isn't bearded as far as I could see. Situated on the extreme right, she is reflected by a crucified Christ as the Man of Sorrows on the extreme left.

 

Across the top rail, a dedicatory inscription winds, mysterious and beautiful.

 

Either side of the chancel arch and screen, the two aisle chapels are both in use, which is unusual and lovely. Both have small screens, each with just four figures. That on the north side is particularly lovely, and is where the blessed sacrament is reserved. The four figures are St Peter, St Bartholomew, St John the Baptist and St John the Divine. At least three of these are also on the rood screen, suggesting that either the images there are wholly Victorian, or these aisle screens came originally from elsewhere.

 

The south aisle chapel is simpler - it is here you enter the church through the priest door. The screen features another St Bartholomew, along with St Lawrence, St Philip and a Bishop.

 

St Mary is a building to wander around in, a place to enjoy for its great beauty rather than to interrogate for its medieval authenticity. As you turn corners, vistas open up; the view from the font to the south door, for example, or that back to the west from the chancel. All perfect, all stunning. The high church nature of the modern furnishings chimes perfectly with these architectural treats. And there are other significant medieval survivals - a fine brass of a Catholic priest, scraps of wall painting beside the chancel arch, and so on.

 

As at other churches in this benefice, the war memorial is complemented by photographs of all those commemorated. What a splendid idea, and what a labour of love. Also in common with other churches around here, St Mary has a second hand bookstall. As I explored the Worstead area, I found myself buying more and more of them, until by the time I got back to Ipswich station that evening, my rucksack was laden down with a dozen or more.

 

Simon Knott, April 2005

 

www.norfolkchurches.co.uk/worstead/worstead.htm

I had no idea what to expect at Yalding, either the town or church. Jools realised it was near to West Farleigh, so we went to investigate.

 

Across what looked like a canal and then the river via an old pack bridge, with the tower of the church on the far bank.

 

The town, or this part of it, stretched either side of the High Street, and once parked, we approach the church down an alleyway and I see the porch doors open; a good sign.

 

I explained what I was at the church for: are you going to be long, I was asked.

 

As quick as I can be.

 

What I found was a huge parish church, the back of which had been converted into a community space, with a fitted kitchen, wooden floor for use possible as a gym or space for yoga, and the east kept as a fine parish church, filled with monuments, memorials and fine fixtures and fittings. Three wardens were tidying up preparing for Candlemass the next day.

 

I go round taking shots, taking nearly and hour to do so, as there was so much detail.

 

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

 

The little cupola on the west tower is topped by a weathervane dated 1734, and summons us to a large church, heavily restored in the 1860s, but worth travelling a long way to see. The nave roof has two interesting features - one is a form of celure or canopy of honour over the third bay from the west. It must have served some long-forgotten purpose. At the east end of the nave there is a real Canopy of Honour in its more usual position over the chancel arch. The south transept contains many interesting features - niches in the walls, bare stonework walls and a good arcaded tomb chest recessed into the south wall. There is a telling string course that suggests a thirteenth-century date, although the two windows in its east wall are Decorated in style. The most recent feature in the church - and by far the most important - is the engraved glass window in the chancel. It was engraved by Laurence Whistler in 1979 and commemorates Edmund Blunden, the First World War poet. It depicts a trench, barbed wire, a shell-burst and verses from Blunden's poems. This feature apart it is the nineteenth-century work that dominates Yalding - especially the awful encaustic tiles with arrow-like designs, the crude pulpit with symbols of the evangelists and the poor quality pews. The glass isn't much better, the Light of the World in the south chancel window being especially poor, but the south window of the south transept (1877) showing scenes from the Life of Christ redeems the state of the art.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Yalding

 

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

 

YALDING.

NORTH-WESTWARD from Hunton lies Yalding, antiently written Ealding, which signifies the antient meadow or low ground.

 

Most of this parish is in the hundred of Twyford, and the rest of it, viz. the borough of Rugmerhill, is in the antient demesne of Aylesford. That part of this parish, which holds of the manor of West Farleigh, is in the borough of West Farleigh, and the borsholder thereof ought to be chosen at the court leet there, and so much thereof as is held of the manor of Hunton, is in the borough of Hunton, and the borsholder thereof is chosen at the court leet there; and the inhabitants of neither of these boroughs owe service to the court holden for the hundred of Twyford, within which hundred they both are; but at that court a constable for that hundred may be chosen out of either of these boroughs.

 

THIS PARISH lying southward of the quarry hills, is within the district of the Weald. It is but narrow, but extends full four miles in length from north to south, the upper or northern part reaches up to the quarry hill adjoining to West Farleigh, near which is Yalding down, on which is a large kiln for the purpose of burning pit coal into coke, which is effected by laying the coal under earth, and when set on fire quenching the cinders; the method is used in making charcoal from wood, the former particularly is much used in the oasts for the drying of hops, so profitably encouraged in this neighbourhood. Below it, near the river Medway, its western boundary in this part, opposite to Nettlested, stands the seat of Sir John Gregory Shaw, bart. a retired, but not an ill chosen situation. It was for several generations the residence of the family of Kinward, which from the reign of king Henry VIII. was possessed of good estates in this parish and its neighbourhood, and bore for their arms, Azure, on a bend or, three roses gules, between three cross-croslets, fitchee argent. Robert Kenward, esq. of Yalding, resided here, and dying in 1720, was buried with the rest of his family in this church; he left a son John, and several daughters, of whom the third, Martha, married the late Sir Gregory Page, bart. and died S. P. John Kenward, esq. the son, died in 1749, leaving by Alicia his wife, youngest daughter of Francis Brooke, esq. of Rochester, one daughter and heir Alicia, who carried this seat and a considerable estate in this neighbourhood to Sir John Shaw, bart. late of Eltham, whose eldest son, Sir John Gregory Shaw, bart. is the present owner of it, and resides here. (fn. 1). In this part of the parish the land is kindly both for corn and hops, of which there are several plantations, and round the down there are some rich grass lands, but further southward where the parish extends to Brenchley, Horsemonden, and Mar den, it is rather a sorlorn country, the land lying very low, and the soil is exceeding wet and miry, and much of it very poor, and greatly subject to rushes, being a stiff unfertile clay; the hedge rows are broad and interspersed with quantities of large spreading oak trees.

 

The river Medway flows from Tunbridge along the west side of the upper part of this parish as mentioned before, there are across it here two bridges, Twyford and Brandt bridge, leading hither from Watringbury, Nettlested and East Peckham; a small stream, which comes from Marden, and is here called the Twist, flows through the lower part of this parish towards the west side of it, and joins the main river at Twyford bridge, which extends over both of them; another larger stream being a principal head of the Medway flowing from Style-bridge by Hunton clappers, separating these two parishes, joins the main river, about a quarter of a mile below Twyford bridge; on the conflux of these two larger streams the town of Yalding is situated, having a long narrow stone bridge of communication from one part of the town to the other, on the opposite bank of the Hunton stream. Leland who lived in king Henry the VIIIth.'s reign, calls it a a praty townelet, to which however at present it has no pretensions. The church and court-lodge stand at the north end of the town. A fair is held in it on WhitMonday, and on October 15, yearly. The high road over Teston bridge, and through West Farleigh, leads through the town, and thence southward along the hamlets of Denover and Collens-street to Marden; at a small distance from the former is the borough of Rugmarhill, esteemed to be within the antient demesne of Aylesford, belonging to Mrs. Milner.

 

Adjoining the town southward is Yalding lees, over which there is another high road, which leads from Twyford bridge, parallel with the other before-mentioned, along the hamlet of Lodingford, and thence through the lower part of this parish towards Brenchley, near the boundaries of which in this parish is an estate still called Oldlands, which appears in king Edward II's reign to have been part of the demesne lands of the manor of Yalding, for he then confirmed to the priory of Tunbridge a rent charge to be received out of the asserts of the old and new lands of the late Richard de Clare, in Dennemannesbrooke, which he had given to it on its foundation; lower down, close to the stream of the Twist, is the manor house of Bockingsold, the lands of which extend across the river into Brenchley and Horsemonden and other parishes.

 

A third high road over Brandt bridge passes along the western bounds of this parish, over Betsurn-green towards Lamberhurst and Sussex.

 

A new commission of sewers under the great seal, was not many years ago obtained to scour and cleanse that branch of the river Medway, or if I may so call it, the Yalding river from Goldwell in Great Chart, through Smarden, Hunton, and other intermediate parishes to its junction with the Rain river, at a place called Stickmouth, a little below the town of Yalding.

 

The commissioners for the navigation of the river Medway, about twenty years ago, made a navigable cut or canal, from a place in the river called Hampsted, where they judiciously constructed a lock to a place in the river near Twyford bridge, where they erected a tumbling bay for the water, when at a certain height, to pass over. The contrivance of this cut from one bend or angle of the river to the other, is of the greatest utility to the navigation, by not only shortening the passage, but by baying up a convenient depth of water, which they could not have had along the lees, and other adjoining low lands on each side of that part of the river, which is avoided by it, or at least not without a very great expence.

 

At the river here the barges are loaded with timber, great guns, bullets, &c. for Chatham and Sheerness docks, London, and other parts, and bring back coals, and other commodities for the supply of the neighbouring country.

 

In 1757 a large eel was caught in the river here, which measured five feet nine inches in length, and eighteen inches in girt, and weighed upwards of forty pounds.

 

THE MANOR OF YALDING, or Ealding, as it was usually written, was, after the conquest, part of the possessions of the eminent family of Clare, who became afterwards earls of Gloucester and Hertford, (fn. 2) the ancestor of whom, Richard Fitz Gilbert, came into England with William the Conqueror, and gave him great assistance in the memorable battle of Hastings, and in respect of his near alliance in blood to the king, he was advanced to great honor, and had large possessions bestowed upon him, both in Normandy and England; among the latter was this estate of Yalding, as appears from the survey of Domesday, taken in the 15th year of the Conqueror's reign, in which it is thus entered, under the title of Terra Richardi F. Gislebti:

 

Richard de Tonebridge holds Ealdinges, and Aldret held it of king Edward, and then and now it was taxed at two sulings. The arable land is sixteen carucates. There are two churches (viz. Yalding and Brenchley) and fifteen servants, and two mills of twenty-five shillings, and four fisheries of one thousand and seven hundred eels, all but twenty. There are five acres of pasture, and wood for the pannage of one hundred and fifty hogs.

 

In the time of king Edward the Consessor, and afterwards, it was worth thirty pounds, now twenty pounds, on account of the lands lying waste to that amount.

 

The above-mentioned Richard Fitz Gilbert, at the latter end of the Conqueror's reign, was usually called Richard de Tonebridge, from his possessions and residence there, and his descendants took the name of Clare, for the like reason of their possessing that honor. His descendant, Gilbert, son of Richard de Clare, earl of Gloucester and Hertford, owned it in the reign of king Henry III. and in the 21st year of Edward I. he claimed before the justices itinerant, and was allowed all the privileges of a manor.

 

¶Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester and Hertford, his son, by Joane, of Acres, king Edward I.'s daughter, succeeded to it, and dying in the 7th year of king Edward II. without surviving issue, his three sisters became his coheirs, and on the partition of their inheritance, this manor, among others in this county, was allotted to Margaret, the second sister, then wife of Hugh de Audley, junior, who in the 12th year of Edward II. obtained for his manor of Ealding, a market to be held here weekly, and a fair to continue three days yearly, viz. the vigil, the day of the feast of St. Peter and St. Paul, and the day subsequent to it. He died in the 21st year of it, holding this manor, which he held for his life, by the law of England, of the king in capite. He left an only daughter and heir Margaret, then the wife of Ralph Stafford, who in her right became possessed of the manor of Yalding, and was a man greatly esteemed by king Edward III. who among other marks of his favor, in his 24th year, advanced him to the title of earl of Stafford.

 

After which it continued in his descendants down to his great grandson, Humphry Stafford, who was created duke of Buckingham anno 23 Henry VI. whose grandson Henry, duke of Buckingham, having put himself in arms against king Richard, in favor of Henry, earl of Richmond, and being deserted by his army, had concealed himself in the house of one Ralph Banister, who had been his servant, who on the king's proclamation of a reward of 1000l. or 100l. per annum, for the discovering of the duke, betrayed him, and he was without either arraignment or judgment, beheaded at Salisbury.

 

YALDING is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Rochester and deanry of Malling.

 

The church, which is a large handsome building, consists of three isles and a large chancel, with a square tower at the west end. Against the south wall in it is a very antient altar tomb, which has been much desaced, on which is remaining, Ermine, a bend gules. There was formerly a brass plate on it. On a large stone in the middle isle, is a memorial for Robert Penhurst, descended from Sir Robert Penhurst, of Penhurst, in Suffex, who died in 1610. The arms, on a shield, a mullet. In the chancel there is a handsome monument for the family of Warde, who bore for their arms, Azure, a cross flory or, and one for the family of Kenward, in this parish. In the pavement of the church are several large broad stones, a kind of petrifaction of the testaceous kind, dug up in the moors or low lands in this parish.

 

Richard de Clare, earl of Hertford, gave the church of Aldinges, with the chapel of Brenchesley, and all their appurtenances, in pure and perpetual alms, to the priory of Tunbridge, lately founded by him.

 

Gilbert de Glanvill, bishop of Rochester, who came to that fee in the 31st year of king Henry II. confirmed this gift, and granted, that the prior and canons should possess the appropriation of this church in pure and perpetual alms; saving a perpetual vicarage in it, granted by his authority, with the assent and presentation of the prior and canons as follows:

 

That the vicar should have the altarage, and all obventions, and small tithes belonging to this church, and all houses, which were within the court, and the land belonging to the church, together with the tenants and homages, and the alder-bed, and the tithes of sheaves of Wenesmannesbroke, and the tithes of Longesbroke, of the new assart, and the moiety of meadow belonging to the church; all which were granted to him, to hold under the yearly pension of two shillings, duly to be paid to the prior and canons; and that the vicar should sustain all episcopal burthens and customs, as well for the prior and canons as for himself. And he granted to the prior and canons as part of the appropriation, the tithes of sheaves of this church, excepting the said tithes of Wenesmannesbroke, and of Longebroke; and that they should have the moiety of the meadow belonging to the church, with the fisheries, and the place in which the two greater barns stood, with the barns themselves, and the whole outer court in which the stable stood, with the garden which was towards the east, and the small piece of land which lay by the garden, and the rent of four-pence, which ought to be paid yearly to the court of Eyles forde; reserving to himself the power of altering the endowment of this vicarage, if at any time it should seem expedient; saving, nevertheless, all episcopal rights to the bishop of Rochester, &c. (fn. 16)

 

The church of Yalding, together with the advowson of the vicarage, remained with the priory of Tunbridge, till the suppression of it, in the 17th year of king Henry VIII. when being one of those smaller monasteries which cardinal Wolsey had obtained for the endowment of his colleges, it was surrendered into his hands, with all the possessions belonging to it.

 

After which the king granted his licence to him, in his 18th year, to appropriate and annex this church, among others of the cardinal's patronage, to the dean and canons of the college founded by him in the university of Oxford. But here it staid only four years, when this great prelate being cast in a præmunire in 1529, the estates of that college were forfeited to the king, and became part of the royal revenue.

 

¶Queen Elizabeth, in her 10th year, granted the rectory or parsonage of Yalding, and the advowson of the vicarage, for thirty years, to Mr. John Warde, at the yearly rent of thirty pounds, in whose possession they continued till king James I. in his 5th year, granted the see of them to Richard Lyddale and Edward Bostock, at the like yearly rent, (fn. 17) and they soon afterwards alienated them to Ambrose Warde, gent. of this parish, son of John above-mentioned, in whose descendants they continued down till they came into the possession of three brothers, Thomas, of Littlebrook, in Stone; George and Ambrose, among whose descendants they came afterwards to be divided, and again sub-divided in different shares, one third part to captain Thomas Amhurst, of Rochester; one third of a third part, and a third of a sixth part to Mr. Holmes, of Derby; Mr. Ambrose Ward, of Littlebrook, and the Rev. Mr. Richard Warde, late of Oxford, each alike, and the remaining sixth part by the Rev. Mr. John Warde, the present vicar of this parish, who some years ago rebuilt the vicarage-house in a very handsome manner.

 

This rectory now pays a yearly fee-farm rent of thirty pounds to the crown.

 

It is valued in the king's books, at 20l. 18s. 9d. and the yearly tenths at 2l. 1s. 10½d.

 

There are two separate manors, one belonging to the rectory or parsonage, and the other to the vicarage of this church.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol5/pp154-173

Social Bookmarking is a really simple tool that can offer your Extension audience a great deal of value. It's also a great place to get started with eExtension.

The legend for this exhibit explained that the ancient Greeks sometimes ritually "killed" a helmet by bending its cheek flanges outward.

 

"It was the custom for victorious Greek cities to dedicate tropaia, ‘trophies’ of armour from the defeated, in the sanctuary of one of the gods. When the trophy collapsed from age or when the sanctuary became too full the armour was buried, but first it was ‘killed’ as part of the process of offering it to the gods: the cheekpieces were bent

back and the noseguard turned up to render the helmet useless in this world." - Walters Art Museum

 

Photographed at the Walters Art Museum, Baltimore, Maryland.

froknowsphoto.com/?p=3795

This image is part of explaining how f stops work going from 1.4 to f16. You will get a feel for how the image is effected.

People often ask "How has this economic crisis affected you". Instead of explaining, might be easier to visualize with a graph. Before graduating from University, I had never been to any concert in life. And then, the concert mania started in Montreal in 2007. For Nov 07 to Oct 08, the frequency had risen to 1 concert per 10 days. But then came the economic depression of 08. which taught a few lessons in savings, hence a big dip. No bailouts for me :(

 

Note to self: Do post photos of previous concerts and shows

 

July to Oct - 7 Shows

Phil Collins & Genesis, Sting & The Police, Daft Punk, Russel Peters (Comic), Seth MacFarlane (Comic - Family Guy), Nadia Ali & iiO, Colin Mochrie & Brad Sherwood (Whose Line Is It Anyway)

 

Nov to Feb - 10 Shows

Bon Jovi, Van Halen, Linkin Park, Trans Siberian Orchestra, Paul Van Dyk, Spice Girls, Vanessa Carlton, Marie Mae, DJ Shadow, Bobby McFerrin

 

March to June - 9 Shows

Kanye West, Bruce Springsteen, Foo Fighters, Avril Lavigne, Al Gore, Santana, Billy Joel, The Cure, Deep Dish

 

July to Oct - 15 Shows

Coldplay, Madonna, Backstreet Boys, George Michael, Celine Dion, Simple Plan, Sheryl Crow, Blue Man Group, Alanis Morissette, Lenny Kravitz, Bran Van 3000, Leonard Cohen Tribute, Comics -> Greg Proops & Ryan Stiles (Whose Line Is It Anyway), Tom Papa, Slava, Omid Djalili

 

Nov to Feb - Only 2 concerts :(

Duran Duran, Sara Bareilles

 

p.s. I should have included the sarcasm tags

 

Raymah is Yemen’s newest governorate, carved off Sana’a in 2004. An egg carton of mountains each with a house on top. Providing health an education is a challenge with a population dispersed over so many difficult to get to places.

I was there to see how are nutrition and education programmes were progressing. The government health staff and local government I met were well trained and keen to make a difference.

I explained how I met Beste in my previous submission of her sister Buke. They were on campus in downtown Toronto and both sisters agreed to participate in my Human Family photography project.

 

Beste had a quiet, somewhat shy personality but her friendliness came across clearly. Our communication was hampered a bit by language difference (Beste speaks Turkish and German and I speak neither). I had a feeling she spoke and understood more English than she was confident in revealing, so Buke assisted with translating.

 

Beste is Buke’s older sister, but only by one year at 23. She is in medical school in Cyprus and I was reminded that Cyprus is half Turkish and half Greek. She likes medical school and looks forward to a career as a physician but is less fond of Cyprus and intends to transfer her studies to medical school in Istanbul. She arrived from Cyprus the previous dayand came to pay a one month summer visit to Buke. It was clear that the two of them are close.

 

Beste was as easy to photograph as her sister; both are very pretty and were eager to participate in the project. Although most of my conversation was with Buke, Beste was interested in the chat and she radiated what I would describe as a sweet friendliness. I think that quality came across in the portraits. As I was reminding myself not to cut off Beste's delicate necklace charm, Buke explained to me that both she and her sister were wearing a charm known as The Hand of Fatima, an common and important religious symbol among Muslims. A bit of internet research revealed that this amulet is a symbol of protection from evil as well as a symbol of patience, loyalty, and faith. It represents the hand of Muhammad's daughter Fatima and carries a blessing of purity, goodness and truth.

 

It was great meeting you Beste. Thanks for participating in my photography project and lending it such an international flavor. I wish you well in medical school and in your medical career and I’m sure you’re going to have a fun visit with your sister here in Toronto. I hope this photo will be a nice souvenir of your visit.

 

This is my 306th submission to The Human Family Group on Flickr.

 

You can view more street portraits and stories by visiting The Human Family.

 

In contrast to the chilly reception at West Peckham, Hadlow was a delight. Though it did involve a bit of a wait, as there was a wedding on. The poor couple we met outside had been invited to the wedding, but that week's updated advice meant guests inside the church had been cut from 30 to 15, so they lost out.

 

We talked as they waited, and told me some of the history of the town, the church and the castle next door. And of the Hop-picker's Memorial in the churchyard, which I went out to photograph.

 

There was no guarantee that we would be let in once the wedding was over, and once they did troop out, and the photographs taken, I thought that the west door would be locked and the hours wait wasted.

 

But it swung open, and the poor vicar was getting the chairs ready for the next day's service, and mentioned several years in seminary all to be a furniture mover.

 

I explained the project, and asked if I could take shots, explaining I would be quick and when he was done I would leave. But he was fine, let me take my time and showed me detail I would have otherwise missed.

 

It was hard to miss the wooden "throne" in the chancel, it looks very impressive, and I asked expecting it to be a Bishop's throne or chair, but it turns out to be not all what it seems. It is named Coverdale Chair, supposedly once owned by the Bishop who created the first translation of the Bible.

 

So far so good.

 

It was donated to Rochester Cathedral at one point, but returned, unwanted, when it became clear that some parts of the chair, especially the side panels, are younger than others.

 

Still, impressive from the front.

 

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

 

The first record of a church in Hadlow was in 975.[2] This church would probably have been a wooden building. In 1018, the early church was replaced by a building of stone. In the 12th century, the church was rebuilt and extended by Richard de Clare, then lord of the Manor of Hadlow. De Clare granted the church to the Knights Hospitallers in 1166. The Knights Hospitallers later had a preceptory at nearby West Peckham, which was their local administrative base. From the Norman Conquest until the 18th century, Hadlow did not have a resident Lord of the Manor, being held under Tonbridge Castle.[3] It is thought that the tower was raised and the spire added in the 15th century.[4] Little money was spent on the maintenance of the church, although some 15th- and 16th-century bequests are recorded. Thomas Walter, Yeoman bequeathed 20s in 1448 "To make a window on the north side of the church by the altar of Our Lady". John Tatlyngbery bequeathed 10 marks "For repair of the great door of the church". In 1456, Richard Bealde bequeathed 13s 4d "For repair of the tower of Hadlow church".[5] In 1461, Dionysia Ippenbury left 3d for masses to be said each year for 12 years.[6] In 1465, William Palle, yeoman left a cow to the church. It was to be sold and "the profits therefrom to be devoted to the maintenance of a lamp in the chancel".[5] In 1509, Thomas Fisher, yeoman bequeathed £20 "for making a new rood loft". The rood screen may not have been in existence long, although it was mentioned in bequests dated 1510 and 1513.[7] The church remained under the ownership of the Knights Hospitallers until 1540, when the order was dissolved by Henry VIII.[3] In 1533, Henry Fane left two chalices valued at £4.[6]

 

The west door is inscribed "WB 1637 ES". The tower and steeple were repaired in that year. The churchwardens were Walter Barton and Essau Simmons.[7] In 1791, the clock was installed in the tower. It was made by John Thwaites of Clerkenwell.[8] At the beginning of the 19th century, the church was in disrepair. In 1847, the chancel was rebuilt and the vestry added. In 1853, the south porch was blocked up. The north aisle was added in this year at a cost of £470, which was raised by public subscription. A private gallery was erected by Walter Barton May, owner of Hadlow Castle. This had its own private access and was located at the west end of the nave. In 1885, an altar reredos was erected to the memory of Sir William Yardley and his wife Amelia. Yardley was a former judge in the High Court of Bombay, India. In 1936, the gallery was removed.[5] Work on the doorway at the west of the church in 1936 exposed some small crosses carved in the stonework. These are attributed to Nicholas de Hadloe and his son, who lived at Hadlow Place. They were carved to commemorate their safe return from the Third Crusade in 1189.[4] St Mary's was listed on 20 October 1954. It is currently Grade II* listed.

 

St Mary's is mostly constructed from ragstone, with some ashlar detail and quoins of Tunbridge Wells sandstone. The church is built in the Early English and Decorated style. The chancel roof is of slate, while the nave and aisle roofs are tiled. The spire is covered in shingles. The stained glass windows date from the 19th and 20th centuries,[9] the most recent of which is "The Visitation" created by Francis Skeat in 1956.

 

In 1919, the Coverdale Chair was presented to St Mary's by T E Foster MacGeagh of Hadlow Castle. The chair is so-named because it was owned by Miles Coverdale, Bishop of Exeter, who made the first translation of the Bible into English. In 1954, the chair was transferred to Rochester Cathedral, but it was returned to St Mary's in 1967.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Mary%27s_Church,_Hadlow

 

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

 

The lowy of Tunbridge: Hadlow

 

HADLOW.

THE BOROUGH OF HARDLOW, within the lowy of Tunbridge, contains the parish of Hadlow, with the church, except a small district of the northern part of it, which is in the hundred of Littlefield.

 

THE PARISH of Hadlow is of large extent, joining to West Peckham northward, and to the river Medway, its boundary southward; to the west it extends to the Northfrith woods and the parish of Tunbridge. It is far from being a pleasant situation, being a flat low country, much covered with large and spreading oaks, and broad hedge rows; the soil is in general a stiff clay, much of which is very swampy and wet; towards the upper part of the parish it is but poor, being very panny, and in some places inclining to gravel; lower down it is much more fertile, and bears good corn, and is kindly for hops, of which there are many plantations, which have much increased of late years. Near the river the grass lands are very rich, and capable of fatting beasts of a large size. The rivulet called the Sheet, which flows from Plaxtool by Oxenhoath, crosses this parish, joining the river Medway, a little above Brandt bridge, near which at Hartlake bridge, at the east end of this parish, is what is here called a flowing bolt, being an ingenious contrivance to pen up the water to a certain height, by which means it is capable of being let out in dry seasons, to flow over and moisten the adjoining meadows, which is at that time of the greatest advantage to them. The high road from Maidstone through Mereworth to Tunbridge, crosses this parish over Hadlow common, at the northern boundary of it, whence it goes through the town or village of Hadlow, between which and the river is Fish-hall and Hadlow-place, and more eastward the small hamlets of Goldwell-green, Barnes, and Mill-street.

 

On the bank of the Medway, at the west end of the parish, is a wharf and landing place, called Hadlow-stairs, for the lading and unlading of timber, coals and other merechandize.

 

A fair is yearly held in Hadlow town on WhitMonday.

 

IT APPEARS from the survey of Domesday, that this place was part of those vast possessions with which William the Conqueror enriched his half-brother Odo, bishop of Baieux, whom he afterwards made earl of Kent, under the title of whose lands it is thus entered there.

 

Richard de Tonebridge holds of the bishop (of Baieux) Hastow. It was taxed at six sulings. The arable land is twelve carucates. In demesne there are three, and forty-seven villeins, with fifteen borderers, having fifteen carucates. There is a church and ten servants, and two mills of eleven shillings, and twelve fisheries of seven shillings and six-pence, and twelve acres of meadow, Wood for the pannage of sixty hogs. In the time of king Edward the Consessor, and afterwards, and now, it was and is worth thirty pounds. Eddeva held it of king Edward.

 

In the reign of king Henry III. the seignory of this manor was claimed by the archbishop of Canter dury, and an agreement was entered into in the 42d year of it, between archbishop Boniface and Richard de Clare, earl of Gloucester and Hertford, concerning the customs and services which the archbishop required of the earl, on account of the tenements which the latter held of him in Tunebregge, Hanlo, &c. that is, the manors of Tunebregge and Hanlo, together with the whole lowy of Tonebregge, whence the archbishop required of the earl that he should do him homage, the service of four knights fees, and suit to his court at Canterbury, and that he should be the high steward of him and his successors, at their great feast, whenever it should happen that the archbishop should be inthroned.

 

The above-mentioned Richard de Clare, earl of Gloucester and Hertford, dying at Eschemerfield, in this county, in the 46th year of the reign of king Henry III. anno 1261. Gilbert, earl of Gloucester and Hertford, his son, succeeded him in this manor, and whose son of the same name, earl of Gloucester and Hertford, dying in the 7th year of Edward II. anno 1313, without surviving issue, his three sisters became his coheirs. (fn. 1) Upon which the manor of Hadlow, with the adjoining manor and castle of Tunbridge, and others in these parts, seem to have been allotted to the share of Margaret, the second sister, wife of Hugh de Audley, who in her right became possessed of this manor, and in the 11th year of king Edward III. was, in respect of this marriage, in parliament created earl of Gloucester.

 

Margaret, countess of Cornwall and Gloucester, died in the 16th year of that reign, and her husband, earl Hugh, outliving her about five years, died then possessed of this manor by courtesy of the realm, and leaving by her an only daughter and heir Margaret, then the wife of Ralph Stafford, lord Stafford. He before the end of that year obtained a special possession of all the lands of her inheritance, and among them of this manor, and in his descendants, earls of Stafford, and afterwards, by creation, dukes of Buckingham, of high estimation for the great offices of state which they held in the different reigns in which they lived. This manor continued down to Edward, duke of Buckingham, who in the 13th year of Henry VIII. being accused of conspiring the king's death, was found guilty, and beheaded that year; and although there was an act passed for his attainder, yet another act passed likewise for the restitution in blood of Henry his eldest son, but not to his honors and lands, which remained forfeited to the crown, and the king in his 16th year, granted the manors of Hadlow and Northfrith, aud several messuages, tenements, parks, &c. in the parishes of Hadlow, Shipborne, and Tunbridge, late belonging to Edward, duke of Buckingham, attainted, to Sir Henry Guildford, comptroller of his household, to hold by knight's service.

 

Sir Henry Guildford had greatly signalized himself by his valour against the Moors in Spain, and being first knighted, afterwards created a knight banneret, and made master of the horse. In the 17th year of king Henry VIII. he was made one of the chamberlains of the exchequer, and next year was elected a knight of the garter, being only thirty-nine years of age at the time of his election. (fn. 2)

 

On his death in the 23d year of king Henry VIII. this manor seems to have reverted to the crown, where it remained till king Edward VI. in his 4th year, granted the manor and park of Hadlow to John Dudley, earl of Warwick, who was afterwards created duke of Northumberland, and he by indenture, in the 7th year of that reign, inrolled in the Augmentation-office, sold this manor, among other premises, to the king, in exchange for lands in several other counties. (fn. 3)

 

The manor of Hadlow remained in the crown till the accession of queen Elizabeth, who in her 1st year granted it, together with the park called Northfryth, to her kinsman, Henry Carey, lord Hunsdon, to hold in capite; and he seems to have given it before his death to his eldest son, Sir George Carey, who possessed it.

 

in the 25th year of that reign, and on his father's death in the 38th year of it, succeeded to the title of lord Hunsdon. He died in the 1st year of king James I. without male issue, upon which this manor came to his next brother John, who succeeded him likewise as lord Hunsdon, and died in the 15th year of James I. and his eldest son Henry, lord Hunsdon, soon afterwards conveyed this manor by sale to James Faircloth, M. D. of London, who alienated it to George Rivers, esq. of this parish, second son of Sir George Rivers, of Chafford, in this county, whose son Edward Rivers, esq. was of Fishall, in this parish, and dying possessed of this manor in 1660, was buried near his father in this church. His successor alienated it in the reign of king Charles II. to Jeffry Amherst, gent. and he in the year 1699 sold it to Mr. John France, who dying without male issue, his two daughters, Mary and Elizabeth, became his coheirs; the eldest of whom married Walter Barton, gent. and the youngest George Swayne, gent. On his death, the former by settlement succeeded to this manor, as did his son Mr. John Barton, (by the entail in the same settlement, on his father's decease) and his son Walter who has since taken the name of May, is the present proprietor of it.

 

This manor holds a court leet and court baron, which seems to be entirely independent of the court leet of the manor of Tunbridge, for in 1759 a constable of Tunbridge was chosen at the court leet of that manor, and as such claimed jurisdiction over the parish of Hadlow; but on a trial had on a suit concerning it, at the Lent assizes for this county in 1761, it was proved, that the courts leet of Tunbridge and Hadlow had no connection with each other, and a verdict was found accordingly.

 

HADLOW-PLACE is a seat and estate in this parish, which, in all probability, gave both name and residence to a family of no small note in antient time.

 

John de Hadloe, a descendant of Nicholas de Hadloe, was among those gentlemen of this county, who attended king Edward I. in his expedition into Scotland, in the 28th year of his reign, and for his remarkable service there, at the siege of Carlaverock, was made knight banneret by that prince. The Hadlows bore for their arms, three crescents, to which was afterwards added, seven cross-croslets, in token of some exploit or expedition against the Saracens in the holly land; a usual mark of honor in those times. This addition was most likely granted to Nicholas de Hadloe, who is in the list of those Kentish gentlemen, who were with king Richard I. at the siege of Acon, in Palestine.

 

How long Hadlow-place remained in the above mentioned family I do not find; but most likely till it was alienated to that of Vane, aliasFane. Henry Fane, the eldest son of John Fane, esq. of Tunbridge, was possessed of it in the reign of king Henry VII. and was sheriff in the 23d year of it. (fn. 4) He died in the 30th year of king Henry VIII. anno 1538, leaving no issue by Alice his wife, sister of John Fisher, gent. of this parish. By his will he gave this manor-place, in which he then dwelt, with all his lands in Hadloe and Capel, to his kinsman Ralph Fane, son of Henry, his father's youngest brother, in tail male, remainder to each of the sons of his youngest brother, John Fane, successively in like tail. (fn. 5)

 

¶Ralph Fane was afterwards knighted at the siege of Bulleyn in 1544, and for his gallant behaviour at the battle of Musselborough, in the 1st year of king Edward VI. was made a knight banneret; but in the 6th year of that reign, being found guilty of high treason, he was executed. He died without issue, and Hadlow-place, with the adjoining lands, by virtue of the above entail, came to Henry Fane, the eldest son of John Fane, deceased, the youngest brother of Henry, of Hadlow, before-mentioned, who was of Hadlow-place; being concerned in Sir Thomas Wyatt's insurrection, he was attainted, but the queen pardoned him on account of his youth, and his estates were restored to him; his son Henry, wrote himself, as his ancestors had formerly done, Vane, which his posterity have continued to do ever since. He removed his residence to Raby-castle, in the bishopric of Durham, and was afterwards knighted, from which time he acted a conspicuous part in public affairs, and was greatly favored by king Charles I. (fn. 6) But in the year 1642, the king being offended at his forwardness in the prosecution of the earl of Strafford, he was removed from his place of secretary of state, and from the privy council, and became one of the most malicious of the king's enemies, soon after whose death he alienated this seat, with the estate belonging to it in this parish, to Mr. Thomas Petley, of Filston, in Shoreham, who at his death gave it to his son, Ralph Petley, by his second wife Elizabeth, daughter of Ralph Cam, of London, and he removed from Shoreham to Riverhead, in Sevenoke, where he afterwards resided, and in his descendants resident there this estate continued down in like manner with that seat to Ralph Robert Carter Petley, esq. who died in 1788, leaving his wife, Mrs. Elizabeth Petley surviving, who is the present possessor of this estate. (fn. 7)

  

HADLOW is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Rochester, and deanry of Malling.

 

The church, which stands on the east side of the town, in Hadlow borough, is dedicated to St. Mary. It is a small building with a low pointed steeple at the west end. There is a monument in it for Sir John Rivers and his lady. It was part of the possessions of the knights of St. John of Jerusalem, commonly called the knights hospitallers, so early as the reign of king John; for in the last year of it, anno 1216, Benedict, bishop of Rochester, at the presentation of the prior and brethren of that hospital, admitted and instituted Adam de Fontibus to this church, saving to the prior and brethren the antient pension of two shillings yearly paid to them from it; and the right likewise of the church of Rochester in all matters, and the right of those who were accustomed to take tithes in this parish, separated from the mother church.

 

Thomas de Inglethorpe, bishop of Rochester, in 1287, appropriated this church, then vacant, and of the patronage of the prior and brethren, to them and their house, for ever; reserving a competent vicarage in it, which he decreed should consist of all the small tithes, oblations, obventions, and all other matters belonging to the altarage, excepting the tithe of the hay of the parish; and he decreed, that the vicar should have one acre of land, where he might conveniently build a house, and two acres of meadow, fit to be mowed, of the demesne of the church; and that he should sustain the ordinary burthens of the church, viz. the procurations of the archdeacon, and should pay yearly to the rector of the church of Adintone, eighteen pence, which the rector of the church of Hadlo used to pay to it, time out of mind; and that the prior and brethren should pay to the prior and convent of Rochester five shillings yearly, as had been accustomed to be paid to them from this church from antient time.

 

On the establishment of the preceptory in the adjoining parish of West Peckham by those knights, this church was allotted as an appendage to it; in which state it continued till the general dissolution of their hospital in the 32d year of king Henry VIII. when that order was suppressed by an act specially passed for the purpose, and all their lands and revenues given by it to the king. At which time the parsonage or rectory of Hadlow, appears to have been esteemed a manor.

 

King Edward VI. July 16, in his first year, granted the rectory and advowson of Hadlow, to Sir Ralph Fane, and lady Elizabeth Fane his wife, to hold in capite by knights service. (fn. 10) On Sir Ralph Fane's death, lady Elizabeth Fane, his widow, became possessed of it, and soon afterwards alienated one part of it, by the description of the manor of the rectory of Hadlow, together with all houses, glebes, tithes, and other appurtenances, lying in Hadlow-ward in this parish, to Thomas Roydon, esq. of East Peckham, whose daughter and coheir Elizabeth, married William Twysden, of Chelmington, who became in her right possessed of this manor and rectory; and his descendant, Sir William Jarvis Twysden, bart. lately sold it to Mr. Walter Barton, who is the present pos sessor of this tithery, with the manor and appurtenances belonging to it.

 

¶The other two parts of the rectory of Hadlow, consisting of the tithes of this parish, in the tithe wards of Goldwell, alias Coldweld and Stair, as well as the advowson, remained (after the above-mentioned alienation to Roydon) in the possession of lady Eliz. Fane, who in the 1st and 2nd year of king Philip and queen Mary, alienated the remainder of the parsonage of Hadlow to Henry Fisher, and he, in the first year of queen Elizabeth passed it away to Richard Smithe, who next year alienated it to John Rivers; his son, Sir George Rivers, possessed this parsonage, as well as the advowson of the church, which seems to have passed with it from lady Fane, and his eldest son, John Rivers, esq. was created a baronet, and in the 21st year of king James I. procured an act of parliament to disgavel as well his lands as those of Sir George Rivers, his father, and to settle the inheritance of them upon himself and his heirs by dame Dorothy his wife, daughter of Thomas Potter, esq. of Westerham. His grandson and heir, Sir Thomas Rivers, bart. son of James Rivers, esq. who died in his life time, in 1657 conveyed that part of this parsonage, which consisted of the tithes arising within the ward of Stayer, to Edward Rivers, esq. son of George Rivers, esq. of this parish, next brother to Sir John Rivers, created a baronet as above-mentioned, and he died possessed of it in 1660, and was buried in this church. His son, George Rivers, esq. possessed it near seventy years, and then dying, by will gave it to his god-son, George Rivers, esq. of the Inner Temple, who in 1737, reserving to himself a life estate in this tithery, sold the reversion of it to Stephen Hervey, esq. of London, and he soon after Mr. Rivers's death, in 1777, conveyed the fee of it to Mr. Robert Simmons, of Hadlow, who gave it by will to his nephew Mr. William Simmons, the present possessor of this part of the parsonage of Hadlow.

 

The remaining part of the parsonage of Hadlow, consisting of the tithe within Goldwell, commonly called Colweld-ward, passed afterwards into the possession of Wm. Lea, gent. of Hadlow, whose granddaughter, Mrs. Eliz. Leavens, of Hadlow, in 1701, conveyed it to Mr. John Weekley, of Town Malling, who in 1738 gave it by will to his brother, Mr. George Weekley, late of Ware, in Hertfordshire, on whose death in 1777 it descended to his only daughter and heir, Miss Jane Weekley, since whose death this tithery has been sold by her devisees to Mr. Thomas Swayne, of Tunbridge, the present possessor of it.

 

THE ADVOWSON of the vicarage of Hadlow seems to have continued in the Rivers family, till the death of Sir George Rivers, in 1734, when, on disputes arising concerning the devise of his estates, they were put into chancery, and after several decrees and process at law, this advowson, among his other estates, was in 1743 ordered by the court to be sold, (fn. 11) and it was accordingly conveyed to the Rev. Arthur Spender, vicar of this parish, who died in 1750, and his son Arthur, dying unmarried, it came to his brother, Mr. John Spender, of Northamptonshire, who sold it not long since to Mr. Monypenny, who is the present patron of it.

 

It is valued in the king's books at 13l. and the yearly tenths at 1l. 6s.

 

The income of this vicarage greatly depends on the hop-plantations in this parish, which have been some years so advantageous as to increase the income of it to 240l. per annum.

 

In 1608 the communicants in this parish were in number three hundred and seventy-six.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol5/pp177-193

Unedited

"The Power of WOMM Workshop" (Word of Mouth Marketing) held at LMC conference in Orlando 2011. Facilitated by Craig Flynn & Brian Bunt, it included some WOMM case studies & concepts as well as group participation in the "5 T's workshop" based on Andy Sernovitz's work (see: www.gaspedal.com). The lecture & workshop were an extension of The Empty Bin (www.theemptybin.com) a marketing and WOMM source for pro lumberyards, the building community, and anyone with an interest in WOMM.

why these were for sale at a hardware store?

Explained nicely about every shot with examples

 

   

wp.me/p5qk6T-3T8

China Town, London

.

 

To say that I have driven along the St Olaves to Beccles road a thousand times is probably an exaggeration, but not by much. And yet I have never been tempted to explore the signs to the Waveney River Centre. But a friend here in Dover remarked on the unusual tower at Burgh St. Peter, but more of that later. As on the way there, I suddenly found All Saints beside a crossroads, and with the welcoming signs, I reversed up and parked.

 

The light rain had begun to fall as I left Bungay, and was set in for the day, as my Dad would have said. So after getting out of the car and grabbing the camera, just time to snap a shot of the church, before I rushed to the porch to try the door.

 

And as advertised, it was unlocked, and delightful. Even the apparently Victorian screen was several hundred years older than its appearances suggested, and then there is that unusual Chancel Arch, but Simon will explain that.

 

Best of all, for me, was the wonderful selection of prayer kneelers, several showing recognisable British Butterfly species, including the local rarity, the Swallowtail.

 

A church to return to on a sunny day.

 

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

 

This quiet little spot in the middle of the marshland peninsula has a church which is far more interesting than at first it might appear. The compact graveyard is pretty full, a testimony to how busy this area was in the 18th and 19th century. The tower is a chequerboard of flint and brick, typical of the Tudors, and relatively unusual in Norfolk, although the same thing seems to have been begun at neighbouring Burgh. Burgh was never finished, but this one was, probably on the very eve of the Reformation. However, not everything planned here reached completion, as we shall see inside.

At first sight, the interior is entirely Victorianised, but this is not at all the case. For a start, although the colouring on the font has been renewed, it appears to match what is on the shaft.

 

And the whole piece is not vandalised at all. This may simply be because, judging from its style, it was produced almost immediately before the Reformation. It has the little heads familiar from other fonts in this area, nearby Aldeby for example, but here they have become angels, and the panels are heraldic in style - it takes a second glance to see that one of the panels depicts the Instruments of the Passion, and another a Holy Trinity symbol facing the wall. The font has certainly been moved by the Victorians, so perhaps the instruments were previously less visible.

 

The screen appears Victorian, but if you look closely you can see that the lace-like tracery is late 15th century. And then, look up. There is a vast chancel arch, but it is partly filled, and beneath it is a small arch into the current chancel, and an even smaller one into the north chancel aisle. what happened here? It appears that the nave was widened by moving the north wall outwards, and the great arch built in preparation for refashioning the chancel and aisle into a new, wider chancel. The south chancel aisle had already been demolished - witness the filled in arcade on the south wall of the chancel. But the new chancel never happened; the Reformation intervened.

 

Between the chancel and the aisle is a simple little tombchest, probably designed to act as an Easter Sepulchre. It is anonymous, but the Holy Trinity symbol held by an angel matches the one on the font which I believe to be contemporary with the tower, so what we have here may well be the tomb of the donor of the new church. Intriguingly, as DD pointed out, an angel on the other side holds a blank shield - was a set of Instruments of the Passion intended for it?

 

The survival of the font imagery might be explained by the brass to John London, who died in 1620 a strong Laudian, if his inscription is anything to go by. Unusually in this area, the Londons supported the Crown in the Civil War.

 

I loved the art nouveau font cover, a tree carved intricately in wood, rather like that in the window of St John the Baptist at nearby Haddiscoe. There is more of this carving up in the chancel, and it is extraordinary. Worth a visit on its own.

 

Simon Knott, February 2005

 

www.norfolkchurches.co.uk/wheatacre/wheatacre.htm

 

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

 

WHETACRE.

Ralph Lord Bainard, for his services, was rewarded with this town, by the Conqueror, on the expulsion of Toret, a thane of King Edward, and was held by Geffrey under the Lord Baynard; it contained, on the Conqueror's grant, 2 carucates of land, 6 villians, 12 borderers with 2 servi, 2 carucates in demean, and 2 among the tenants, &c. 30 acres of meadow, 2 runci, and 11 cows, &c. 160 sheep, &c. and 6 freemen belonging to the lord's fold, and under his protection, held in King Edward's time 18 acres of land, a carucate and a half, with one acre of meadow; and there were 2 churches endowed with 60 acres, and valued at 5s. and the manor was valued at 30s. but at the survey at 50s. it was one leuca long, and half a leuca broad, and paid 16d. gelt. (fn. 1)

 

Jeffrey, who held it under the Lord Baynard, was a near relation of the Lord Bainard, who held it in capite. Juga, widow of that lord possessed it, and was succeeded by her son Jeffrey. William, his son, taking part with Elias Earl of Maine, in France, and other conspirators against King Henry I. was deprived of his barony of Bainard castle in London, which was granted to Robert, a younger son of Richard Fitz-Gilbert, whose son Walter Fitz-Robert succeeded, and the descendants of Jeffrey abovementioned held it of him; Thomas, son of Robert Bainard, holding it in the reign of Richard I. Robert Baynard had a charter Ao. 12, Edward II. for two fairs and two mercates here.

 

By an inquisition taken at Norwich, on the death of Robert Baynard, (fn. 2) of Whetacre, on April 16, Ao. 4 Edward III. the jurors find that he died seized of a capital messuage of no value, besides the repairs, a pigeon-house valued at 12d. per ann. 180 acres of arable land valued at 4l. 10s. 6d. per acre, 100 acres of salt marsh at 100s. per ann. 20 of gross wood, without underwood, valued at 2d. per acre, a windmill at 20s. per ann. rents of assize payable at Lady-day, Midsummer, and Michaelmas, 6l. 6s. 4d. copyholders days works between Michaelmas and St. Peter ad vincula 10s. and between that feast and Michaelmas 20s. pleas and perquisites of court 10s. per ann. held of the Lord FitzWalter, and Thomas was his son and heir, aged 26.

 

This Thomas Bainard sold this lordship, in the 10th of the said King, to Sir Thomas Rosceline, from whom it came (as may be seen at large in Edgfield) to John Lord Willoughby of Eresby, and from them to Richard Bertue, by the heiress, whose son Peregrine, was Lord Willoughby in his mother's right, and presented to the church in 1602.

 

John Wentworth, Esq. was lord of both manors, and patron of the two churches, September 21, Ao. 16 James I. and Sir John Wentworth was his son and heir.

 

Matthew Bluck, Esq. one of the six clerks in Chancery, was lord in 1675, and in this family it remained, till conveyed to William Grimston, Esq.

 

The Lord Bainard had also the grant of another lordship in this town, of which a freeman of Herold the King was deprived, and consisted of 2 carucates of land, 10 villains, 5 borderers, 4 servi 2 carucates in demean, and 2 among the tenants, &c. with 30 acres of meadow; Robert, son of Corbution, (or Corbun,) claimed it, and had livery. Here was pasture for 200 sheep, 2 runci, 7 cows, &c. 6 bee skeps, 7 freemen under commendation belonged to the lord's fold, with 18 acres of land, 2 carucates and an acre of meadow, valued then at 30s. at the survey at 45s.; this came to the Lord Bainard, by an exchange, and Frankus held it of him. (fn. 3)

 

The ancient family of De Edisfeld or Edgfield, was soon after the Conquest enfeoffed of this lordship, and held it in the reign of Henry II. from whom it came by an heiress, to Sir William de Rosceline, and was held of the Lord Fitz Walter, as in Chatgrave, Edgfield, &c. Sir Thomas Rosceline dying sine prole, it came to the Lords Willoughby, &c. as above.

 

The tenths were 3l. 10s.— Deducted 10s.—Temporalities of Norwich priory 13s. 4d.

 

The temporalities of Langley abbey 3l. 5s. 5d. a manor is said to belong to Whetacre.

 

Here were two churches; one dedicated to St. Peter, a rectory valued at 11 marks, the rector had a manse with 3 acres of land, Peter-pence were, 16d. carvage 4d. ob. This is called Whetacre Burgh.

 

Rectors.

 

In 1301, John Baynard, instituted rector, presented by Lady Joan, relict of Sir Robert Baynard.

 

1304, Thomas Baynard, by ditto.

 

1316, John Baynard, by Sir Robert Baynard. (fn. 4)

 

1325, Gerard de Horstede, by ditto; he is called Esquire of the Laby Roscelyne, went in a lay-coloured habit (veste stragulata) and had not the clerical tonsure.

 

1334 John de La Grene, by Sir Thomas Roscelyn.

 

1355, Mr. William Graa, by Sir William Synthwait, in right of his wife Joan, late relict of John Lord Willoughby.

 

1365, William Malebys, by ditto.

 

1376, Sim. de Kilpesham, by Sir Robert de Willoughby, Lord Eresby.

 

1379, Mr. Robert de Weston, by William Ufford Earl of Suffolk, Sir Roger Scales, Sir Robert Howard, &c.

 

1382, John Sayer, by Robert Lord Willughby.

 

1398, Henry Wodestoke, by ditto.

 

1398, Robert Coucliff, by ditto.

 

1401, William Linchewyk, by ditto.

 

1403, John Burges, by ditto.

 

1414, Richard Facon, by Robert Lord Willoughby.

 

1434, William Themilby, by ditto, in right of the manor of Whetacre.

 

1436, William Castell, by Sir William Tireshit, Richard Yardesburgh, and John Wyles, Esq. feoffees of Robert Lord Willoughby.

 

1444, Henry Bramerton, by Robert Lord Willoughby.

 

1465, John Mareys, by Richard de Wells Lord Willughby.

 

1480, Robert Monger, by Richard Hastings Lord Welles.

 

1500, William Ward, by ditto.

 

1501, William Hantensale, by Sir Richard Hastings.

 

1508, George Washingham, by the Bishop, a lapse.

 

1536, Richard Hill, by Mary Lady Willoughby, widow.

 

1545, Andrew Hawes, by Catharine Dutchess of Suffolk, daughter of William Lord Willughby,

 

1553, Henry Bacon, by Richard Bertier, Esq. of Ormsthorp in Lincolnshire, in right of his wife Catharine.

 

1555, Robert Ullothornes, by the Bishop, a lapse.

 

1556, Henry Hill, by the assignees of William Heronden, a trustee of Richard Bertie, Esq. &c.

 

1602, Edward Stanhawe, by the assignees of Peregrine Lord Willoughby.

 

1618, Christopher Milne, by Euseb. Paget, clerk.

 

1659, Henry Watts, by Ann Melling.

 

Daniel Benton, rector.

 

1669, Phil. Prime, by Thomas Garneys, Esq.

 

1713, Thomas Page, by William Grimstone. Esq.

 

1764, Mr. Samuel Boycot.

 

The present valor is 7l. 6s. 8d. and is discharged.

 

The other church is dedicated to All-Saints. John de Bumstede is said to have had an interest in the patronage, but in the beginning of Edward II. the family of Baynard; the rector had then a beautiful manse, and it was valued at 5l. Peter-pence 12d. carvage 4d. ob.

 

Rectors.

 

1316, Sim. de Berningham, presented by Sir Robert Baynard.

 

Sim. Croppe, rector.

 

1357, William de Merse, by Sir William Synthweit.

 

1360, John Hoppe, by William Ufford Earl of Suffolk.

 

1404, John Draper, by William Lord Willougby.

 

1405, John Goldspring, by ditto.

 

1409, John Tenalby, by ditto.

 

1409, Nicholas Tydd, by ditto.

 

1412, Richard Newman, by Robert Lord Willoughby.

 

1437, Andrew Dean, by ditto.

 

1445, John Annotson, by ditto.

 

1450, William Gilbert, by ditto.

 

1476, John Mareys, by Rich. Hastings Lord Welles and Willoughby.

 

1494, John Hoker, by ditto.

 

1497, Robert Proveyt, L.L. B. by ditto.

 

1510, John Shilton, by William Lord Willoughby.

 

1510, Edward Lamson, by ditto.

 

Nicholas Chamberlin.

 

1522, Thomas Bingley, by ditto.

 

1538, John Thuxton.

 

1539, Nicholas Dade, by ditto.

 

1440, Roger Gavell, by Charles Duke of Suffolk, and Catharine his Dutchess.

 

1555, Mr. William Botiler, by the Bishop, a lapse,

 

1556, Thomas Robinson, by William Herenden, Esq.

 

1557, Henry Hill, by ditto.

 

¶1572, Roger Gavel, by Richard Bertie, Esq. in right of Catherine his wife.

 

1602, Euseb. Paget, by the assigns of Peregrine Bertie; he returned 68 communicants in 1603.

 

1650, Henry Watts.

 

1658, John Morris, by Lady Anne Wentworth.

 

1673, Thomas Lunn.

 

1675, Phil. Prime, by Matthew Bluck, Esq.

 

1713, Thomas Page, by William Grimston, Esq.

 

1715, John Guavas, by ditto.

 

1758, Mr. Christopher Smear, presented by Lynn Smear, clerk.

 

The presented valor, is 6l. 6s. 4d. and is discharged.

 

On a stone, with a brass plate, by the font,

 

Rob'tus London, arcâ, cum conjuge, sacra; Hac fatum subiens, consepilitur humo. Ambo fælices, numerosâ prole beati, Complent hospitio, pacificiq; dies Illa obt. Junij 1620. Ille Oct. 1627,

 

There was an ancient family of the Whitacres, who had an interest in a lordship. (fn. 5)

 

William de Whitacre was found to hold one fee of the barony of Baynard, in this town, in the begining of King Henry the Third's reign.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/topographical-hist-norfolk/vol8...

To celebrate International Archives Day 2015, we asked a representative from our offices to explain their role & select their favourite record. You can see the selections on our Flickr account and check our Twitter account for further International Archives Day celebrations. For more information on International Archives Day check out the International Council on Archives website www.ica.org/1561/international-archives-day/about-the-int...

 

==============

 

Historical Life Imitating Art – HBO’s Deadwood and Eleanor Catton’s The Luminaries come to life in Archives New Zealand’s holdings

 

Kia ora tātou. My name is Geordy Muir. I’m an archivist at Archives New Zealand’s Dunedin Regional Office.

 

I love gritty historical drama in any medium, be it television, literature, film, or best of all, real life. I’m fascinated by historical examples of vitriolic ranting. Ned Kelly’s Jerilderie Letter, held by the National Museum of Australia, is a really fantastic example. For me, it’s the language Kelly uses that’s so captivating. His anger is so raw that it oozes out of all 50 pages. But, we hold some gems too.

 

For the last few years, I’ve spent a lot of time with records generated by the various Wardens’ Courts that were set up throughout the Goldfields of Otago and Southland during the rushes of the 1860s and 70s. These are frontier records. The majority are made up of various mining applications, plaint files and licences. Often only a page or two in length and spattered with mud and who knowns what else, occasionally crinkled and tattered from spending the first phase of their lives in a miner’s back pocket, these scraps of paper are artefacts – time travellers travelling towards us at a speed of one day at a time.

 

But, while the content of the mining applications illustrates the industriousness of the men and women that worked the fields, and their physical condition occasionally gives us clues about the nature of life on those fields, generally, they’re literally gritty, not figuratively gritty. What I really love is plaint and criminal files, where you can stumble across a succinct and complete gritty little narrative – something that takes you all the way back to the muddy streets of these frontier (and sometimes temporary) gold towns. We witness drunks cussing at each other under a veranda as a fight spills out of one of the countless pubs and into the street as a local eccentric exposes himself within. Many of the stories are violent and harrowing, some of them are funny, and the best are both.

 

Criminal File – Police v William Maclarn- 1879

Archives Ref: AEPG 20967 D568/51 66 68

 

Transcript:

 

"You bloody lowe (sic) life son of a whore,

you bloody son of a bitch,

you god damn bugger of hell I will

do for you"

 

"’Morton you bloody low thief you son of a whores bitch

you god damned bugger of hell I will do for you yet’

and continued making use of that language in the hearing of

several children on the public road at 4:30pm on 5.8.79

E. Morton

Sergeant of Constabulary”

  

Material from Archives New Zealand