View allAll Photos Tagged extented
Number:
171620
Date created:
1926
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 7 x 9.5 in.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Johns Hopkins Hospital School of Nursing--People
Slessinger, Julia Alexander
Bast, Evelyn Alling
Swackhamer, Elizabeth Bass
Munroe, Ethel Berger
Stowers, Jennie Bishop
Willard, Caroline Bliss
Helbling-Bolger, Anna
Brierly, Charlotte M.
Jinks, Ruth Brister
Brown, Barbara
Cruickshank, Josephine Brown
Carn, Irene
Mentzer, Gladys Cox
Davies, M. Isabel
Barton, Dorothy Diggs
Lewis, Emily A. Engle
Wilkinson, Elizabeth Franzoni
Mabrey, Grace Furniss
Glenn, Sarah
Hains, M. Lois
Hanes, M. Inez
Hartwell, Sara M.
Willliams, Helen Hess
Hoff, Dorothy E.
Coffman, Mary Holloway
Jones, Alberta I.
Tyner, Grace Replogle Kagarise
Keener, Anne
Laxton, Augusta A.
Lahmann, Florence Lesser
Long, Mary Thelma
Noon, Marie MacDonald
Elmer, Edyth Marshall
Mason, Mrs. Mollie Couldourn
Stewart, Mildred Miller
Moser, Elizabeth
Nordin, Gunda R.
Ober, Hazel
Schmalbach, Hilda Ostrom
Parkhouse, Mary Ruby
Anders, Winifred Patrick
Robinson, Roda Mabel
Segelke, Hilda A.
Ewert, Louise M. Sheddan
Weiler, E. Ruth Smith
McLain, Edith Sparklin
Stoutner, Clare Elaine
Stayer, Lois Naomi
Struve, Mildred
Fuller, Dorothy Sutton
Switzer, Sarah A.
Thomason, Florine N.
Thuma, Marion E.
Tittsworth, Munsey A.
Legenbauer, Dorothy Van Patten
Warfield, Hester Ann
Watson, Mary Louise
Lawler, Elsie M.
Seckinger, June Smith Worley
Ault, Margaret G.
Wirt, Verna
Nursing students--Maryland--Baltimore--1920-1930
Nurses--Maryland--Baltimore--1920-1930
Graduation ceremonies--Maryland--Baltimore--1920-1930
Portrait photographs
Group portraits
Notes: Photographer unknown.
Number:
179346
Date created:
1995
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 7.5 x 9.5 in.
Description:
Front row: 1) Loomes; 2) Shim; 3) Price; 4) Girman; 5) Gajary; 6) Reis; 7) Fragetta; 8) Dover; 9) McMillan; 10) Brubaker; 11) Wright; 12) Bucchieri; 13) Vienna.
Second row: 1) Kwiatowski; 2) Rheingold; 3) Goodman; 4) Bogen; 4) Ginsberg; 5) Beck; 6) Koch; 7) Phillips; 8) Sibinga; 9) Hom.
Third row: 1) Cabana; 2) Cuervo; 3) Gould; 4) Bardwell; 5) Shoves; 6) Goodstein; 7) Johns; 8) Brinkmann; 9) Sills; 10) Ratanawongsa.
Fourth row: 1) LaBella; 2) Snead; 3) Kruse; 4) Chaitovitz; 5) Nguyen; 6) Leary. Fifth row: 1) Torjesen; 2) Crocetti; 3) Marino; 4) Meshinchi; 5) Rice; 6) Loeb; 7) Chen.
Back row: 1) Brown; 2) Dudas; 3) Levey; 4) Slote; 5) Gilbert; 6) Lee; 7) Saha; 8) Hearns; 9) Clemens.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Johns Hopkins Hospital. Department of Pediatrics--People
Loomes, Kathleen M.
Shim, Hyunbo H.
Price, Laura
Girman-Ratan, Andrea Marie
Gajary, Zia L.
Reis, Brijit Meehan-Bert
Fragetta, James E.
Dover, George
McMillan, Julia
Brubaker, Gillian L.
Wright, Gail Elizabeth
Viennas, Zaharoula A.
Kwiatkowski, Janet L.
Rheingold, Susan Robbins
Goodman, Stanton C.
Bogen, Debra L.
Ginsberg, Jill Phillips
Beck, Valerie Anne
Phillips, Susan A.
Sibinga, Erica M.
Hom, Xenia B.
Cabana, Michael D.
Cuervo, Elizabeth Halstead
Gould, Rebecca B.
Bardwell, Susan A.
Shores, Jennifer Clare
Goodstein, Miriam R.
Johns-Femino, Christina
Brinkmann, Kirsten M.
Sills, Marion Ruth
Ratanawongsa, Boosara
LaBella, Cynthia Rose
Snead, Katie L.
Kruse, Debra Lynne
Chaitovitz, Susan Joan
Nguyen, Theresa T. H.
Torjesen, Kristine A.
Crocetti, Michael T.
Marino, Bradley S.
Meshinchi, Soheil
Rice, James W.
Loeb, David Mark
Chen, Kathleen J.
Brown, Robert Clark
Dudas, Robert Arthur
Levey, Eric B.
Slote, Adam Y.
Gilbert, Donald L.
Lee, Lucia H.
Saha, Prantik
Hearns, Michelle L.
Clemens, Christopher T.
Pediatricians
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
Notes: Photographer unknown.
www.bangalorebreakdown.com/music.html
At Joe's Pub with Bangalore Breakdown.
__________
Play the music, not the instrument. ~Author Unknown
***
“Any great art work … revives and readapts time and space, and the measure of its success is the extent to which it makes you an inhabitant of that world - the extent to which it invites you in and lets you breathe its strange, special air.”
― Leonard Bernstein
***
"You are the music while the music lasts. "
-T.S. Eliot
***
"Music is Magic. Magic is Life"
-Jimi Hendrix
(part of an unfinished song discovered after his death)
***
www.flickr.com/photos/42514297@N04/sets/72157632988389457...
View “A Life Of Music - to be cont.'d ...(with GRATITUDE!)” slideshow
www.flickr.com/photos/42514297@N04/sets/72157635185040413...
View “Photos for Media” slideshow
For both: Click on 'Show info' to see captions w' slideshow – Click on ‘Options’ to control speed
For slow “animated” slideshows click the double rectangle at the top right side of "set"- album page of choice.
__________
World / Jazz / Experimental / Improv / East-West / Ambient / Pop
PREMIK RUSSELL TUBBS
Looking for music for your film or project? Let’s talk...
__________
__________________
Contact/Listen
www.emusic.com/album/premik/mission-transcendence/10884302/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premik_Russell_Tubbs
New music coming soon!
__________________
__________
Premik, a composer, arranger, producer and an accomplished multi-instrumentalist performs on various flutes, soprano, alto and tenor saxophones, wind synthesizers, and lap steel guitar.
Premik has worked with everyone from Carlos Santana, Whitney Houston, Herbie Hancock, John McLaughlin, Ravi Shankar, Narada Michael Walden, Clarence Clemons, Ornette Coleman, Jackson Browne, Jean-Luc Ponty, Lonnie Liston-Smith, Scarlet Riveria, James Taylor, Sting and Lady Gaga, just to name a few. He is equally adept in pop, R&B, jazz, world and experimental genres.
Sax solos on #1 Hits -: “How Will I Know” (Whitney Houston) and “Baby, Come To Me” (Regina Belle).
Premik's first major recording breakthrough was with John McLaughlin and the Mahavishnu Orchestra on the album“Visions of the Emerald Beyond.” Premik was a major part of the landmark Carlos Santana album "The Swing of Delight" which featured Herbie Hancock as co-arranger and co-musical director. Also featured were Wayne Shorter, Tony Williams, Ron Carter and several members of the Santana band.
www.premik.com/recordings/discography/
New music coming soon!
____________
YouTube -DEVADIP CARLOS SANTANA ~~ HANNIBAL ~~ 1980
Russel Tubbs, saxo
Devadip Santana, guitar
All photos LIFE Magazine
www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv_jsp_43h0
____________
Most recent recordings and projects:
In 2012 Premik recorded with 2011 Grammy nominee vocalist and composer Chandrika Krishnamurthy Tandon. 'Over 75 musicians came together to record the album in the US and India combining ancient traditional instruments like the rhumba, calypso, ektara, dugdugi and esraj with saxophone, banjo and piano to transcend musical boundaries.'
www.indianexpress.com/news/chandrika-tandons-new-album-in...
Sound Samples: www.amazon.com/Soul-March-Chandrika-Krishnamurthy-Tandon/...
www.cdbaby.com/cd/chandrikakrishnamurthyta2 Check out "JOG"
****
Recording projects in 2010-2012 with Grammy award-winning producer and founder of Windham Hill Records Will Ackerman include albums by Fiona Jay Hawkins, Shambhu, Dean Boland, Rebecca Harrold, Ronnda Cadle and Masako.
Will Ackerman: ...‘The criteria for who works here go way past simple talent. Imaginary Road is my home and I’m only letting wonderful people into my home. I don’t care how talented you are; if you’re not able to wear your heart on your sleeve don’t bother to turn up. We use Keith Carlock (Sting and Steeley Dan) as a drummer too along with Arron Sterling (John Mayer and Sheryl Crow). Only last year I met Premik Russel Tubbs who plays sax and wind synths for us.
‘Premik has become part of the family...'
www.newagemusicworld.com/will-ackerman-interview-new-in-2...
imaginaryroadstudios.com/
*****
Premik plays on both of these albums
Winners in 2013
10th Annual ZMR Awards
Album: Masako
Artist: Masako M. Kumano
Award Category- Best New Artist
Premk with Masako: played wind synth on Secret Path to Point Reyes (track 3)
Album: Dreaming of Now Best
Artist: Shambhu
Award Category: Contemporary Instrumental Album
Premik with Shambhu: alto flute on Dreaming of Now (track 4) and wind synth on Jasmine (track 10)
www.zonemusicreporter.com/admin/2013award_finalists.asp
****
Premik recorded with Heidi Breyer and accompanied her at the ZMR Awards 2013, staged in New Orleans.
www.zonemusicreporter.com/admin/performers.asp
ZMR Awards 2013 -Best Instrumental Album – Piano - “Beyond the Turning” - Heidi Breyer - Winterhall Records, produced at Synchrosonic Productions by Grammy winner Corin Nelsen. www.heidibreyer.com/
****
New Age / Ambient / World Top 100 Radio Chart
ZoneMusicReporter.com
Top 100 Radio Play - #1 Top Recordings for January 2014
Title: Call of the Mountains - Artist: Masako
www.zonemusicreporter.com/charts/top100.asp
Premik plays wind synth on tracks 4 "Watching the Clouds", & 9 "Purple Indulgence".
****
Premik, in conjunction with jazz pianist Uli Geissendoerfer heads Bangalore Breakdown, an exciting, world music ensemble. They released their first CD, titled Diary, in 2008. In the words of noted Jazz author Bill Milkowski: Is it world music? Is it jazz? Is it some kind of new uncategorizable fusion that hasn’t yet been labeled?
Sound samples here: www.bangalorebreakdown.com/music.html
****
Premik and Uli Geissendoerfer will soon be releasing their own collaborative duo CD titled Passport to 'Happyness' (yes, happiness with a 'y'') www.ulimusic.com
****
Premik will soon be featured in Carman Moore's Cd “Concerto for Ornette” in which Premik will play the orchestral solo saxophone part. Premik is also the featured saxophonist with SKYBAND on its recording of Carman Moore’s “DON AND BEA IN LOVE,” a fantasy concept album roughly about the intense Renaissance love between Dante and Beatrice which, in part, takes place in outer space! Carman Moore is a 2013 Guggenheim Fellowship winner. www.carmanmoore.com
****
Premik’s ‘Journey To Light Ensemble’
Sound is East/West, jazz., a journey....
With Premik Russell Tubbs (saxpohones, flutes, lap steel, wind synth),
Dave Phelps (guitar),
Leigh Stuart (cello),
Nathan Peck (upright & electric bass),
www.alexskolnick.com/biography-nathan-peck/
Todd Isler (drums, percussion)
Naren Budakar (tabla)
www.sooryadance.com/html/Milan/naren.htm
Watch for a Journey To Light Ensemble album to be released in 2014
****
TriBeCaStan
Premik (saxophones, flutes, lap steel, wind synth)
***
Performing in:
25th Anniversary of the Rainforest Fund Benefit Concert
Thursday, April 17, 2014
Carnegie Hall
Stern Auditorium / Perelman Stage
7 PM
www.carnegiehall.org/Calendar/2014/4/17/0700/PM/25th-Anni...
***
Premik Russell Tubbs - solo with the London Royal Philharmonic -YouTube
And Premik is performng in SINGING THE OCEANS ALIVE CONCERT WITH THE ROYAL PHILHARMONIC CONCERT ORCHESTRA LONDON, ENGLAND APRIL 25, 2014
YouTube
'The first youtube appearance of my performance with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra @ Fairfeild Hall in Croydon, England on April 25th. The piece is called "Apla Kathar". The main melody was composed by Sri Chinmoy & orchestrated by Vapushtara Matthijs Jongepier.' -Premik
www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQxnO3Da8rc
****
Premik will guest and record with the Five Toe Dragon
Premik Russell Tubbs with the Five Toed Dragon @ the BeanRunner Cafe 04/18/2014
YouTubes 4-18-2014
www.youtube.com/watch?v=spkxaVteX08 Set 2 0f 2
www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSI-ZwekM-Y Set 1 of 2
The sound of the Five Toed Dragon can be described as electro-acoustic featuring a distinctly original blend of styles from jazz, classical and ethnic music.
J. ERIC JOHNSON
F. CARTER HOODLESS
BRIAN LEE
Regular guest artists will include Charles Burnham/violin and Premik Russell Tubbs/ saxophones, fultes, wind synth
All are long time members Carman Moore ’s the Incredible Skyband and/or Skymusic Ensemble.
Carman Moore is a 2013 Guggenheim Fellowship winner.
______________
BeanRunner Cafe
A wonderful venue!
Owners Ted and Drew are true champions of the arts.
_______________
______________
Using Flickr – if not signed in (may differ if signed in)
1. www.flickr.com/photos/42514297@N04/sets/72157632988389457...
-Slideshow – Album Set, A Life Of Music - to be cont'd. ...(with GRATITUDE!)
(Click above link and once in the SLIDESHOW click on (upper right) 'Options' to control speed & Show Info’ to see captions w' slideshow
2. To the right of any photo – click upon the oval icon with Premik’s photo to go to the full page of all photos posted (the ‘Photostream’) or the X in the upper right corner to return to the full page of the Set album you are in
3. Click the small rectangle icon to the right of the full album ‘set’ page to see the SLOW ‘ANIMATED’ slideshow of photos within the album
4. To see individual photos –just click on any photo you would like to see from the full page. Caption will appear to the right
5. Scroll down the caption until you see small thumbnail sized photos – click the 3 dots directly under these photos- Click on ‘Download / All sizes’ to see photo enlarged
This will allow you to enlarge the photo you are viewing (or click to see as a slideshow as in #1.)
______
One of my favorite images I ever took. On this very cold February night, I decided to drive out to Gros Cap Bluffs near Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario to get a picture of Venus. It was the first clear night in nearly a month. February 17 also happened to be the day that Venus would be at its greatest illuminated extent. At 10 o'clock to Venus is the planet Mars. I was also lucky enough to capture two meteorites in the same image.
This is an experiment with Photoshop Elements photomerge and a hand held series of shots taken from the top of Maiden Castle to show how the shape of Dorchester has changed. Helped by text from Wikipedia, the key change in my lifetime and very evident from Maiden Castle is the increase in the size of the town through the Poundbury development to the west (left of view) end of town. The large playing fields, part of Dorchester's main school fields, roughly in the lower centre of the image used to mark the western extent of the town. To the east the railway to Weymouth can be seen entering the town from the south. Its passage behind Dorchester Town's football ground, Tesco, the cricket ground and the cemetery can be seen behind which is the junction where the railway line splits to West and South stations. Somewhere in the near part of town at the southern edge is my parents house.
Dorchester's roots stem back to prehistoric times. The earliest settlements were around Maiden Castle, a large Iron Age hill fort that was one of the most powerful settlements in pre-Roman Britain. Different tribes lived there from 4000 BC. The Durotriges were likely to have been there when the Romans arrived in Britain in 43 AD.
The Romans defeated the local tribes by 70 AD. After possibly being converted from a garrison to a town, the Romans named the settlement Durnovaria, a Brythonic name incorporating durn, "fist", perhaps meaning 'place with fist-sized pebbles' and appears to have taken part of its name from the local Durotriges tribe who inhabited the area. Durnovaria was first recorded in the 4th century Antonine Itinerary and became a market centre for the surrounding countryside, and an important road junction and staging post, and subsequently one of the twin capitals of the Celtic Durotriges tribe.
The remains of the Roman wall around the town can still be seen. They have been largely replaced with walks that form a square inside modern Dorchester and known as 'The Walks'. A small segment of the original wall still remains near the Top 'o Town roundabout.
The town's Roman features include part of the town walls and the foundations of a town house near the County Hall. The County Museum contains many Roman finds. The Romans built an 8-mile (13 km) aqueduct to supply the town with water; lengths of the terrace on which it was constructed still remain in parts. Near the town centre is Maumbury Rings, an ancient British henge earthwork converted by the Romans for use as an amphitheatre, and to the north west is Poundbury Hill, another pre-Roman fortification.
Little evidence exists to suggest continued occupation after the withdrawal of the Roman administration from Britain. The name Durnovaria survived into Old Welsh as Durngueir, recorded by Asser in the 9th century. The area remained in British hands until the mid-7th century and there was continuity of use of the Roman cemetery at nearby Poundbury. Dorchester has been suggested as the centre of a sub-kingdom of Dumnonia or other regional power base.
Anglo-Saxon
By 864, the area around Durnovaria/Durngueir was dominated by the Saxons who referred to themselves as Dorsaetas, 'People of the Dor' - Durnovaria. The town became known as Dornwaraceaster or Dornwaracester, combining the original name Dor/Dorn from the Latin and Celtic languages with cester, Old English for walled town and changed over time to Dorncester/Dornceaster and Dorchester. The town was a thriving commercial and political centre for south Dorset with a textile trading and manufacturing industry which continued until the 17th century.
Early modern history
"The town is populous, tho' not large, the streets broad, but the buildings old, and low; however, there is good company and a good deal of it; and a man that coveted a retreat in this world might as agreeably spend his time, and as well in Dorchester, as in any town I know in England". -- Daniel Defoe, in his A tour thro' the Whole Island of Great Britain (1724-1726).
In 1613 and 1725 great fires destroyed large parts of the town, but some of its mediaeval buildings, including Judge Jeffreys' lodgings, and a Tudor almshouse survive in the town centre. Among the replacement Georgian buildings are many which are built in Portland limestone.
In the 17th century the town was at the centre of Puritan emigration to America, and the local rector, John White, organised the settlement of Dorchester, Massachusetts. For his efforts on behalf of Puritan dissenters, White has been called the unheralded founder of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. (Some observers have attributed the oversight to the fact that White, unlike John Winthrop, never came to America.)
In 1642, just before the English Civil War, Hugh Green, a Catholic chaplain was executed here. After his execution, Puritans played football with his head. The town was heavily defended against the Royalists in the Civil War.
In 1685 the Duke of Monmouth failed in his invasion attempt, the Monmouth Rebellion, and almost 300 of his men were condemned to death or transportation in the "Bloody Assizes" presided over by Judge Jeffreys in the Oak Room of the Antelope Hotel in Dorchester.
Modern history
In 1833, the Tolpuddle Martyrs founded the Friendly Society of Agricultural Labourers. Trade unions were legal but because the members swore an oath of allegiance, they were arrested and tried in the Shire Hall which is preserved as it was at the time. Beneath the courtroom are cells where the prisoners were held while waiting trial. Dorchester Prison was constructed in the town during the 19th century and was used for holding convicted and remanded inmates from the local courts until it closed in December 2013.
Dorchester remained a compact town within the boundaries of the old town walls until the latter part of the 19th century because all land immediately adjacent to the west, south and east was owned by the Duchy of Cornwall. The land composed the Manor of Fordington. The developments that had encroached onto it were:
The Marabout Barracks, to the north of Bridport Road, in 1794
The Dorchester Union Workhouse, to the north of Damer's Road, in 1835
The Southampton and Dorchester Railway and its station east of Weymouth Avenue, in 1847
The Great Western Railway and its station to the south of Damer's Road, in 1857
The waterworks, to the north of Bridport Road, in 1854
A cemetery, to the west of the new railway and east of Weymouth Avenue, in 1856
The Dorset County Constabulary police station in 1860, west of the Southampton railway, east of Weymouth Avenue and north of Maumbury Rings.
The Duchy land was farmed under the open field system until 1874 when it was enclosed - or consolidated - into three large farms by the landowners and residents. The enclosures were followed by a series of key developments for the town: the enclosing of Poundbury hillfort for public enjoyment in 1876, the 'Fair Field' (new site for the market, off Weymouth Avenue) in 1877, the Recreation Ground (also off Weymouth Avenue) opening in 1880, and the Eldridge Pope Brewery of 1881, adjacent to the railway line to Southampton. Salisbury Field was retained for public use in 1892 and land was purchased in 1895 for the formal Borough Gardens, between West Walks and Cornwall Road. The clock and bandstand were added in 1898.
A permanent military presence was established in the town with the completion of The Depot Barracks in 1881.
Land was developed for housing outside the walls including the Cornwall Estate, between the Borough Gardens and the Great Western Railway from 1876 and the Prince of Wales Estate from 1880. Land for the Victoria Park Estate was bought in 1896 and building began in 1897, Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee year. The lime trees in Queen's Avenue were planted in February 1897.
Recent developments
Dorchester High West Street
Poundbury is the western extension of the town, constructed since 1993 according to urban village principles on Duchy of Cornwall land owned by Charles, Prince of Wales. Being developed over 25 years in four phases, it will eventually have 2,500 dwellings and a population of about 6,000. Prince Charles was involved with the development's design. Since 2008, Poundbury has housed the Dorset Fire and Rescue Service headquarters and Dorchester fire station.
Number:
164451
Date created:
1945-06-27
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 8 x 10 in.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Church Home and Hospital (Baltimore, Md.). School of Nursing
McAfee, Wilda Lorraine
Sanders, Roma Susan
Entzian, Frieda Mackintosh, Patsy Ruth
Murphy, Doris Alene
Turner, Shirley Elizabeth
Baker, Helen Jean
Ritchey, Elsie Marie
Oliver, Jean Sybil
Stick, Mary Ann
Pinkerton, Ann Louise
Helms, Eleanor Tomlin
Curtis, Margaret Louise
Bess, Irma Luida
Pardoe, Lyla
Noone, Hilda Mae
Heck, Rae
Ballard, Hattie May
Young, Iris Winifred
Langenfelder, Doris Gwendolyn
Schaeffer, Doris Margaret
Linthicum, Shirley Ruth
Dodd, Virginia D.
Allan, Jeanne Louise
Castle, Louise Florence
Smith, Catherine Elizabeth
Baker, Anna Mae
Sinclair, Sarah Jane
Mitchell, Mary Virginia
Wheeler, Ruth Imogene
Creutzburg, Freda Lewis, 1898-1963
Nash, Jane Evans, 1880-1955
Elliott, Margaret, 1884-1966
Nursing students--Maryland--Baltimore--1940-1950
Nurses--Maryland--Baltimore--1940-1950
Graduation ceremonies--Maryland--Baltimore--1940-1950
Nursing schools--Faculty
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
Notes:
Photographer unknown.
The Ailment – Sippy Downs, QLD Australia – Sunday, 8 March 2009
Strobist Info (this ordering may or may not have changed throughout the shoot):
- 1 x Bowens Gemini Esprit 500WS – shot bare camera left
- 1 x Bowens Gemini Esprit 500WS – shot bare camera right
- 1 x Bowens Gemini Esprit 500WS – shot through beauty dish camera right
- 1 x Bowens Gemini Esprit 500WS – shot bare from behind
- 2 x Bowens Travelpacks – powering 2 x 500WS strobes each
- Canon 5D Mark II w/ BG-E6
- Canon 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
- Elinchrom Skyport Universal Triggers
P.S. I’m not taking a rip on oli sykes or bring me the horizon I love his band and their music and they are awesome individuals, it’s just a running joke we had going with the singer josh and the rest of the band for the day…
FINALLY IM DONE EDITING SO… HERE COMES THE PAINT HAHAHA!!!
I love abandoned houses like ridiculously love them to an extent no person should their character is awesome there is a sense of mystery and always a story as to how the place got that way and plus if we break something being absolute idiots getting the shot we want or getting black paint all over the shop because the guys don’t understand the fact I want it on them doesn’t really matter (keep your eyes peeled for the shots to come) and that to me makes for an awesome shoot…
The Ailment are an awesome band from the sunshine coast, I got the time to hang out with them and shoot their promo’s past Sunday and this is what I’ve come up with so far got a tonne more to edit two more locations slash themes figured I’d edit in the order I’ve taken the shots just to be easy, got a mad t-shirt tan slash camera tan from this location so hot sliced my legs up real bad too but it was fun, all the guys are really awesome dudes really genuine people and their music absolutely shreds, I’ll be working with them again soon on their forthcoming EP out later this year, you can go check them out here I strongly recommend you listen to their stuff the ailment myspaceor stalk them at their shows…
4 Apr 2009 - Princess Theatre - signal, ATV, HOC, Shredded intestines, tomb of doom - Brisbane, Queensland
24 Apr 2009 - Gympie senior citizens hall - PROVOKE, PRIDE OF PLACE AND MORE - Gympie, Queensland
also cheers go out to my brother, josh’s girlfriend and his 8 week old puppy for helping me do the dirty work and assist me during the shoot it would have been a shocker without your help…
and alternatively feel free to stalk my life THE BAKE HOUSE @ WORDPRESS
St Peter's is situated opposite what is now Wallett's Court, a country hotel which charges an arm and a leg for B&B, but it looks nice enough and always seems to be busy. But, opposite is St Peter's, beside a small lay by-cum-car park. It is a small two cell church, with a low tower which doubles as the porch. Inside there is the rope for a single bell.
I will try to get back over the weekend, as tomorrow is being decorated now that Lent is coming to an end, and should look pretty as a picture.
--------------------------------------------------------------
WEST CLIFFE
IS so called from its situation westward of the adjoining parish of St. Margaret at Cliffe last described, and to distinguish it from that of Cliff at Hoo, near Rochester.
THIS PARISH lies very high on the hills, and much exposed; it is partly inclosed and partly open, arable and pasture downs; it extends to the high chalk cliffs on the sea shore, and the South Foreland on them, where the light-house stands. The high road from Dover to Deal leads through it. Its greatest extent is from north to south, in the middle of which stands the church, and village adjoining to it. As well as the adjoining parishes it is exceedingly dry and healthy, the soil is mostly chalk, notwithstanding which there is some good and fertile land in it. The height and continuance of the hills, and the depth and spacious width of the valleys, added to a wildness of nature, which is a leading feature throughout this part of the country, contribute altogether to its pleasantness; and the variety of propects, as well over the adjoining country, as the sea, and the coast of France beyond it, are very beautiful.
THE MANOR OF WEST CLIFFE, alias WALLETTSCOURT, was, in the time of the Conqueror, part of those possessions with which he enriched his halfbrother Odo, bishop of Baieux, and earl of Kent, under the general title of whose lands it is thus entered in the survey of Domesday, taken in the 15th year of that reign:
Hugo (de Montfort) holds of the bishop, Westclive. It was taxed at two sulings. The arable land is. . . . . In demesne is one carucate, and seventeen villeins, having two carucates. In the time of king Edward the Con sessor it was worth eight pounds, when he received it six pounds, now eight pounds. Of this manor Hugo de Montfort holds two mills of twenty-eight shilings. Edric held it of king Edward.
Four years afterwards the bishop was disgraced, and all his possessions were confiscated to the crown, upon which this manor was granted to Hamon de Crevequer, a man of much note at that time, who was succeeded in it by the eminent family of Criol, and they continued in the possession of it in the reign of king Henry III. in the 48th year of which, John de Criol, younger son of Bertram, died possessed of it, leaving Bertram his son and heir, and he alienated it to Sir Gilbert Peche. He soon afterwards conveyed it to king Edward I. and Eleanor his queen, for the use of the latter, who died possessed of it in the 19th year of that reign. How long it afterwards continued in the crown I have not found; but in the 20th year of king Edward III. Gawin Corder held it by knight's service of the honor of Perch, viz. of the constabularie of Dover castle.
Sir Gawin Corder possessed this manor only for life, for the next year the king granted the reversion of it to Reginald de Cobham for his services, especially in France, being the son of John de Cobham, of Cobham, by his second wife Joane, daughter of Hugh de Nevill. (fn. 1) His son Reginald was of Sterborough castle, whence all his descendants were called of that place.
Reginald de Cobham, his son, possessed this manor, whose eldest surviving son Sir Thomas Cobham died possessed of this manor held in capite, in the 11th year of king Edward IV. leaving an only daughter and sole heir Anne, who carried it in marriage to Sir Edward Borough, of Gainsborough, in Lincolnshire, (fn. 2) the lands of whose grandson Thomas, lord Burgh, were disgavelled by the act passed in the 31st year of king Henry VIII. His son William, lord Burgh, succeeded to it, holding it in capite, and in the 15th year of queen Elizabeth alienated it to Mr. Thomas Gibbon, who resided here; and it should be observed that though the coat of arms assigned to the Gibbons, of Westcliffe, by Sir William Segar, Sable, a lion rampant, guardant, or, between three escallops, argent—bears a strong resemblance to that assigned by him to the Gibbons, of Rolvenden, and is identically the same as those allowed to the Gibbons of Frid, in Bethersden, who were undoubtedly a branch of those of Rolvenden, yet I do not find any affinity between them; but I should rather suppose, these of Westcliffe were descended of the same branch as those of Castleacre abbey, in Norfolk; Matthew, the eldest son of Thomas Gibbon, the purchaser of this manor, rebuilt this seat in 1627, as the date still remaining on it shews. He resided in it, as did his several descendants afterwards down to Tho. Gibbon, gent. (fn. 3) who in 1660 sold it to Streynsham Master, esq. and he alienated it to admiral Matthew Aylmer, afterwards in 1718 created lord Aylmer, of the kingdom of Ireland, whose descendant Henry, lord Aylmer, devised it to his youngest son the Hon. and Rev. John Aylmer, and he alienated it to George Leith, esq. of Deal, who passed it away by sale to the two daughters and coheirs of Mr. Thomas Peck, surgeon, of Deal; they married two brothers, viz. James Methurst Pointer, and Ambrose Lyon Pointer, gentlemen, of London, and they are now, in right of their wives, jointly entitled to this manor.
BERE, or BYER-COURT, as it is sometimes written, situated in the southern part of this parish, was once accounted a manor, and was parcel of the demesnes of a family of the same name; one of whom, William de Bere, was bailiff of Dover in the 2d and 4th years of king Edward I. After this name was extinct here, this manor passed into the name of Brockman, and from thence into that of Toke, a family who seem before this to have been for some time resident in Westcliffe, (fn. 4) and bore for their arms, Parted per chevron, sable and argent, three griffins heads, erased and counterchanged. John Toke, a descendant of the purchaser of this manor in the fourth generation, lived here in the reigns of king Henry V. and VI. as did his eldest son Thomas Toke, esq. who by Joane, daughter of William Goldwell, esq. of Godington, in Great Chart, whose heir-general she at length was, had three sons, Ralph, who succeeded him in the family seat of Bere; Richard, who died s. p. and John, the youngest, who had the seat and estate of Godington, where his descendants remain at this time. Ralph Toke, esq. the eldest son above-mentioned, resided at Bere in king Henry VIII.'s time, in whose descendants this manor continued till the latter end of the last century, when Nicholas Tooke, or Tuck, as the name came then to be spelt, dying possessed of it, his heirs conveyed it afterwards by sale to the trustees of George Rooke, esq. of St. Laurence, who died possessed of this estate, which had long before this lost all the rights of having ever been a manor, in 1739, s. p. leaving it to his widow Mrs. Frances Rooke, (fn. 5) who alienated it to Thomas Barrett, esq. of Lee, who died in 1757, and his only son and heir Thomas Barrett, esq. of Lee, is the present owner of it. (fn. 6)
SOLTON is an estate in the northern part of this parish, which was once accounted a manor; it was part of the possessions of Odo, bishop of Baieux, under the general title of whose lands it is entered in the survey of Domesday, as follows:
Hugo (de Montfort) holds Soltone of the bishop. It was taxed at one suling. The arable land is . . . . . In demesne there is one carucate, and three villeins, with one borderer, paying four shillings and seven pence. In the time of king Edward the Consessor, it was worth fifteen ponnds, and afterwards and now thirty shillings. In this manor Godric dwelt, and holds twenty acres as his own fee simple.
Four years after the taking of the above survey, the bishop was disgraced, and all his possessions were confiscated to the crown.
Soon after which this manor was granted to Jeffry de Peverel, and together with other lands elsewhere, made up the barony of Peverel, as it was then called, being held of the king in capite by barony, for the defence of Dover castle, to which it owed ward and service. Of the heirs of Jeffery de Peverel, this manor was again held by the family of Cramaville, by knight's service, and it appears by the escheat rolls, that Henry de Cramaville held it in capite at his death, in the 54th year of king Henry III. by yearly rent and ward to the castle of Dover; after which, though part of this estate came into the possession of the Maison Dieu hospital, in Dover, yet the manor and mansion of Solton became the property of the family of Holand, who bore for their arms, Parted per fess, sable and argent, three fleurs de lis, counterchanged. Henry Holand died possessed of this part of it in the 35th year of king Edward I. holding it in capite, as of the honor of Peverel, and it continued in that name till Henry Holand dying anno 10 Richard II. his daughter and heir Jane became possessed of it; after which it passed into the name of Frakners, and then again into that of Laurence, from whom it was conveyed to Finet, and Robert Finet resided here in queen Elizabeth's reign, being descended from John Finet, of Sienne, in Italy, of an antient family of that name there, who came into England with cardinal Campejus, anno 10 Henry VIII. They bore for their arms, Argent, on a cross engrailed, gules, five fleurs de lis of the field. His son Sir John Finet, master of the ceremonies to king James and king Charles I. likewise resided here, and died in 1641. He left by Jane his wife, daughter of Henry, lord Wentworth, two daughters and coheirs, Lucia and Finette, who became entitled to this manor, which at length was afterwards alienated to Matson, whose descendant Henry Matson, about the year 1720, devised it by his will, with other estates, to the value of one hundred and fifty pounds per annum, to the trustees of Dover harbour, for the use, benefit, and repair of it for ever, but the discharging of the trust in Mr. Matson's will being attended with many difficulties, his affairs were put into the court of chancery, and a decree was made, that the commissioners of Dover harbour should have Diggs-place, Solton, Singledge, and other lands, to make up the one hundred and fifty pounds per annum, they paying forty pounds a year out of these estates to the poor relations of his family, as long as any such of the name should remain according to the devise in his will, and the trustees above-mentioned, are at this time entitled to the fee of it.
There are no parochial charities. The poor constantly maintained are about sixteen, casually six.
THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Dover.
The church, which is dedicated to St. Peter, is small, consisting of only one isle and a chancel. In the chancel is a stone, about one foot square, (not the original one, I apprehend) to the memory of Matthew Gibbon the elder, son of Thomas Gibbon, who built Westcliffe house, and dying in 1629, was buried here. Service being performed in it only once a month, little care is taken of it. This church was given by queen Alianor, wife to king Edward I. together with one acre of land, and the advowson, with the chapels, tithes and appurtenances, to the prior and convent of Christ-church, in pure and perpetual alms, free from all secular service, among other premises, in exchange for the port of Sandwich, which was confirmed by king Edward I. After which, in 1327, anno 2 king Edward III. the parsonage of this church was appropriated to the almnery of the priory, for the sustaining of the chantry founded there by prior Henry de Estry. In which situation it remained till the dissolution of the priory, in the 31st year of king Henry VIII. when it was surrendered, among the other possessions of it; after which, this appropriation and the advowson of the vicarage were settled by the king in his 33d year, among other lands, on his new-erected dean and chapter of Canterbury, part of whose possessions they remain at this time.
On the sequestration of the possessions of deans and chapters, after the death of king Charles I. this parsonage was valued in 1650, by order of the state, when it appeared to consist of the parsonage-house, a large barn and yard, with the parsonage close, of three acres, and four acres lying in Westcliffe common field, together with the tithes of corn and grass, and all other small tithes within the parish, of the improved yearly value of sixty-two pounds. (fn. 7) The lessee repairs the chancel of the parsonage. Thomas Barrett, esq. of Lee, is the present lessee, on a beneficial lease.
The vicarage of Westcliffe is not valued in the king's books. In 1640 it was valued at ten pounds, communicants twenty. It is now of the clear yearly value of twenty-four pounds per annum, which is the augmented pension paid by the dean and chapter, the vicar not being entitled to any tithes whatever, nor even to the profits of the church-yard, all which are demised by the dean and chapter as part of the parsonage.
Maurice Callan, curate in 1466, was buried in this church, and by his will ordered his executors to pave the body of this church with paving tile.
www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=63585
----------------------------------------------------------
A great surprise meets the visitor who is lucky enough to gain admittance here! The church is entered by walking up a hill, but you actually step down into the interior as the hill drops away steeply to the north, with the church set into its ridge. A Norman flint church of nave, chancel and later south tower, it is a haven of peace and light. Much of the latter floods in through the huge Decorated west window (its lancet predecessors may be seen in the wall outside). The church has a rare interior indeed – box pews run down north and south walls and there is a huge alley between, designed for the benches that still survive dotted about the building. Box pews were rented; the benches were for the non-paying poor. In pride of position is the pulpit. All this woodwork dates from the early nineteenth century, although the chancel was refurnished in the 1877s by the Church Commissioners and is standard fare. The lovely east window, the stonework of which is surely of the 1870s, contains some Georgian coloured glass edging – most delightful. Beautifully cared for and much loved, it is a shame that it is not more accessible to the casual visitor.
The three revealed faithssent down as a blessing by our Lord through
trueprophets and true scriptures, Islam and the uncorrupted, genuine
forms of Christianity and Judaism, share many common beliefs. Although
the Torah and the Injil were gradually corrupted over the course of
time, the essence and moral values of the true faith are still to a
large extent preserved in these bookssent down from the Presence of
Allah. These uncorrupted parts can clearly be seen when looked at
using the Qur’an and the hadith asa guide. These three revealed faiths
all believe in the absolute existence of Allah, that He is eternal,
that He created the universe from nothing and that He rules all matter
with His almighty power. Muslims, Christians and Jews also oppose the
same intellectual errors. They share the same intellectual struggle
against atheism, irreligion, racism, fascism and moral degeneration.
All three faiths strive to preach the existence of Allah in the same
way. Members of all three faiths aim fora world full of justice in
which everyone will know Allah, sincerely believe in and submit to
Him, and live in peace and compassion. Members of all three faiths act
out of a fear and love of Allah, follow in the path of His messengers
and abide by His revelation.
In essence, the members of these three faiths believe in and worship
the same, one Allah. Our Almighty Lord has revealed His power and
might, His creative artistry, His sublimity, that He is the Lord of
theworlds, that He is All-Powerful and the soleCreator of all things
in allthree faiths. He is the Lord of the heavens and the earth and
all things belong to Him, He knowsall, is Almighty and is thePossessor
of all. His might, sublime power and majesty pervade all things and
all places. He is unfettered by any flawor deficiency, though He is
needed by all beings.
Our Almighty Lord revealed His faith with the religion of the Prophet
Abraham (peacebe upon him):
We revealed to you: “Follow the religion of Abraham, a man of pure
natural belief. He was not one of the idolaters.” (Surat an-Nahl, 123)
The word “haneef” means “someone who believes in and serves only
Allah.” This is the attribute of the Prophet Abraham (pbuh) that is
emphasized in the Qur’an as being “haneef,” for he believed in and
submitted to Allah as theone and only. This devout servant of Allah
distanced himself from his tribe's superstitious beliefs and turned
solely to Him. He also called on his tribe to abandon their pagan
beliefs and idolatry, and to believe in Allah.
The true religion revealed by Allah to the Prophet Abraham (pbuh)was
kept alive by other prophets from his line and by true believers. This
is revealed in the Qur’an as follows:
Who would deliberately renounce the religion of Abraham except someone
who reveals himself to be a fool? We chose him in the world and in the
Hereafter he will be one of the righteous. When his Lordsaid to him,
“Become a Muslim!” he said, “I am a Muslim who has submitted to the
Lord of all the worlds.” Abrahamdirected his sons to this, as did
Jacob: “My sons! Allah has chosen this religion for you, so do not die
except as Muslims.” Or were you present when death came to Jacob and
he said to his sons, “What will you worship when I have gone?” They
said, “ We will worship your God, the God of your forefathers,
Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac – one God. We are Muslims submitted to Him.
” (Surat al-Baqara, 130-133)
The Prophet Abraham's (pbuh) “haneef” religionis common to Muslims,
Jews and Christians. He was a sincere prophet who believed in one
Godalone, Allah, who praised Him, and who served Him genuinely and
with all his heart. Our Lord praises those who follow the pure faith
of the Prophet Abraham (pbuh) in the Qur’an:
Who could have a betterreligion than someone who submits himself
completely to Allah and is a good-doer, and follows the religion of
Abraham, a man of pure natural belief? Allah tookAbraham as an
intimate friend. (Surat an-Nisa’, 125)
The pure faith of the Prophet Abraham (pbuh), whom Allah praised and
sent as a guide for mankind, and the belief in the one Allah that
forms the basisof that faith are commonvalues shared by true faiths
that were sent down later—Islam, Judaism and Christianity.Therefore,
the members of all three faiths have a responsibility to worshipAllah,
the one Lord of all,He Whose All-Powerful might pervades all things
and all places, theCreator of all things.
This common value requires the members ofall three revealed faiths to
come together in a single monotheistic belief and to act together for
a common purpose. People with true faith, who abide by the religion of
the Prophet Abraham (pbuh)and believe in the one Allah must combine
theirstrengths, grow deeper in faith and grow even stronger in unity
in order to wage an intellectual struggle against the atheist,
Darwinist system that is trying to rule the world. Rather than waging
an artificial struggle againstone another, they must be aware of the
real danger, that is the atheistic, Darwinist system of the antichrist
(dajjal), and must not ignore those forces that are striving to set
believers against one another. They must act together to spread
beliefin Allah across the world and must preach the religion of the
Prophet Abraham (pbuh) together. By Allah’s leave, that will lead to
the greatest force that will totally eradicate the system of the
antichrist that now rules the worldand will cause atheism to collapse
entirely.
Almighty Allah will bestow a great reward from His Presence on those
who genuinely strive in His name, who unite and praise monotheistic
belief and who combine forces in order for belief in Allah to rule the
world. And Hewill make His religion rule the world. By His leave, that
powerful dominion will definitely come about in the time of the coming
of the Prophet Jesus and HazratMahdi (peace be upon them). That time
is now imminent. The coming ofHazrat Mahdi (pbuh), as revealed in
hadith by our Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) and in
the statements by religious scholars, has already happened. Hazrat
Mahdi (pbuh) is currently unrecognized, but he is among us. As for the
second coming of the Prophet Jesus (pbuh), according to the
information in the hadith, the indications in the verses of the Qur’an
and statements by Islamic scholars, this will take place in the next
10 to 20 years. This will be the Golden Age, when the system of the
antichrist is completely defeated and when well-being, peace,
security, brotherhood, wealth and friendship rule the world entirely.
In that time, belief in Allah will rule the world and people will live
by the “haneef” faith of theProphet Abraham (pbuh)in all its majesty
and beauty. All believers have a duty to prepare for this age, when
Muslims, Jews and Christians will live together as brothers under the
leadership of the Prophet Jesus and Hazrat Mahdi (peace be upon them).
For that reason, all believers in the world must seek to praise the
name of Allah together, in feelings of love and brotherhood, and
establish a fine and powerful union against irreligion.
Belief in the One Allah Was Gradually Misinterpreted in Christianity
ACCORDING TO THE TRUE INTERPRETATION OF THE INJIL, belief in Allah in
Christianity is the same as that in Islam and Judaism. However,
certain passages in the Injil have been interpreted differently from
their genuine meanings, and certain descriptions and ideas stemming
from a failure to properly appreciate the might of our Lord have
entered Christian belief. That false belief isthe error of the
trinity.
The error of the trinity adopts a false view of our Almighty Lord and
is a totally mistaken and corrupt belief that ascribes divine status
(surely Allah is beyond that) to the Prophet Jesus (pbuh), whom Allah
sent to mankind as a prophet. Despite its many internal contradictions
and anti-monotheistic nature, it assumed a veryimportant place in
Christian belief. So much so that someone who does not believe in the
error of the trinity, therefore who does not believe that the Prophet
Jesus (pbuh) is the son ofAllah (surely Allah is beyond that) is not
regarded as a true Christian by those who espouse trinitarian belief.
Although the trinity is a false belief in total opposition to the
monotheistic belief, the true one in the Presence of Allah, and
preached by the Prophet Jesus (pbuh), and EVEN CONTRADICTS VARIOUS
PASSAGES IN THE INJIL, it gradually came to be an obsession that
Christians must never deny. Historyshows that those people and
communities who rejected this erroneous belief and maintained that the
Prophet Jesus (pbuh) was merely a human being and a prophet of Allah
have been dealt with harshly. The evidence that such people produced
from the Injil and the life of the Prophet Jesus (pbuh)was always
ignored, andpeople were forbidden to discuss such matters. For that
reason alone, the proponents of monotheistic belief werebranded
“infidels,” “heretics,” or “enemies of the faith” by the Christians in
question, and those who supported them elicited the same reactions.
Some were exiled for that very reason, and others were hanged or burnt
alive by the Inquisition's courts within the history. Through this
repression, BASED NOT ON THE INJIL BUT ON MISINTERPRETATIONS, the
artificial belief in the trinity came to reign supreme through force
and imposition and became a component of Christianity. Many sincere
Christians, unaware of this policy ofimposition, are still blindly
devoted to belief in the trinity, imagining that they are abiding by
the Injil. They are unaware of their error. They do not know this
belief is a total contradiction of the belief in Allah revealed in the
Qur’an, Torah and the Injil. This is a most grave error.
One of the most noteworthy aspects of this subject is that TRINITARIAN
BELIEF DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE BIBLE ITSELF. It appears neitherin the
Old Testament, theholy book of the Jews, nor in the Injil, the
Christian holy text. Rather, it is based on misinterpretations of a
few Injil passages, and the word itself was only used for the first
time byTheophilus of Antioch at the end of the second century.
Acceptance of the belief took place much later. Therefore, NO BELIEF
THAT IS NOT PRESENT IN THE INJIL, ANDWHICH WAS THUS UNKNOWN TO THE
EARLY CHRISTIANS, CAN REPRESENT THE BASIS OF CHRISTIANITY. This is a
grave error that came about after the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) and under
the influence of the established Greek culture.
The Prophet Jesus (pbuh) is completely unfettered by this false belief
artificially developed in Christianity. Like all the prophets, the
Prophet Jesus (pbuh) is a servant created by Allah. He is a sincere
and noble prophet who worships Allah with all his heart and seeks to
earn His approval. He is a chosen, honored messenger of high esteem
(Surah Al ‘Imran, 45). Allah reveals the following about the Prophet
Jesus (pbuh):
The Messiah would never disdain to be a servant to Allah nor would the
angels near toHim . If any do disdain toworship Him, and grow
arrogant, He will in any case gather them all to Him. (Surat an-Nisa’,
172)
As revealed in the verse, the Prophet Jesus (pbuh)is a very genuine
humanbeing eager to discharge the duty of being a servant to Allah and
who has completely submitted to Him. All the statements made about his
supposed claim to divinity are all nonsense produced subsequently. Our
Lord has absolute sovereignty over all beings. APART FROM OUR LORD
HIMSELF, EVERYTHING ELSE NEEDS HIM IN ORDER TO EXIST AND SURVIVE. The
Prophet Jesus (pbuh) of course appreciated this reality and spent his
life striving with all his heartto be the servant of Almighty Allah.
In the verses of the Qur’an, Allah reveals thatthere is no other Deity
but Him using very wise clarifications:
Everyone in the heavens and the earth belongs toHim. Those in His
Presence do not consider themselves too great to worship Him and do
not grow tired ofit. They glorify Him by night and day, without ever
flagging. Or have they taken deities out of the earth who can bring
the dead to life? If there had been any deities besides Allah in
heaven or earth, they would both be ruined. Glory be to Allah, Lord of
the Throne, beyond what they describe! He will not be questioned
aboutwhat He does, but they will be questioned. Or have they taken
other deities besides Him? Say:“Produce your proof! This is the
message of those with me and the message of those before me.” But most
of them do not know the truth, so they turn away. (Suratal-Anbiya’,
19-24)
It Is Stated in the Injil that Allah Is One
While the error of the trinity ascribes divine status (surely Allah
is beyond that) to the Prophet Jesus (pbuh), the oneness of Allah and
His infinite dominion over all things is set out in great detail in
the Injil. People are called tomonotheistic faith in both the message
of the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) to his people and followers, and in the
words of his disciples. In the Injil, THE PROPHET JESUS (pbuh)
constantly makes it clear that EVERYTHING HE DOES IS THE RESULT OF
ALLAH’S INFINITE POWER AND MIGHT, THAT IT IS ALLAH WHO CAUSES HIM TO
SAY EVERYTHING HE SAYS, AND THAT HE PERFORMS THESE MIRACLES ONLY
BECAUSE ALLAH WILLS THEM TO OCCUR. He also invites those who elevate
him to elevate Allah instead, remember His infinite might, and submit
to Him.
Such statements by the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) calling people to belief
in the one Allah are still to be found in the otherwise corrupted
Gospels of the New Testament. For instance, according to the Gospel of
Saint Mark, the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) gave the following reply to a Jew
who asked him which commandment was the most important:
"The most important one," answered Jesus, "isthis: ' Hear, O Israel,
the Lord our God, the Lord isone . Love the Lord your God with all
your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all
your strength.”(Mark 12:29-30)
The following passage again from the Gospel ofSaint Mark shows that
far from ascribing divinestatus to himself, the Prophet Jesus (pbuh)
even prevented himself being praised:
As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his
kneesbefore him. "Good teacher," he asked,"what must I do to inherit
eternal life?""Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. “No one is
good—exceptGod alone.” (Mark 10:17-18)
By refusing praise and emphasizing that only Allah is worthy of it,
the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) makes it clear he is just aservant of Allah.
Those who set up other deities together with Allah are called on to
accept monotheism in many passages of the Injil. Some of these read as
follows:
… answered Jesus, "the Lord our God, the Lord isone” … "Well said,
teacher," the man replied. "You are right insaying that God is One and
there is no other butHim .” (Mark 12: 29-32)
… God is one . (Galatians 3:20)
And exchanged the gloryof the immortal God for images made to look
like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.T hey exchanged the
truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather
than the Creator —Who is forever praised. ... (Romans 1:23-25)
… for us there is but One God, from Whom all things came and for Whom
we live ... (1 Corinthians 8:6)
We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is
no God but One. (1 Corinthians 8:4)
And the twenty-four elders, who were seated on their thrones before
God, fell on their faces and worshiped God, saying: " We give thanks
to You, Lord God Almighty, the One Who isand Who was, …” (Revelation
11:16-17)
Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor
and glory for ever and ever .... (1 Timothy, 1/17)
For there is one God … (1Timothy 2:5)
You believe that there is One God. Good! … (James2:19)
… to the only God our Savior be glory ... (Jude:24)
How can you believe if you accept praise from one another, yet make no
effort to obtain the praise that comes from the only God ? (John 5:44)
For nothing is impossiblewith God . (Luke 1:37)
It is also described in theInjil how the followers of the Prophet
Jesus (pbuh) went from town to town and from villageto village,
preaching the word and calling on people to be Christians believing in
Allah, the one and only:
But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heardof this, they tore their
clothes and rushed out into the crowd, shouting: "Men, why are you
doing this? We too are only men, human like you. We are bringing you
good news, telling you to turn from these worthless things to ... God,
Who made heaven and earth and sea and everything in them… He has shown
kindness by giving you rain from heaven and crops in their seasons; He
provides you with plenty of food and fills your hearts with joy.
"(Acts 14:14-17)
"The God Who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven
and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. And He is not
served by human hands, as if He needed anything, because He Himself
gives all men life and breath and everything else. From one man He
made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth;
and He determined the times setfor them and the exact places where
they should live. God did this so that men would seek Him … though He
is not far from each one of us. For in Him we live and move and have
our being…” (Acts 17:24-28)
The Prophet Jesus (pbuh) always praised the glory of Allah and said
that all power belongs to Allah, in such passages as, “I do
exactlywhat God has commanded me,” (John 14:31); "The words I say to
you are not just my own,” (John 14:10) and "Itell you the truth, the
apostle can do nothing by himself” (John 5:19).
Some passages from the Injil that refer to the infinite might and
power of Allah are as follows:
For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the
glory forever! ... (Romans 11:36)
Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is
forgotten by God. Indeed, the very hairs of your head are all numbered
…. (Luke 12:6-7)
Jesus looked at them and said: "With man this is impossible, but with
God all things are possible. "(Matthew 19:26)
… Who is God over all, forever praised! (Romans9:5)
Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! (Romans 11:33)
Fear [and respect] God and give Him glory, because the hour of His
judgment has come. Worship Him Who made the heavens and earth, the sea
and the springs of water. (Revelation 14:7)
Great and marvellous areYour deeds, Lord God Almighty. Just and true
are Your ways, King of the ages. Who will not fear [and respect] You,
O Lord, and bring glory to Your name? For You alone are holy. All
nations will come and worship before You, for Your righteous acts
havebeen revealed. (Revelation 15:3-4)
Everything comes from God. (1 Corinthians 11:12).
Salvation and glory and power belong to our God, for true and just are
His judgments… For our Lord God Almighty reigns. (Revelation 19:1-6)
There is no authority except that which God has established. The
authorities that exist have been established by God. (Romans 13:1)
…"As surely as I live," saysthe Lord, "every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will confess to God." (Romans14:11)
… God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of
lords, Who alone is immortal and Who lives in unapproachable light,
Whom no one has seen or can see. To Him be honor and might forever. (1
Timothy 6:15-16)
It is revealed in the Qur’an that the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) sought
shelter in Allah from the claims of divinity that some people
heretically made regarding him andCALLED ON PEOPLE TO BELIEVE IN THE
ONE AND ONLY ALLAH:
And when Allah says, ‘‘Jesus son of Mary! Did you say to people, “Take
me and my mother as deities besides Allah?” hewill say, “Glory be to
You! It is not for me to say what I have no right to say! If I had
said it, then You would have known it. You know what is in my self but
I do not know what is in Your Self . You are the Knower of all unseen
things. I said to them nothing but what You ordered me to say: ‘
Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. ’ I was a witness against them
as long as I remained among them, but when You took me back to You,
You were the One watching over them. Youare Witness of all things. If
You punish them, they are Your servants. If you forgive them, You are
the Almighty, the All-Wise.” (Surat al-Ma'ida: 116-118)
... Tribe of Israel, worship Allah, your Lord and my Lord... (Surat
al-Ma’ida, 72)
The Injil clearly contains a great many true passages that praise our
Almighty Lord as the oneand only and that perfectly express His might
and sublimity. Thecorrupt belief in the trinity, which was addedon to
Christianity subsequently, was developed many years after the Injil
had been sent down and consists of an utterly false misconception.
The essential point is of course this: even if someone who can
properly appreciate the sublimity and greatness of Allah has no
knowledge of the history of Christianity, his own conscience should
still make him strongly doubt the idea of trinity. That is becausethis
false belief fails to properly appreciate the might of Allah, and is
an expression of a failure torecognize Allah and His sublimity. It is
revealed in the Qur’an, sent downconfirming the Injil and the Torah,
that this erroneous belief spread among Christians is actually
“polytheism” and sincere Christians are warned on the subject.
They say, “Allah has a son.” Glory be to Him! No, everything in the
heavens and earth belongs to Him . Everything is obedient toHim, the
Originator of the heavens and earth. When He decides on something, He
just says to it, “Be!” and it is. (Surat al-Baqara, 116-117)
They say, “The All-Merciful has a son.” They have devised a monstrous
thing. The heavens are all but rent apart and the earth split open and
the mountainsbrought crashing down, at their ascription of a son to
the All-Merciful. It is not fitting for the All-Merciful to have a
son. There is no one in the heavens and earth who will not come to
theAll-Merciful as a servant . He has counted them and numbered them
precisely. Each of them will come to Him on the Day of Rising all
alone. (Surah Maryam, 88-95)
Allah Is Praised As the One and Only God in the Torah
The Judaism described inthe Torah sent down to the Prophet Moses
(pbuh) is a monotheistic faith, just like Islam. TrueJews praise our
Lord as the one and only God, genuinely believe that Allah is the Lord
of all, that there is no other Creator but Him and thatall beings are
in need of Him.
Almighty Allah is praised in the Old Testament andreverenced as the
sole Possessor of power, strength and sublimity, the one and only God.
Christians, who believe in the Old Testament as well as the New
Testament must not ignore this fact:
The Lord is God; besides Him there is no other … Acknowledge and take
to heart this day that theLord is God in heaven above and on Earth
below. There is no other.(Deuteronomy 4:35-39)
… Before Me no God was formed, nor will there be one after Me. I, even
I, am the Lord, and apartfrom Me there is no savior... (Isaiah,
43:10-11)
For this is what the Lord says—He Who created the heavens, He is God;
He Who fashioned and made the earth, He founded it; He did not create
it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited—He says: "I am the Lord,
and there isno other.” (Isaiah 45:18)
And there is no God apart from Me, a righteous God and a Savior; there
is none but Me. (Isaiah 45:21)
... The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all
your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.
(Deuteronomy 6:4-5)
… I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me
. (Isaiah 46:9)
So that all the peoples ofthe earth may know thatthe Lord is God and
that there is no other. (1 Kings, 8:60)
This is what the Lord says: “ … Surely God is with you, and there is
noother; there is no other God. "(Isaiah 45:14)
The Lord our God, the Lord is one. (Deuteronomy 6:4)
... O Lord; no deeds can compare with Yours. All the nations You have
made will come and worship before You, O Lord; they will bring glory
to Your name. For You are great and do marvelous deeds; You alone are
God. (Psalms 86:8-10)
O Lord Almighty ... You alone are God over all the kingdoms of the
earth. You have made heaven and earth. (Isaiah 37:16)
… so that all kingdoms on earth may know that You alone, O Lord, are
God. (Isaiah 37:20)
This is what the Lord says—your Redeemer, Who formed you in the womb:
I am the Lord, Who has made all things,Who alone stretched outthe
heavens, Who spread out the earth by Myself . (Isaiah, 44:24)
Since ancient times no one has heard, no ear has perceived, no eye has
seen any God besides You, who acts onbehalf of those who wait for him.
(Isaiah 64:4)
… Was it not I, the Lord? And there is no God apart from Me, a
righteous God and a Savior; there is none but Me . (Isaiah 45:21)
"See now that I myself am He! There is no God besides Me. I put to
death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal …
(Deuteronomy 32:39)
“… so that you may know there is no one like the Lord our God." (Exodus 8:10)
O Lord ... there is no God like You in heaven aboveor on earth below
…. (1 Kings 8:23; 2 Chronicles 6:14)
Then Asa called to the Lord his God and said, "Lord, there is no one
like You to help the powerless against the mighty…” (2 Chronicles
14:11)
You can access detailed explanations on the subject from here .
True Believers in the OneAllah Must Unite in Order to Spread the Glory
of Our Almighty Lord
Muslims, Christians and Jews are all believing descendants of the
Prophet Abraham (pbuh)and they all believe in the same Allah, strive
to spread the Sublime Gloryof our Lord and eliminate irreligion
fromthe world. At this time when atheism, degeneration, Darwinism,
anarchy, oppression and war are so widespread, it is a great blessing
and support from Allah that there are believers who believe in the one
and only Allah and who eagerly strive to praise Him by adhering to the
“haneef” faith of the Prophet Abraham (pbuh). At this blessed time,
that of the coming of the Prophet Jesus and Hazrat Mahdi (peace be
upon them), we must actbefitting this blessing bestowed on us by our
Almighty Lord and establish an intellectual union to praise His name.
If true believers fall for the traps set by masonic Evangelicals or
masonic Muslims and fallout with one another, if they strive against
one another rather than against atheists and Darwinists, that could
mean their failing to properly appreciate this blessing from Allah.
Our Lord tells all believers to be united, and any efforts to disunite
believers may hinder Allah’s bounty. Instead ofbestowing blessings
andvictory, Allah may hold blessings back from believers because of
this attitude. We must act in the knowledge of this and praise His
faith with all our hearts. The most essential condition for this is
not to be deceivedby the snares of the masons, to find the truthby the
use of conscience,reason and faith and to act accordingly.
Almighty Allah is the Lord of all beings, and absolute power and
victory belong to Him alone. Every effort to praise His name is an act
of worship the believers need to draw closer to Him and gain Paradise.
Itis certain that Allah has the power to cause His religion to prevail
without the need for any natural causes.
In late July 2010, flooding caused by heavy monsoon rains began in several regions of Pakistan, including the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh, Punjab and parts of Baluchistan. According to the Associated Press, the floods have affected about one-fifth of the country. Tens of thousands of villages have been flooded, more than 1,500 people have been killed, and millions have been left homeless. The floodwaters are not expected to fully recede before late August. This image shows how surface emissivity -- that is, how efficiently Earth's surface radiates heat -- changed in the affected region over a 32-day period between July 11 (pre-flood) and August 12 (post-flood). The image was created using data from the Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit instrument, which flies on NASA's Aqua spacecraft as part of the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) instrument suite. Surface emissivity, in this case, in the microwave region of the electromagnetic spectrum, depends strongly on what type of surface is present. For dry land, it is high, close to 1 (land radiates heat very efficiently), while for water, it is quite low, less than 0.5 (water tends to retain heat better than land). The image shows that the emissivity has dropped by up to 0.4 in large areas surrounding the Indus River, indicating that these areas are almost completely under water.
Scientists can use this technique to estimate how much of the land surface has been inundated. A significant advantage of the technique is that it works regardless of time of day and under both clear and cloudy conditions.
______________________________________________________________________
About AIRS
The Atmospheric Infrared Sounder, AIRS, in conjunction with the Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit, AMSU, sense emitted infrared and microwave radiation from the Earth to provide a three-dimensional look at Earth's weather and climate. Working in tandem, the two instruments make simultaneous observations all the way down to the Earth's surface, even in the presence of heavy clouds. With more than 2,000 channels sensing different regions of the atmosphere, the system creates a global, 3-dimensional map of atmospheric temperature and humidity, cloud amounts and heights, greenhouse gas concentrations, and many other atmospheric phenomena. The AIRS and AMSU fly onboard NASA's Aqua spacecraft and are managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California, under contract to NASA. JPL is a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena.
Credit
NASA/JPL AIRS Project
Download the image
Various sizes of the image are available, and there are two ways to download:
1) Right-click on the image. Click on a size next to "View all sizes".
2) Click on the "Actions" menu located above the image. Select "View all sizes".
Resources
Atmospheric Infrared Sounder web site ›
How to get the AIRS data
Red River Basin Investigation. Probable Extent of 1826 and 1852 Floods in the Winnipeg Area [map]. 1:13,650. In: Red River Basin Investigation, Water Resources Division. Report on Investigations into Measures for the Reduction of the Flood Hazard in the Greater Winnipeg Area. [Ottawa]: Dept. of Resources and Development, Engineering and Water Resources Branch, 1953, plate 19.
Number:
179495
Date created:
1988
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 7.5 x 9.5 in.
Description:
Front row, from left to right: 1) DeAngelis; 2) Barnes; 3) Oski.
Second row, from left to right: 1) Lewis; 2) Zuckerberg; 3) McColley; 4) Resar; 5) Fasano; 6) Atton; 7) May; 8) McGrath-Morrow.
Third row, form left to right: 1) Reardon; 2) Keller; 3) Solow; 4) Wong; 5) Kapphahn; 6) Markel; 7) Scharfstein; 8) Ballaban; 9) Livingston.
Fourth row, from left to right: 1) Greene; 2) Cortese; 3) Cooke; 4) Christenson; 5) Daft; 6) Morrison; 7) Bazell; 8) Bernstein; 9) Pao; 10) Scheel; 11) Hart.
Fifth row, from left to right: 1) Orel; 2) Besser; 3) Broadbent; 4) Ragheb; 5) Baldwin; 6) Egan; 7) Thomas; 8) Elder; 9) Wittpenn; 10) Pearson; 11) Shenker.
Back row, from left to right: 1) Duggan; 2) Wechsler; 3) Molrine; 4) Orzech; 5) Funkhouser; 6) Burns; 7) Flotte; 8) Shearer; 9) Johnson.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Johns Hopkins Hospital. Department of Pediatrics--People
DeAngelis, Catherine D.
Barnes, Steven D.
Oski, Frank A
Lewis, Lisa S.
Zuckerberg, Aaron L.
McColley, Susanna A.
Resar, Linda Smith
Fasano, Mary B.
Atton, Andrew Vincent
May, Michael W.
McGrath-Morrow, Sharon Ann
Reardon, David A.
Keller, Bradley B.
Solow, Linda A.
Wong, Jackson
Kapphahn, Cynthia Joyce
Markel, Howard
Scharfstein, Suzanne King
Ballaban, Karen R.
Livingston, Robert Alan
Greene, Mary G.
Cortese, Margaret Mary
Cooke, David William
Christenson, Marie J.
Daft, Paula A.
Morrison, Leslie Anne
Bazell, Carol Martin
Bernstein, Elizabeth F.
Pao, Maryland
Scheel, Janet Nagle
Hart, Carolyn Elizabeth
Orel, Howard N.
Besser, Richard E.
Broadbent, Kenneth R.
Ragheb, Jack A.
Baldwin, Robert M.
Egan, Marie E.
Thomas, Pamela M.
Elder, Melissa A.
Wittpenn, Ann Saylor
Pearson, Ellyn B.
Shenker, Andrew
Duggan, Christopher Paul
Wechsler, Daniel S. G.
Molrine, Deborah Claire
Orzech, Bonnie L.
Funkhouser, Ann Ward
Burns, Stephanie Ann
Flotte, Terrence R.
Shearer, Patricia D.
Johnson, Kevin Brian
Pediatricians
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
Notes: Photographer unknown.
Number:
171751
Date created:
1933
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 5 x 9 in.
Front row: 1) L. Kelley; 2) B. Tarkoff; 3) E. Swaney; 4) I. Boyer; 5) B. Ellmer; 6) M. Prime; 7) L. Shattuck; 8) V. Compton; 9) E. Stevens; 10) S. Johnson; 11) A. Koblarchick; 12) R. Crawford; 13) M. White; 14) M. Clark; 15) M. Troop; 16) T. Skrivan; 17) L. Van Horn. Second row: 1) P. Anderson; 2) P. Gattis; 3) R. Furlong; 4) N. Hackman; 5) A. Mustard; 6) M. Mann; 7) M. Mulson; 8) Miss Lawler; 9) Miss Hay; 10) M. Bard; 11) V. Fuller; 12) M. McIntosh; 13) P. Hodges; 14) N. Replogle; 15) M. Wilbur; 16) E. Willmore; 17) L. Schulze. Third row: 1) V. Marshall; 2) M. Mears; 3) C. Waldron; 4) E. Nemecek; 5) M. Davis; 6) M. Argo; 7) S. Doggett; 8) M. Seeds; 9) K. Petzold; 10) E. Johnson; 11) M. Hoch; 12) L. Marshall; 13) A. Megules; 14) C. Merrill. Back row: 1) M. Rinehart; 2) L. McGranahan; 3) G. Hawley; 4) A. Bowman; 5) G. McCuen; 6) G. Alt.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Johns Hopkins Hospital School of Nursing--People
Alt, Grace E.
Mahoney, Pauline Anderson
Argo, Myrtle B.
Vinczeller, Marian Bard
Betzold, K. Virginia
Bowman, Anita Grace
Maxwell, Inez Boyer Robson
Hisle, Margaret Clark
Mulford, Virginia Compton
Crawford, Rose
Sarney, Eugenia Davis
Joerger, Sarah Doggett
Elmer, Blanche
Walton, Virginia A. Fuller
Furlong, Rose Lilyan
Gatts, Patsy
Hackman, Naomi Ruth
Oard, Gertrude Hawley
Hoch, Margaret A.
Hopkins, Pauline Hodges
Powers, Esther Johnson
Johnson, Sara M.
Daniel, Lillie Kelley
Koblarchick, Anna May
Feldman, Marjorie Mann
Marshall, Lilyan May
Parsons, Virginia Marshall
Richardson, Margaret McIntosh
McCuen, Georgia
McGranahan, Lois
Mears, Margaret C.
Cousins, Agnes M. Megules
Cover, Carolyn Merrill
Dalton, Madeleine Mulson
Mustard, Alice Isabel
Nemecek, Emelia P.
Nickel, Marjorie Prime
Fenn, Nannie Mae Replogle
Moran, Irene Rinehart
Lawrence, Leona Schulze
Seeds, Margaret
Richardson, Louise Shattuck
Skrivan, Theresa
Stevens, Elizabeth R.
Swaney, Edith M.
Tarkoff, Bessie
Troop, Mary Elizabeth
Van Horn, Lena
Waldron, Catherine
Brandt, Mary Eleanor White
Henninger, Mabel E. Wilbur
Wilmore, Emma Rachel
Lawler, Elsie M.
Nursing students--Maryland--Baltimore--1930-1940
Nurses--Maryland--Baltimore--1930-1940
Graduation ceremonies--Maryland--Baltimore--1930-1940
Portrait photographs
Group portraits
Notes: Photographer unknown.
Number:
164538
Date created:
1971-06-09
Extent:
1 photographic print : col. ; 8 x 10 in.
Scope and content:
Back row: 1) Barbara Lindsay Dibble Taber; 2) Janet Lee Miller; 3) Linda Carol Ross; 4) Diane M. DeSombre; 5) Gail Paige Houser; 6) Patricia E. Palmere; 7) Cynthia A. Jones; 8) Mary Lou Sweigert Turchi; 9) Leslie Ann Walker; 10) Marjorie Maisak; 11) George Mason; 12) unidentified; 13) Nancy Jean Huber; 14) Stephanie Sue Mealy; 15) Marshal Kristin Henry; 16) Cecelia Louise Calhan; 17) Barbara Jean McLaughlin; 18) Patricia Anne Conner; 19) Joanne Marie Satterfield; 20) Margaret Priscilla Wroth Harris; 21) unidentified. Front row: 1) Ellen Catherine Beckman; 2) Sheila M. Kent Merritt; 3) Nancy Jane Cournoyer; 4) Karyn Lee Cooper; 5) Nancy Kilmer Marociglia; 6) Barbara Crummitt; 7) Tery Lynn Woods; 8) Kathleen Mildred Mohr; 9) Debra Rose Cappolloni; 10) Alison Elizabeth Stup; 11) Priscilla Jean Schildwachter; 12) Lynda Woodworth; 13) Llyern Leslie Abercrombie; 14) Ann Simmons
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Church Home and Hospital (Baltimore, Md.). School of Nursing
Abercrombie, Llyern Leslie
Beckman, Ellen Catherine
Calhan, Cecelia Louise
Cappolloni, Debra Rose
Clary, Judith Ann
Cournoyer, Nancy Jane
Crummitt, Barbara
DeSombre, Diane M.
McDonald, Barbara Dibble
Harris, Margaret Priscilla Wroth
Henry, Marsha Kristin
Houser, Gail Paige
Huber, Nancy Jean
Jones, Cynthia A.
Kelmer, Frances Louise
McLaughlin, Barbara Jean
Mealy, Stephanie Sue
Merritt, Sheila M. Kent
Miller, Janet Lee
Mohr, Kathleen Mildred
Palmere, Patricia E.
Ross, Linda Carol
Satterfield, Joanne Marie
Schildwachter, Priscilla Jean
Simmons, Ann
Stup, Alison Elizabeth
Turchi, Mary Lou
Walker, Leslie Ann
Woods, Tery Lynn
Woodworth, Lynda
Mason, George W.
Maisak, Marjorie B.
Nursing students--Maryland--Baltimore--1970-1980
Nurses--Maryland--Baltimore--1970-1980
Graduation ceremonies--Maryland--Baltimore--1970-1980
Nursing schools--Faculty
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
Notes:
Photographer unknown.
Number:
179504
Date created:
1994
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 7.5 x 9.5 in.
Description:
Front row, from left to right: 1) Barone; 2) Hom; 3) Flowers; 4) Oski; 5) Hays; 6) Oski; 7) Hardart; 8) McMillan; 9) Reis; 10) Deacon; 11) Dudas; 12) Shimamura.
Second row, from left to right: 1) Clemens; 2) Levey; 3) Goodman; 4) Kadan; 5) Ratanawongsa; 6) Fertsch; 7) Hirshon; 8) Gropman; 9) Lee; 10) O'Grady; 11) Shores.
Third row, form left to right: 1) Zorc; 2) Crocetti; 3) Miller; 4) Hopkins; 5) Gilbert; 6) Cummings; 7) Saha; 8) Hearns; 9) Slote; 10) Gould.
Fourth row, from left to right: 1) S. Beck; 2) Mehta; 3) Nichols; 4) Santoli; 5) Foster; 6) Hanawalt; 7) Girman; 8) Gajary; 9) Loomes; 10) Karamanos; 11) Sills; 12) Moses.
Fifth row, from left to right: 1) Nigrin; 2) Lundquist; 3) Huang; 4) Junkins; 5) Peitavino; 6) Adler; 7) Koch; 8) Rheingold; 9) Kwiatkowski; 10) Sibinga.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Johns Hopkins Hospital. Department of Pediatrics--People
Barone, Michael A.
Hom, Xenia B.
Flowers, Margaret D.
Oski, Jane Anoush
Hardart, George E.
McMillan, Julia
Reis, Brijit Meehan-Bert
Deacon, Beth R.
Dudas, Robert Arthur
Shimamura, Akiko
Clemens, Christopher T.
Levey, Eric B.
Goodman, Rachel G.
Kadan, Nina Singh
Ratanawongsa, Boosara
Ruggio, Diana Fertsch
Hirshon, Cecilia
Gropman, Andrea L.
Lee, Lucia H.
O'Grady, Denise Maryann
Shores, Jennifer Clare
Zorc, Joseph J.
Crocetti, Michael T.
Miller, Marlene R.
Hopkins, Katherine Lee S.
Gilbert, Donald L.
Cummings, Susan Dona
Saha, Prantik
Hearns, Michelle L.
Slote, Adam Y.
Gould, Rebecca B.
Beck, Suzanne E.
Mehta, Alka
Nichols, Jill E.
Santoli, Jeanne Marie
Foster, Charles A.
Hanawalt, Martin E.
Girman-Ratan, Andrea Marie
Gajary, Zia L.
Loomes, Kathleen M.
Karamanos, Zaharoula A.
Sills, Marion Ruth
Moses, C. Jill
Nigrin, Daniel Joseph
Lundquist, Thomas George
Huang, James
Junkins, Edward Paul Jr.
Peitavano, Nancy
Adler, Mark D.
Koch, Katherine Sanford
Rheingold, Susan Robbins
Kwiatkowski, Janet L.
Sibinga, Erica M.
Pediatricians
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
Notes: Photographer unknown.
Number:
164468
Creator:
Hughes Company
Date created:
1950-06-14
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 8 x 10 in.
Scope and content:
Front row: 1) Ruth Roney; 2) Jeanne Roney; 3) Margaret Fawcett; 4) Shirley A. Wilson; 5) Margaret Shaw; 6) S. Kathryn Knight; 7) Margaretha Smith; 8) Margaret Reed; 9) Ruth Trumbo; 10) Sarah ruth Meyers; 11) Patricia thomas; 12) Althea Ranck. Second row: 1) Dorothy J. Maberry; 2) Edith B. Fort; 3) Ellee Nichols; 4) Mary Dell Fortune; 5) Doris J. Kiehl; 6) Saranne Van Swearingen; 7) Gladys M
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Church Home and Hospital (Baltimore, Md.). School of Nursing
Baker, Nancy Jane
Crockett, Lillian Smith
Fawcett, Margaret Ann
Fort, Edith Benson
Fortune, Mary Dell
Green, Mary Virginia
Jordan, Donna Jean
Kiehl, Doris Jane
Kline, Kathleen Louisa
Knight, Sarah Kathryn
Knode, Mary Lou
Maberry, Dorothy Jane
Meyers, Sarah Ruth
Miller, Nancy Anne
Mueller, Gladys Ann
Nichols, Ellee Randolph
Nicholson, Estella Jane
Ranck, Althea Mae
Reed, Margaret Joy
Roney, Margaret Jeanne
Roney, Ruth Evelyn
Shaw, Margaret Jane
Slaybaugh, Norma Jene
Smith, Margaretha Loraine
Steinke, Marion Faye
Thomas, Patricia Allene
Trumbo, Ruth O' Nile
Van Swearingen, Saranne
Waggoner, Betty Jane
Wagner, Betty Lou
Willard, Alta Jeanette
Wilson, Shirley Abagail
Creutzburg, Freda Lewis, 1898-1963
Elliott, Margaret, 1884-1966
Nash, Jane Evans, 1880-1955
Nursing students--Maryland--Baltimore--1950-1960
Nurses--Maryland--Baltimore--1950-1960
Graduation ceremonies--Maryland--Baltimore--1950-1960
Nursing schools--Faculty
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
From The New Gresham Encyclopedia 1922:
Canute (Knut), who espoused the widow of Ethelred, that he might reconcile his new subjects, obtained the name of Great, not only on account of his personal qualities, but from the extent of his dominions, being master of Denmark and Norway as well as England. In 1035 he died, and was followed in England by two other Danish kings, Harold and Hardicanute, whose joint reigns lasted till 1042, after which the English line was again restored in the person of Edward the Confessor. Edward was a weak prince, and in the latter years of his reign had far less real power than his brother-in-law Harold, son of the great Earl Godwin. On Edward's death in 1066 Harold accordingly obtained the crown. He found, however, a formidable opponent in the second-cousin of Edward, William of Normandy, who instigated [246]the Danes to invade the northern counties, while he, with 60,000 men, landed in the south. Harold vanquished the Danes, and hastening southwards met the Normans near Hastings, at Senlac, afterwards called Battle. Harold and his two brothers fell (14th Oct., 1066), and William (1066-87) immediately claimed the government as lawful King of England, being subsequently known as William I, the Conqueror. For some time he conducted the government with great moderation; but being obliged to reward those who had assisted him, he bestowed the chief offices of government upon Normans, and divided among them a great part of the country. The revolts of the native English which followed were quickly crushed, Continental feudalism in a modified form was established, and the English Church reorganized under Lanfranc as Archbishop of Canterbury.
At his death, in 1087, William II, commonly known by the name of Rufus, the Conqueror's second son, obtained the crown, Robert, the eldest son, receiving the duchy of Normandy. In 1100, when William II was accidentally killed in the New Forest, Robert was again cheated of his throne by his younger brother Henry (Henry I), who in 1106 even wrested from him the duchy of Normandy. Henry's power being secured, he entered into a dispute with Anselm the Primate, and with the Pope, concerning the right of granting investure to the clergy. He supported his quarrel with firmness, and brought it to a not unfavourable issue. His reign was also marked by the suppression of the greater Norman nobles in England, whose power (like that of many Continental feudatories) threatened to overshadow that of the king, and by the substitution of a class of lesser nobles. In 1135 he died in Normandy, leaving behind him only a daughter, Matilda.
By the will of Henry I his daughter Maud or Matilda, wife of Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count of Anjou, and frequently styled the Empress Matilda, because she had first been married to Henry V, Emperor of Germany, was declared his successor. But Stephen, son of the Count of Blois, and of Adela, daughter of William the Conqueror, raised an army in Normandy, landed in England, and declared himself king. After years of civil war and bloodshed an amicable arrangement was brought about, by which it was agreed that Stephen should continue to reign during the remainder of his life, but that he should be succeeded by Henry, son of Matilda and the Count of Anjou. Stephen died in 1154, and Henry Plantagenet ascended the throne with the title of Henry II, being the first of the Plantagenet or Angevin kings. A larger dominion was united under his sway than had been held by any previous sovereign of England, for at the time when he became King of England he was already in the possession of Anjou, Normandy, and Aquitaine.
Henry II found far less difficulty in restraining the licence of his barons than in abridging the exorbitant privileges of the clergy, who claimed exemption not only from the taxes of the State, but also from its penal enactments, and who were supported in their demands by the Primate Becket. The king's wishes were formulated in the Constitutions of Clarendon (1164), which were at first accepted and then repudiated by the Primate. The assassination of Becket, however, placed the king at a disadvantage in the struggle, and after his conquest of Ireland (1171) he submitted to the Church, and did penance at Becket's tomb. Henry was the first who placed the common people of England in a situation which led to their having a share in the Government. The system of frank-pledge was revived, trial by jury was instituted by the Assize of Clarendon, and the Eyre courts were made permanent by the Assize of Nottingham. To curb the power of the nobles he granted charters to towns, freeing them from all subjection to any but himself, thus laying the foundation of a new order in society.
Richard I, called Cœur de Lion, who in 1189 succeeded to his father, Henry II, spent most of his reign away from England. Having gone to Palestine to join in the third crusade, he proved himself an intrepid soldier. Returning homewards in disguise through Germany, he was made prisoner by Leopold, Duke of Austria, but was ransomed by his subjects. In the meantime John, his brother, had aspired to the crown, and hoped, by the assistance of the French, to exclude Richard from his right. Richard's presence for a time restored matters to some appearance of order; but having undertaken an expedition against France, he received a mortal wound at the siege of Châlons, in 1199.
John was at once recognized as King of England, and secured possession of Normandy; but Anjou, Maine, and Touraine acknowledged the claim of Arthur, son of Geoffrey, second son of Henry II. On the death of Arthur, while in John's power, these four French provinces were at once lost to England. John's opposition to the Pope in electing a successor to the see of Canterbury in 1205 led to the kingdom being placed under an Interdict; and, the nation being in a disturbed condition, he was at last compelled to receive Stephen Langton as archbishop, and to accept his kingdom as a fief of the papacy (1213). His exactions and misgovernment had equally embroiled him with the nobles. In 1213 they refused to follow him to France, and, on his return defeated, they at once took measures to secure their own privileges and abridge [247]the perogatives of the Crown. King and barons met at Runnymede, and on 15th June, 1215, the Great Charter (Magna Charta) was signed. It was speedily declared null and void by the Pope and war broke out between John and the barons, who were aided by the French king. In 1216, however, John died, and his turbulent reign was succeeded by the almost equally turbulent reign of his son Henry III.
During the first years of the reign of Henry III the abilities of the Earl of Pembroke, who was regent until 1219, retained the kingdom in tranquillity; but when, in 1227, Henry assumed the reins of government he showed himself incapable of managing them. The Charter was three times reissued in a modified form, and new privileges were added to it, but the king took no pains to observe its provisions. The struggle, long maintained in the Great Council (henceforward called Parliament) over money grants and other grievances, reached an acute stage in 1263, when civil war broke out. Simon de Montfort, who had laid the foundations of the House of Commons by summoning representatives of the shire communities to the Mad Parliament of 1258, had by this time engrossed the sole power. He defeated the king and his son Edward at Lewes in 1264, and in his famous Parliament of 1265 still further widened the privileges of the people by summoning to it burgesses as well as knights of the shire. The escape of Prince Edward, however, was followed by the battle of Evesham (1265), at which Earl Simon was defeated and slain, and the rest of the reign was undisturbed.
On the death of Henry III, in 1272, Edward I succeeded without opposition. From 1276 to 1284 he was largely occupied in the conquest and annexation of Wales, which had become practically independent during the barons' wars. In 1292 Baliol, whom Edward had decided to be rightful heir to the Scottish throne, did homage for the fief to the English king; but when, in 1294, war broke out with France, Scotland also declared war. The Scots were defeated at Dunbar (1296), and the country placed under an English regent; but the revolt under Wallace (1297) was followed by that of Bruce (1306), and the Scots remained unsubdued. The reign of Edward was distinguished by many legal and legislative reforms, such as the separation of the old king's court into the Court of Exchequer, Court of King's Bench, and Court of Common Pleas, and the passage of the Statute of Mortmain. In 1295 the first perfect Parliament was summoned, the clergy and barons by special writ, the commons by writ to the sheriffs directing the election of two knights from each shire, two citizens from each city, two burghers from each borough. Two years later the imposition of taxation without consent of Parliament was forbidden by a special Act (De Tallagio non Concedendo). The great aim of Edward, however, to include England, Scotland, and Wales in one kingdom proved a failure, and he died in 1307 marching against Robert Bruce.
The reign of his son Edward II was unfortunate to himself and to his kingdom. He made a feeble attempt to carry out his father's last and earnest request to prosecute the war with Scotland, but the English were almost constantly unfortunate; and at length, at Bannockburn (1314), they were defeated by Robert Bruce, which ensured the independence of Scotland. The king soon proved incapable of regulating the lawless conduct of his barons; and his wife, a woman of a bold, intriguing disposition, joined in the confederacy against him, which resulted in his imprisonment and death in 1327.
The reign of Edward III was as brilliant as that of his father had been the reverse. The main projects of the third Edward were directed against France, the crown of which he claimed in 1328 in virtue of his mother, the daughter of King Philip. The victory won by the Black Prince at Crécy (1346), the capture of Calais (1347), and the victory of Poitiers (1356), ultimately led to the Peace of Brétigny in 1360, by which Edward III received all the west of France on condition of renouncing his claim to the French throne. (See Brétigny.) Before the close of his reign, however, these advantages were all lost again, save a few principal towns on the coast.
Edward III was succeeded in 1377 by his grandson Richard II, son of Edward the Black Prince. The people of England now began to show, though in a turbulent manner, that they had acquired just notions of government. In 1380 an unjust and oppressive poll-tax brought their grievances to a head, and 100,000 men, under Wat Tyler, marched towards London (1381). Wat Tyler was killed while conferring with the king, and the prudence and courage of Richard appeased the insurgents. Despite his conduct on this occasion, Richard was deficient in the vigour necessary to curb the lawlessness of the nobles. In 1398 he banished his cousin, Henry Bolingbroke; and on the death of the latter's father, the Duke of Lancaster, unjustly appropriated his cousin's patrimony. To avenge the injustice Bolingbroke landed in England during the king's absence in Ireland, and at the head of 60,000 malcontents compelled Richard to surrender. He was confined in the Tower, and despite the superior claims of Edmund Mortimer, Earl of March, Henry was appointed king (1399), the first of the House of Lancaster. Richard was, in all probability, murdered early in 1400.
The manner in which the Duke of Lancaster, [248]now Henry IV, acquired the crown rendered his reign extremely turbulent, but the vigour of his administration quelled every insurrection. The most important—that of the Percies of Northumberland, Owen Glendower, and Douglas of Scotland—was crushed by the battle of Shrewsbury (1403). During the reign of Henry IV the clergy of England first began the practice of burning heretics under the Act de haeretico comburendo, passed in the second year of his reign. The Act was chiefly directed against the Lollards, as the followers of Wycliffe now came to be called. Henry died in 1413, leaving his crown to his son, Henry V, who revived the claim of Edward III to the throne of France in 1415, and invaded that country at the head of 30,000 men. The disjointed councils of the French rendered their country an easy prey; the victory of Agincourt was gained in 1415; and after a second campaign a peace was concluded at Troyes in 1420, by which Henry received the hand of Katherine, daughter of Charles VI, was appointed regent of France during the reign of his father-in-law, and declared heir to the throne on his death. The two kings, however, died within a few weeks of each other in 1422, and the infant son of Henry thus became King of England (as Henry VI) and France at the age of nine months.
England, during the reign of Henry VI, was subjected, in the first place, to all the confusion incident to a long minority, and afterwards to all the misery of a civil war. Henry allowed himself to be managed by anyone who had the courage to assume the conduct of his affairs, and the influence of his wife, Margaret of Anjou, a woman of uncommon capacity, was of no advantage either to himself or the realm. In France (1422-53) the English forces lost ground, and were finally expelled by the celebrated Joan of Arc, Calais alone being retained. The rebellion of Jack Cade in 1450 was suppressed, only to be succeeded by more serious trouble. In that year Richard, Duke of York, the father of Edward, afterwards Edward IV, began to advance his pretensions to the throne, which had been so long usurped by the House of Lancaster. His claim was founded on his descent from the third son of Edward III, Lionel, Duke of Clarence, who was his great-great-grandfather on the mother's side, while Henry was the great-grandson on the father's side of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, the fourth son of Edward III. Richard of York was also grandson on the father's side of Edmund, fifth son of Edward III. The wars which resulted, called the Wars of the Roses, from the fact that a red rose was the badge of the House of Lancaster and a white one that of the House of York, lasted for thirty years, from the first battle of St. Albans, 22nd May, 1455, to the battle of Bosworth, 22nd Aug., 1485. Henry VI was twice driven from the throne (in 1461 and 1471) by Edward of York, whose father had previously been killed in battle in 1460. Edward of York reigned as Edward IV from 1461 till his death in 1483, with a brief interval in 1471; and was succeeded by two other sovereigns of the House of York, first his son Edward V, who reigned for eleven weeks in 1483; and then by his brother Richard III, who reigned from 1483 till 1485, when he was defeated and slain on Bosworth field by Henry Tudor, of the House of Lancaster, who then became Henry VII.
Henry VII was at this time the representative of the House of Lancaster, and in order at once to strengthen his own title, and to put an end to the rivalry between the Houses of York and Lancaster, he married, in 1486, Elizabeth, the sister of Edward V and heiress of the House of York. His reign was disturbed by insurrections attending the impostures of Lambert Simnel (1487), who pretended to be a son of the Duke of Clarence, brother of Edward IV, and of Perkin Warbeck (1488), who affirmed that he was the Duke of York, younger brother of Edward V; but neither of these attained any magnitude. The king's worst fault was the avarice which led him to employ in schemes of extortion such instruments as Empson and Dudley. His administration throughout did much to increase the royal power and to establish order and prosperity. He died in 1509.
The authority of the English Crown, which had been so much extended by Henry VII, was by his son Henry VIII exerted in a tyrannical and capricious manner. The most important event of the reign was undoubtedly the Reformation; though it had its origin rather in Henry's caprice and in the casual situation of his private affairs than in his conviction of the necessity of a reformation in religion, or in the solidity of reasoning employed by the reformers. Henry had been espoused to Catherine of Spain, who was first married to his elder brother Arthur, a prince who died young. Henry became disgusted with his queen, and enamoured of one of her maids of honour, Anne Boleyn. He had recourse, therefore, to the Pope to dissolve a marriage which had at first been rendered legal only by a dispensation from the Pontiff; but, failing in his desires, he broke away entirely from the Holy See, and in 1534 got himself recognized by Act of Parliament as the head of the English Church. He died in 1547. He was married six times, and left three children, each of whom reigned in turn. These were: Mary, by his first wife, Catherine of Aragon; Elizabeth, by his second wife, Anne Boleyn; and Edward, by his third wife, Jane Seymour. [249]
Edward, who reigned first, with the title of Edward VI, was nine years of age at the time of his succession, and died in 1553, when he was only sixteen. His short reign, or rather the reign of the Earl of Hertford, afterwards Duke of Somerset, who was appointed regent, was distinguished chiefly by the success which attended the measures of the reformers, who acquired great part of the power formerly engrossed by the Catholics. The intrigues of Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, during the reign of Edward, caused Lady Jane Grey to be declared his successor; but her reign, if it could be called such, lasted only a few days. Mary, daughter of Henry VIII, was placed upon the throne, and Lady Jane Grey and her husband were both executed. Mary, a bigoted Catholic, seems to have wished for the crown only for the purpose of re-establishing the Roman Catholic faith. Political motives had induced Philip of Spain to accept of her as a spouse; but she could never prevail on her subjects to allow him any share of power. She died in 1558.
Elizabeth, who succeeded her sister Mary, was attached to the Protestant faith, and found little difficulty in establishing it in England. Having concluded peace with France (1559), Elizabeth set herself to promote the confusion which prevailed in Scotland, to which her cousin Mary had returned from France as queen in 1561. In this she was so far successful that Mary placed herself in her power (1568), and after many years imprisonment was sent to the scaffold (1587). As the most powerful Protestant nation, and as a rival to Spain in the New World, it was natural that England should become involved in difficulties with that country. The dispersion of the Armada by the English fleet under Howard, Drake, and Hawkins was the most brilliant event of a struggle which abounded in minor feats of valour. In Elizabeth's reign London became the centre of the world's trade, the extension of British commercial enterprise being coincident with the ruin of Antwerp in 1585. The Parliament was increased by the creation of sixty-two new boroughs, and its members were exempted from arrest. In literature not less than in politics and in commerce the same full life displayed itself, and England began definitely to assume the characteristics which distinguish her from the other European nations of to-day.
To Elizabeth succeeded (in 1603) James VI of Scotland and I of England, son of Mary Queen of Scots and Darnley. His accession to the crown of England in addition to that of Scotland did much to unite the two nations, though a certain smouldering animosity still lingered. His dissimulation, however, ended in his satisfying neither of the contending ecclesiastical parties—the Puritans or the Catholics; and his absurd insistence on his divine right made his reign a continuous struggle between the prerogative of the Crown and the freedom of the people. His extravagance kept him in constant disputes with the Parliament, who would not grant him the sums he demanded, and compelled him to resort to monopolies, loans, benevolences, and other illegal methods. The nation at large, however, continued to prosper through the whole of his reign. His son Charles I, who succeeded him in 1625, inherited the same exalted ideas of royal prerogative, and his marriage with a Catholic, his arbitrary rule, and illegal methods of raising money provoked bitter hostility. Under the guidance of Laud and Strafford things went from bad to worse. Civil war broke out in 1642 between the king's party and that of the Parliament, and the latter proving victorious, in 1649 the king was beheaded.
A Commonwealth or republican government was now established, in which the most prominent figure was Oliver Cromwell. Mutinies in the army among Fifth-monarchists and Levellers were subdued by Cromwell and Fairfax, and Cromwell, in a series of masterly movements, subjugated Ireland and gained the important victories of Dunbar and Worcester. At sea Blake had destroyed the Royalist fleet under Rupert, and was engaged in an honourable struggle with the Dutch under van Tromp. But within the governing body matters had come to a deadlock. A dissolution was necessary, yet Parliament shrank from dissolving itself, and in the meantime the reform of the law, a settlement with regard to the Church, and other important matters remained untouched. In April, 1653, Cromwell cut the knot by forcibly ejecting the members and putting the keys of the House in his pocket. From this time he was practically head of the Government, which was vested in a council of thirteen. A Parliament—the Little or Barebones Parliament—was summoned, and in the December of the same year Cromwell was installed Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland. With more than the power of a king, he succeeded in dominating the confusion at home, and made the country feared throughout the whole of Europe. Cromwell died in 1658, and the brief and feeble protectorate of his son Richard followed.
There was now a widespread feeling that the country would be better under the old form of government, and Charles II, son of Charles I, was called to the throne by the Restoration of 1660. He took complete advantage of the popular reaction from the narrowness and intolerance of Puritanism, and even endeavoured to carry it to the extreme of establishing the Catholic religion. The promises of religious freedom made [250]by him before the Restoration in the Declaration Breda were broken by the Test and Corporation Acts, and by the Act of Uniformity, which drove two thousand clergymen from the Church and created the great dissenting movement of modern times. The Conventicle and Five-mile Acts followed, and the 'Drunken Parliament' restored Episcopacy in Scotland. At one time even civil war seemed again imminent. The abolition of the censorship of the press (1679) and the reaffirmation of the Habeas Corpus principle are the most praiseworthy incidents of the reign.
Number:
179577
Date created:
1980
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 7.5 x 9.5 in.
Description:
Front row, from left to right: 1) Smith; 2) Murphy; 3) Fivush; 4) Strauss; 5) Kurlinski; 6) Littlefield; 7) Biller; 8) Barnett; 9) Bender; 10) Schwartz.
Second row, from left to right: 1) Karlowicz; 2) Taylor; 3) Brennan; 4) Siegel; 5) Bender; 6) Waber; 7) Milvenan; 8) Cohn; 9) Shalhoub.
Third row, form left to right: 1) Glazier; 2) Trautman; 3) Wissou; 4) Farmer; 5) Fitzpatrick; 6) Shinnar; 7) Hutton; 8) Nolan; 9) McDonald; 10) Dietrich.
Fourth row, from left to right: 1) Hudak; 2) Kessler; 3) Vallone; 4) Krilov; 5) Wallach; 6) Cohen; 7) Tellerman; 8) Cole; 9) Thuma.
Fifth row, from left to right: 1) LeBlanc; 2) Fahey; 3) Santana; 4) Harper; 5) Barbosa.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Johns Hopkins Hospital. Department of Pediatrics--People
Smith, Ann T.
Murphy, Mary J.
Fivush, Barbara A.
Strauss, Lewis C.
Kurlinski, John P.
Littlefield, John W.
Biller, Jeffrey Allan
Barnett, Nancy K.
Bender, Joan G.C.
Schwartz, Cindy L.
Karlowicz, Mitchell Gerard
Taylor, George A.
Brennan, Teresa Lynch
Siegel, David B.
Bender, John W.
Waber, Lewis J.
Milvenan, Eileen S.
Cohen, Bernard A.
Shalhoub, Eugenie
Glazier, Arnold
Trautman, Michael S.
Wissow, Lawrence S.
Farmer, Mychelle Y.
Fitzpatrick, Kathleen M.
Shinnar, Shlomo
Hutton, Nancy
Nolan, Robert J.
McDonald, Ruth I.
Dietrich, Richard Laroy
Hudak, Mark Lawrence
Kessler, David A.
Vallone, Ambrose Martin
Krilov, Leonard R.
Wallach, Daniel E.
Cohen, Mitchell B.
Tellerman, Kenneth H.
Cole, Cynthia H.
Thuma, Philip E.
LeBlanc, Ralph E.
Fahey, John T.
Santana, Victor M.
Harper, Thomas Edwin
Barbosa, Ernest
Pediatricians
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
Notes: Photographer unknown.
Number:
179927
Date created:
1989
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 7.5 x 9.5 in.
Description:
Front row, from left to right: 1) Oliva; 2) McLaurin; 3) Shearer; 5) Witpenn; 6) Orzech; 7) Dundore; 8) Shenker; 9) Markel; 10) DeAngelis; 11) Dietz; 12) Oski; 13) Murray; 14) Rome; 15) Sheils; 16) Thomas; 17) Cortese; 18) Pearson; 19) Stoddard; 20) Broadbent.
Second row, from left to right: 1) Greene; 2) Haney; 3) Hart; 4) Funkhouser; 5) Vogt; 6) Molrine; 7) Abram; 8) George; 9) Cooke; 10) Kapphahn; 11) Burns; 12) Scharfstein; 13) O'Brien; 14) Neu; 15) Egan; 16) Aitken; 17) Ragheb.
Third row, from left to right: 1) Duggan; 2) Zempsky; 3) Livingston; 4) Reardon; 5) Suckerburg; 6) Wechsler; 7) Elder; 8) Boney; 9) Moll; 10) Sokoloski; 11) Baldwin; 12) Flotte.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Johns Hopkins Hospital. Department of Pediatrics--People
Oliva, Maria Magdalena
McLaurin, Marion G.
Shearer, Patricia D.
Wittpenn, Ann Saylor
Orzech, Bonnie L.
Shenker, Andrew
Markel, Howard
DeAngelis, Catherine D.
Dietz, Harry C.
Oski, Frank A
Murray, Carol B.
Rome, Ellen S.
Sheils, Catherine Anne
Thomas, Pamela M.
Cortese, Margaret Mary
Pearson, Ellyn B.
Stoddard, Jeffrey J.
Broadbent, Kenneth R.
Greene, Mary G.
Haney, Peter M.
Hart, Carolyn W.
Funkhouser, Ann Ward
Vogt, Beth A.
Molrine, Deborah Claire
Leverett, Michelle
George, Diane M.
Cooke, David William
Kapphahn, Cynthia Joyce
Burns, Stephanie Ann
Scharfstein, Suzanne King
O'Brien, Katherine L.
Neu, Alicia
Egan, Marie E.
Aitken, Mary E.
Ragheb, Jack A.
Duggan, Christopher Paul
Zempsky, William Todd
Livingston, Robert Alan
Reardon, David A.
Zuckerberg, Aaron L.
Wechsler, Daniel S. G.
Elder, Melissa A.
Boney, Charlotte
Moll, Margaret Mary
Sokoloski, Mary Carmel
Baldwin, Robert M.
Flotte, Terence R.
Pediatricians
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
Notes: Photographer unknown.
St Ethelbert, Hessett, Suffolk
Hessett is a fairly ordinary kind of village to the east of Bury St Edmunds, but its church is one of the most important in East Anglia for a number of reasons, which will become obvious. Consider for one moment, if you will, the extent to which the beliefs and practices of a religious community affect the architecture of its buildings. Think of a mosque, for instance. Often square, expressing the democracy of Islam, but without any imagery of the human figure, for such things are proscribed. Think of a synagogue, focused towards the Holy Scriptures in the Ark, but designed to enable the proclaiming of the Word, and the way that early non-conformist chapels echo this architecture of Judaism - indeed, those who built the first free churches, like Ipswich's Unitarian Chapel, actually called them synagogues.
The shape of a church, then, is no accident. A typical Suffolk perpendicular church of the 15th century has wide aisles, to enable liturgical processions, a chancel for the celebration of Mass, places for other altars, niches for devotional statues, a focus towards the Blessed Sacrament in the east, a roof of angels to proclaim a hymn of praise, a large nave for devotional and social activities, and wall paintings of the Gospels and hagiographies of Saints, of the catechism and teachings of the Catholic Church. As Le Corbusier might have said if he'd been around at the time, a medieval church is a machine for making Catholicism happen.
No longer, of course. The radical and violent fracture in popular religion in the middle years of the 16th century gave birth to the Church of England, and the new church inherited buildings that were quite unsuitable for the new congregational protestant theology, a problem that the Church of England has never entirely solved.
Over the centuries, the problem has been addressed in different ways. The early reformers celebrated communion at a table in the nave, for example, and blocked off the chancel for other uses. Although this was challenged by the Laudian party in the early part of the 17th century, it was the way that many parishes reinvented their buildings, and most were to stay like that until the middle years of the 19th century. Some went further. A pulpit placed halfway down the nave, or even at the back of the church, meant that the seating could be arranged so that it no longer focused towards the east, thus breaking the link with Catholic (and Laudian) sacramentalism. For several centuries, Anglican churches focused on the pulpit rather than the altar.
With the coming to influence of the 19th century Oxford Movement, all this underwent another dramatic change, with the great majority of our medieval parish churches having their interiors restored to their medieval integrity, reinventing themselves as sacramental spaces. This is the condition in which we find most of them today, and some Anglican theologians are asking the question that the Catholic Church asked itself at Vatican II in the 1960s - is a 19th century liturgical space really appropriate for the Church of the 21st century?
So, let us hasten at once to Hessett. The church sits like a glowing jewel in its wide churchyard, right on the main road through the village. It is pretty well perfect if you are looking for a fine Suffolk exterior. An extensive 15th century rebuilding enwraps the earlier tower, which was crowned by the donor of the rebuilding, John Bacon.The nave and aisles are deliciously decorated, reminding one rather of the church at neighbouring Rougham, although this is a smaller church, and the aisles make it almost square. A dedicatory inscription on the two storey vestry in the north east corner bids us pray for the souls of John and Katherine Hoo, who donated the chancel and paid for the trimmings to the aisles. Their inscription has been damaged by protestant reformers, who obviously did not believe in the efficacy of prayers for the dead.
Although not comparable with that at Woolpit, the dressed stone porch is a grand affair, and a bold statement. You may find the south door locked, but if this is the case then the priest's door into the chancel is usually open. And in a way it is a good church to enter via the chancel, because in this way St Ethelbert unfolds its treasures slowly.You step into relative darkness - or, at least, it seems so in comparison with the nave beyond the rood screen. This is partly a result of the abundance of dark wood, and in truth the chancel seems rather overcrowded. The most striking objects in view are the return stalls, which fill the two westerly corners of the chancel. These are in the style of a college or school of priests, with their backs to the rood screen, but then 'returning' around the walls to the east. They are fine, and are certainly 15th or 16th century. But one of the stalls, that to the north, is different to the others, and seems slightly out of place. It is elaborately carved with faces, birds and foliage.
Mortlock thought that it might have been intended for a private house. The stall in front of it has heads on it that appear to be wearing 18th century wigs. The sanctuary is largely Victorianised, with a great east window depicting Saints. The south windows of the chancel depict a lovely Adoration scene by the O'Connors. The chancel is separated from the nave by the 15th century rood screen, which is elegantly painted and gilt on the west side, the beautifully tracery intricately carved above. The rood screen has been fitted with attractive iron gates, presumably evidence of Anglo-catholic enthusiasm here in the early 20th century, and you step down through them into the light. A first impression is that you are entering a much older space than the one you have left. There is an 18th century mustiness, enhanced by the box pews that line the aisles. And, beyond, on walls and in windows, are wonderful things.
The number of surviving wall paintings in England is a tiny fraction of those which existed before the 15th and 16th centuries. All churches had them, and in profusion. It isn't enough to say that they were a 'teaching aid' of a church of illiterate peasants. In the main, they were devotional, and that is why they were destroyed. However, it is more complicated than that. Research in recent years has indicated that many wall paintings were destroyed before the Reformation, perhaps a century before. In some churches, they have been punched through with Perpendicular windows, which are clearly pre-Reformation. In the decades after the Black Death, there seems to have been a sea change in the liturgical use of these buildings, a move away from an individualistic, devotional usage to a corporate liturgical one. There is a change of emphasis towards more education and exegesis. This is the time that pulpits and benches appear, long before protestantism was on the agenda. What seems to happen is that many buildings were intended now to be full of light, and devotional wall paintings were either whitewashed, or replaced with catechetical ones.
The decoration of the nave was the responsibility of the people of the parish, not of the Priest. The wall paintings of England can be divided into roughly three groups. Roughly speaking, the development of wall paintings over the later medieval period is in terms of these three overlapping emphases.
Firstly, the hagiographies - stories of the Saints. These might have had a local devotion, although some saints were popular over a wide area, and most churches seem to have supported a devotion to St Christopher right up until the Reformation.
Secondly came those which illustrate incidents in the life of Christ and his mother, the Blessed Virgin. Although partly pedagogical, they were also enabling tools, since private devotions often involved a contemplation upon them, and at Mass the larger part of those present would have been involved in private devotions. These scriptural stories were as likely to have been derived from apocryphal texts like the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew as from the actual Gospels themselves.
Lastly, there are catechetical wall paintings, illustrating the teachings of the Catholic church. It should not be assumed that these are dogmatic. Many are simply artistic representations of stories, and others are simplifications of theological ideas, as with the seven deadly sins and the seven cardinal virtues. Some warn against occasions of sin (gossiping, for example) and generally wall paintings provided a local site for discussion and exemplification.
To an extent, all the above is largely true of stained glass, as well, with the caveat that stained glass was more expensive, relied on local patronage, and often has this patronage as a subtext, hence the large number of heraldic devices and images of local worthies. But it was also devotional, and so it was also destroyed.
So - what survives at Hessett? The wall paintings first.
Starting in the south east corner of the nave, we have Suffolk's finest representation of St Barbara, presenting a tower. St Barbara was very popular in medieval times, because she was invoked against strikes by lightning and sudden fires. This resulted from her legend, for her father, on finding her to be a Christian, walled her up in a tower until she repented. As a result, he was struck by lightning, and reduced to ashes. She was also the patron saint of the powerful building trade, and as such her image graced their guild altars - perhaps that was the case here.
Above the south door is another figure, often identified as St Christopher, but I do not think that this can be the case. St Christopher is found nowhere else in Suffolk above a south door. The traditional iconography of this mythical saint is not in place here, and it is hard to see how this figure could ever have been interpreted as such. I suspect it is a result of an early account confusing the two images over the north and south doors, and the mistake being repeated in later accounts.
In fact, digital enhancement seems to suggest that there are two figures above the south door, overlapping each other slightly. The figure on the right is barefoot, that on the left is wearing a white gown. There appears to be water under their feet, and so I think this is an image of the Baptism of Christ. Perhaps it was once part of a sequence.
The wall painting opposite, above the north door, is St Christopher. Although it isn't as clear as himself at, say, nearby Bradfield Combust, he bestrides the river in the customary manner, staff in hand. The Christ child is difficult to discern, but you can see the fish in the water. Also in the water, and rather unusual, are two figures. They are rendered rather crudely, almost like gingerbread men. Could they be the donors of the north aisle, John and Katherine Hoo in person?
Moving along the north aisle, we come to the set of paintings for which Hessett is justifiably famous. They are set one above the other between two windows, at the point where might expect the now-vanished screen to a chapel to have been. The upper section was here first. It shows the seven deadly sins (described wrongly in some text books as a tree of Jesse, or ancestry of Christ). Two devils look on as, from the mouth of hell, a great tree sprouts, ending in seven images. Pride is at the top, and in pairs beneath are Gluttony and Anger, Vanity and Envy, Avarice and Lust. Mortlock suggests that some attempt has been made to erase the image for Lust, which may simply be mid-16th century puritan prurience on the part of some reformer here. This would suggest that this catechetical tool was here right up until the Reformation.
The idea of 'Seven Deadly Sins' was anathema to the reformers, because it is entirely unscriptural. Rather, as a catechetical tool, it is a way of drawing together a multitude of sins into a simplistic aide memoire. This could then be used in confession, taking each of them one at a time and examining ones conscience accordingly. It should not be seen simply as a 'warning' to ignorant peasants, for the evidence is that the ordinary rural people of late medieval England were theologically very articulate. Rather, it was a tool for use, in contemplation and preparation for the sacrament of reconciliation, which may well have ordinarily taken place in the chapel here.
The wall painting beneath the Sins is even more interesting. This is a very rare 'Christ of the Trades', and dates from the early 15th century, about a hundred years after the painting above. It is rather faded, and takes a while to discern, and not all of it is decodable. However, enough is there to be fascinating. The image of the 'Christ of the Trades' is known throughout Christendom, and contemporary versions with this can be found in other parts of Europe. It shows the risen Christ in the centre, and around him a vast array of the tools and symbols of various trades. One theory is that it depicts activities that should not take place on a Sunday, a holy day of obligation to refrain from work, and that these activities are wounding Christ anew.
Perhaps the most fascinating symbol, and the one that everyone notices, is the playing card. It shows the six of diamonds. Does it represent the makers of playing cards? If so, it might suggest a Flemish influence. Or could it be intended to represent something else? Whatever, it is one of the earliest representations of a playing card in England. Why is this here? It may very well be that there was a trades gild chantry chapel at the east end of the north aisle, and this painting was at its entrance.
At the east end of the north aisle now is the church's set of royal arms. Cautley saw it in the vestry in the 1930s, and identified it as a Queen Anne set. Now, with additions stripped away, it is revealed as a Charles II set from the 1660s, and a very fine one. It is fascinating to see it at such close range. Usually, they are set above the south door now, although they would originally have been placed above the chancel arch, in full view of the congregation, a gentle reminder of who was in charge.
And so to the glass, which on its own would be worth coming to Hessett to see. Few Suffolk churches have such an expanse, none have such a variety, or glass of such quality and interest. It consists essentially of two ranges, the life and Passion of Christ in the north aisle (although some glass has been reset across the church), and images and hagiographies of Saints in the south aisle.
In the north aisle, the scourging of Christ stands out, the wicked grins of the persecutors contrasting with the pained nobility of the Christ figure. In the next window, Christ rises from the dead, coming out of his tomb like the corpses in the doom paintings at Stanningfield, North Cove and Wenhaston. The Roman centurion sleeps soundly in the foreground.
The most famous image is in the east window of the south aisle. Apparently, it shows a bishop holding the chain to a bag, with four children playing at his feet. I say apparently, because there is rather more going on here than meets the eye. The reason that this image is so famous is that the small child in the foreground is holding what appears to be a golf club or hockey stick, and this would be the earliest representation of such an object in all Europe. The whole image has been said to represent St Nicholas, who was a Bishop, and whose legends include a bag of gold and a group of children.
Unfortunately, this is not the case. St Nicholas is never symbolised by a bag of gold, and there are three children in the St Nicholas legend, not four. In any case, the hand in the picture is not holding the chain to a bag at all, but a rosary, and the hockey stick is actually a fuller's club, used for dyeing clothes, and the symbol of St James the Less.
What has happened here is that the head of a Bishop has been grafted on to the body of a figure which is probably still in its original location. The three lights of this window contained a set of the Holy Kinship. The light to the north of the 'Bishop' contains two children playing with what ae apparently toys, but when you look closely you can see that one is holding a golden shell, and the other a poisoned chalice. They are the infant St James and St John, and the lost figure above them was their mother, Mary Salome.
This means that the figure with the Bishop's head is actually Mary Cleophas, mother of four children including St James the Less. The third light to the south, of course, would have depicted the Blessed Virgin and child, but she is lost to us.
Not only this, but Hessett has some very good 19th Century glass which complements and does not overly intrude. The best is beneath the tower, the west window in a fully 15th Century style of scenes by Clayton & Bell. The east window, depicting saints, is by William Warrington, and the chancel also has the O'Connor glass already mentioned.
If the windows and wall paintings were all there was, then Hessett would be remarkable enough. But there is something else, two things, actually, that elevate it above all other Suffolk churches, and all the churches of England. For St Ethelbert is the proud owner of two unique survivals. At the back of the church is a chest, no different from those you'll find in many a parish church. In common with those, it has three separate locks, the idea being that the Rector and two Churchwardens would have a key each, and it would be necessary for all three of them to be present for the chest to be opened. It was used for storing parish records and valuables.
At some point, one of the keys was lost. There is an old story about the iconoclast William Dowsing turning up here and demanding the chest be opened, but on account of the missing key it couldn't be. Unfortunately, this story isn't true, for Dowsing never recorded a visit Hessett. The chest was eventually opened in the 19th century. Inside were found two extraordinary pre-Reformation survivals. These are a pyx cloth and a burse. The pyx cloth was draped over the wooden canopy that enclosed the blessed sacrament (one of England's four surviving medieval pyxes is also in Suffolk, at Dennington) before it was raised above the high altar. The burse was used to contain the host before consecration at the Mass. They are England's only surviving examples, and they're both here. Or, more precisely they aren't, for both have been purloined by the British Museum, the kind of theft that no locked church can prevent.
But there are life-size photos of both either side of the tower arch. The burse is basically an envelope, and features the Veronica face of Christ on one side with the four evangelistic symbols in each corner. On the other is an Agnus Dei, the Lamb of God. The survival of both is extraordinary. It is one thing to explore the furnishings of lost Catholic England, quite another to come face to face with articles that were actually used in the liturgy.
In front of the pictures stands the font, a relatively good one of the early 15th century, though rather less exciting than everything going on around it. The dedicatory inscription survives, to a pair of Hoos of an earlier generation than the ones on the vestry.Turning east again, the ranks of simple 15th century benches are all of a piece with their church. They have survived the violent transitions of the centuries, and have seated generation after generation of Hessett people. They were new here when this church was alive with coloured light, with the hundreds of candles flickering on the rood beam, the processions, the festivals, and the people's lives totally integrated with the liturgy of the seasons. For the people of Catholic England, their religion was as much a part of them as the air they breathed. They little knew how soon it would all come to an end.
And so, there it is - one of the most fascinating and satisfactory of all East Anglia's churches. And yet, not many people know about it. We are only three miles from the brown-signed honeypot of Woolpit, where a constant stream of visitors come and go. I've visited Hessett many times, and never once encountered another visitor. Still, there you are, I suppose. Perhaps some places are better kept secret. But come here if you can, for here is a medieval worship space with much surviving evidence of what it was actually meant to be, and meant to do.
I've had a go at measuring the extent of this prominence and I reckon it is around 450,000 km when I photographed it. The diameter of the Earth is 12,742 km, so 35 Earth's could line up along it. Edit - I've just realised I have used the wrong line to align this with, so the prom is actually only 400,000 km. I think I need to redo this one! OK it's replaced, it's just under 400,000km now :) (31.5 Earth's)
Number:
164471
Creator:
Hughes Company
Date created:
1952-05-29
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 8 x 10 in.
Scope and content:
Front row: 1) Emily Badders; 2) Jane Nash; 3) Jane Nash; 4) Freda Creutzberg; 5) Eleanor Harris Fox. Second row: 1) Jean Dyer; 2) Gaynel McGuire; 3) Nancy Ziegler; 4) Lillian Duffy; 5) Lois Steele; 6) Jean Ross. Third row: 1) Dolores Connor; 2) Patricia Slagle; 3) Joan Murphy; 4) Mildred Knight. Fourth row: 1) Betty Jo Mares; 2) Nancy Kriz; 3) Billerbeck; 4) Benita Dewey. Fifth row: 1) Jane Shudel; 2) Margaret Perry; 3) Jean Everhart; 4) Dorothy Clair; 5) Jean Sidwell; 6) Doris Vesper; 7) Benita Dewey. Sixth row: 1) Jean Frankland; 2) Janet Hebb. Second row from back: 1) Mildred Heim; 2) Norma Gerbrick; 3) Eileen Dabis; 4) Jean Harris; 5) Thelma Hafer; 6) Dolores Duffey; 7) unidentified. Back row: 1) Jean Webster; 2) Joan Sullivan; 3) Kathryn Stumpf; 4) Pamela Sylvester; 5) Ida Mae Warren; 6) Nancy Jessa
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Church Home and Hospital (Baltimore, Md.). School of Nursing
Badders, Emily Elizabeth
Clair, Dorothy Isabel
Connor, Dolores Evelyn
Davis, Eileen
Dewey, Benita Louise
Duffy, Lillian
Duffey, Dolores Elaine
Dyer, Jean Marie
Everhart, Helen Jean
Frankland, Jean Marie
Gerbrick, Norma Anne
Hafer, Thelma Elaine
Harris, Jean Elaine
Hebb, Janet Bertell
Heim, Mildred Pauline
Jessa, Nancy Adele
Knight, Mildred Elsie
Kriz, Nancy Marie
Mares, Betty Jo
McGuire, Gaynel Mae
Murphy, Joan Crawford
Nease, Shirley Elizabeth
Perry, Margaret Jane
Ross, Jean Elizabeth
Schudel, Jane Corinne
Sidwell, Jean Marie
Slagle, Patricia Lee
Steele, Lois Mae
Stumpf, Kathryn Elizabeth
Sullivan, Joan Elizabeth
Sylvester, Pamela Gertrude
Vesper, Doris Marie
Warren, Ida Mae
Webster, Jean
Ziegler, Nancy
Nash, Jane Evans, 1880-1955
Elliott, Margaret, 1884-1966
Creutzburg, Freda Lewis, 1898-1963
Nursing students--Maryland--Baltimore--1950-1960
Nurses--Maryland--Baltimore--1950-1960
Graduation ceremonies--Maryland--Baltimore--1950-1960
Nursing schools--Faculty
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
oils. and a plectrum. and a scalpel.
120 x 90 cm
A bit less.
Final v of a painting that includes Lisa... she remains perhaps the woman I have loved most in my life, long and fantastical tale that it is...
I cannot remember 2004 – to re-iterate – I received treatment for the deadly extent of my depression in the form of ECT or shock therapy. They could not induce a seizure, which is how it works (they don’t really know how it works), and it DOES work (80% success rate short term – vs THIRTY PERCENT for anti depressant. Well-hidden pharmaceutical fact there.) So they literally kept turning up the VOLTAGE to get me to seize. I had two different hospitalizations (apparently) and two sets of ‘treatments.’
ECT is known for causing memory loss… I read a few books on it (apparently) before I let them do it. Six weeks was supposed to be the maximum amount of memory, of pieces of LIFE, stolen by the desperate final recourse of ECT.
But because of the decision to UP THE FUCKING VOLTAGE, I have lost the memory of ALL of 2004 save 3 weeks or so. The worst pieces of being with lisa are burned within those hundreds of thousands of hours. And perhaps the best. We lived together for a few weeks. Who knows?
I got an email from her yesterday (err the 11th of October '07). Synchronous as all hell considering that I had just finished the painting. I have not heard from her in almost two years, not seen her for longer still. Ah, well... I had thought myself over it, but...
Tragic farce. Tragic indeed. I think this piece exemplifies a great deal about her, and her and I for that matter. I didn’t realize ANY of the symbolism whilst I painted it – post-painting self-analysis. So -
She is GLOWING, there is light pouring from her. She was like this to see, to touch. She is an intensely alive person. Such passion, a match for my own? I dunno. So different. The floor is also blooming with light beneath her feet. The sky outside the window is split between passion-frenzied cloud and the still sweetness of clear blue. Hm… now that I think about it maybe I AM the dark clouds? Or rather I was. Weird. Cooky. And of course, she is beautiful to the point where she walks around making other people feel ugly just by being there. She moves with a liquid grace ah so of course, of course, her feet are
Not. Touching. The. Ground.
I didn’t think about ANY OF THIS while I painted it. Happens. I am just analyzing it backwards a week later. Now I look at it it seems to me as if she is something of a prisoner of the blue and red darkness around her… wow I wonder who that represents – oi you! Painter boy with the HEALTHY SELF IMAGE! (smacks self with rolled up newspaper and bites himself on the ear.)
There is a guitar pick and a scalpel embedded in the paint. The scalpel… in a few more words it becomes clear…the pick - I wrote a bad song for her with good lyrics – couple of lines –
You are the boiling girl
You are the exception to every rule
You will take my hands
And you will tell me the truth.
Chorus-y bit;
She lies silent now
This girl, my brilliant lover
Then she asks me – how do I devour
MY OWN HUNGER?
And I sang to her and sang to her and wrote my most wild hardest most exquisite words and I drew for her and I hurt for her. Finally I HURT her. Yeh…
The vibrant brilliant red border is blood of course… hard to say this but I must hold on, I have to continue to be whom and what I have chosen and fought to be. I must not shy from the truths as ugly as they are as ashamed as they must make me. I have written of it elsewhere on this page perhaps. This woman that I loved so much and so well. What could be more cruel than this? Why the FUCK am I surprised that she is NOT mine? Mad stupid poisonous crippled boy. I can’t write this no not now… but - I found this piece of prose lost from my memory like everything else from that year. Pasted it instead of hitting the paint sticky keys in front of me:
So though I have not returned to the abyss and fallen off the edge again, I still have shit to deal with. I am trying to not work too much – on the recommendation of my psyche and another one. This is how I live though; I need to work it is what I hold onto in the night. Sometimes.
Help gah. I feel totally stripped bare not to mention SHORT I have just seen Lisa and my god she is beautiful my god her beauty is like a fucking river it never runs out like a magic packet of tim tams. Should have answered the door without putting my pants on I should have remembered what looking at her does to me. I know there is no happy ending for this; that there cannot be. I can’t believe I can talk when I look at her… I feel the swell of my passion and lust in the back of my throat choking me; flood of words cut from me even as they bubble with ashes and hope. I am sweating and my stomach hurts. I hate this. I feel completely powerless. I cannot believe she feels the same way I do it is impossible for me to conceive. I am at her mercy an absolute irresolute fool for her; she could crush me so easily, so deeply with the slightest whispered word.
I remember this feeling. I have not felt it since I was a young teenager, a half child already bitter and strange. I remember it; yes. The girl I loved… I left a rose at her doorstep but I had squeezed a piece of barbed wire in my hand and dripped blood all over it. Yeah good work Paul fucking brilliant well I was, like I said, one fucking weird fourteen year old.
But it is like my work; what my work is about. It is always the same thing. The moments are precious to me because they are doomed. It is their fate and brevity that makes them so much sweeter. How to resist something like that – it is some essential part of everything that I believe anyway, and I do not just BELIEVE these things – they are learned from my convictions and turned to articulation and not the other way around. More than my convictions.., it is so real for me, I don’t think anyone really understands but these words do not just represent ideas for me - I feel them continuously, the passing of time treasured and lost.
Perhaps it is only some romanticism, some AESTHETIC truth that makes me fevered and weak in her presence and for hours before and after I see her. Why then do I feel so helpless in its tight ruthless grip? If it is only some concept, a ferocious idea? I am bright enough to see through my own idiocy at least SOME of the time. Though given my recent history I hesitate to believe this. My own stupidity and shame…
She found me, you see. I let this gentle brilliant woman find me dying in the bedroom bleeding and poisoned. I will never, NEVER forgive myself for that brutal act. It doesn’t matter, it CAN’T matter, that I was psychotic with grief and self loathing. How I can do such things and live with myself after and beyond twists inside me like making my father watch while I cut my wrists in drunken fury and hate. Guilt, useless and angry.
Ah hell. What can I do?
Live on. I am in love with her.
I wish I could remember. Wish it, yes. Ah well.
You might think that these subway photos are entirely "accidental" and unplanned -- and to some extent you would be correct, as I never known, in advance, exactly what I'll find or what kind of photos I'll end up with. But it's not entirely random, as you'll come to understand when I describe some of the details associated with this collection of 10 "keepers" that I selected out of 102 photos taken on Mar 30, 2010.
First of all, the idea of taking some subway photos usually only occurs to me on rainy days. If it's bright and sunny outside, who would want to spend his time down underground, where it's dark and noisy and claustrophobic? Also, people who venture outside on rainy days normally have bright, colorful umbrellas (as well as the boring, black ones), and the women often wear equally bright, colorful Welly boots. Once they get down into a subway station, safely away from the rain, they go through various rituals of stamping their feet to shake off the water, folding their umbrellas to put them away, and generally unbuckling/unsnapping/unzipping their restrictive rain gear.
As it turns out, there had been heavy rain all morning on Tues, Mar 30th -- and since that made it impractical to sit outside and take my usual "peeps in the 'hood" photos, I thought it would be a good time to return to the subways once again. Unfortunately, the rain slacked off in the middle of the day, so the umbrella/boot outfits turned out to be much less interesting than I would have expected.
Aside from that, I had no idea -- and never do have any idea -- of what to expect. Having taken subway photos on roughly half a dozen occasions, I do know that I'm likely to see a different crowd of subway-riders in the middle of the week than on the weekend; and there will be different people in the middle of the day than during rush-hour, or during the period right after public schools release all their kids. But aside from that, it's an unpredictable potpourri of workers (some blue-collar, some white-collar), students, tourists, young children, parents and grandparents, homeless people, cops, and utterly mysterious strangers. On this particular occasion, I decided to sit on the uptown side of the 96th Street station, because I figured (rightly or wrong, who knows?) that there would probably be more people heading downtown towards Times Square than uptown toward Morningside Heights and Harlem.
Some people are photographically interesting simply because of the way they look, or the way they dress; others are interesting because of what they are doing -- e.g., running, walking briskly, tossing their hair around, or interacting with a friend or family member, or (as is so often the case in my subway-photography experiences) reading, listening to music, or just daydreaming about their own private world. Thus, one photo may be enough; but with the slow shutter speeds that I typically have to use in the dimly lit subway station, I'll normally take two or three just to be safe. And if the subject(s) is/are "doing" something, then I'll often take half a dozen photos, in the hope that one or two of them will turn out to be interesting. And that helps explain why I typically only keep about 10% of the photos I take; the rest are blurred, out-of-focus, redundant, or merely ordinary...
There's another consequence of this approach: inevitably, I know much more about the "context" of the subject(s) I photograph than does anyone who views the resulting photograph that I publish/upload to Flickr -- because I've spent at least a few seconds watching what they're doing, and I've taken several other photos in which they sometimes look (or act) quite differently. I don't think about it very much, but I realize that I subconsciously just assume that viewers have the same context in mind that I do ... but over and over again, it becomes evident that it just ain't so. An example: I once photographed a woman sitting at an outside cafe on Broadway, a few blocks from where these subway photos were taken; and a few months later, I was startled to see the photo published in a Turkish blog about how to select tour guides in Istanbul.
Ultimately, I have to admit that even I don't know what the "real" context is, i.e., what the subject of my photos are actually thinking or doing -- except in the very rare circumstances when I introduce myself to the subject and speak to him/her. But most of the time, I just try to imagine what's going on in their lives; and I use that imagination to come up with the title/caption that I put on most of the photos. In most cases, the title/captions represent a feeble, but deliberate, attempt at humor; but in any case, it's important that I admit that in most cases, I have no idea whether those caption/titles are accurate or realistic.
**************************************************
This is a continuation of a series of subway photos that I began in the spring of 2009, and which you can find here. Thus far in 2010, my photographic efforts have included the IRT subway stations at 96th Street, 42nd Street (Times Square), and Christopher Street/Sheridan Square (in Greenwich Village).
********************************
Over the years, I've seen various photos of the NYC subway "scene," usually in black-and-white format. But during a spring 2009 class on street photography at the NYC International Center of Photography (ICP), I saw lots and lots of terrific subway shots taken by my fellow classmates ... so I was inspired to start taking some myself.
One of the reasons I rarely, if ever, took subway photos before 2009 is that virtually every such photo I ever saw was in black-and-white. I know that some people are fanatics about B/W photography as a medium; and I respect their choice. And I took quite a lot of B/W photographs in the 1970s, especially when I had my own little makeshift darkroom for printing my own photos.
But for the past 30 years, I've focused mostly on color photography. As for photos of subways, I don't feel any need to make the scene look darker and grimier than it already is, by restricting it to B/W. Indeed, one of the things I find quite intriguing is that there is a lot of color in this environment, and it's not too hard to give some warmth and liveliness to the scene...
To avoid disruption, and to avoid drawing attention to myself, I'm not using flash shots; but because of the relatively low level of lighting, I'm generally using an ISO setting of 3200 or 6400, depending on which camera I'm using. As a result, some of the shots are a little grainy - but it's a compromise that I'm willing to make.
I may eventually use a small "pocket" digital camera, but the initial photos have been taken with my somewhat large, bulky Nikon D300 and D700 DSLRs. If I'm photographing people on the other side of the tracks in a subway station, there's no problem holding up the camera, composing the shot, and taking it in full view of everyone. But if I'm taking photos inside a subway car, I normally set the camera lens to a wide angle (18mm or 24mm) setting, point it in the general direction of the subject(s), and shoot without framing or composing.
If I can find some situations where people hold still for a few seconds, I think I might try some HDR scenes, just to see what it looks like. But so far, no such occasions have presented themselves. We'll see how it goes...
Number:
164452
Creator:
Hughes Company
Date created:
1946-06-25
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 8 x 10 in.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Church Home and Hospital (Baltimore, Md.). School of Nursing
Harris, Eleanor Mae
Mercer, Vivian Ruth
Daugherty, Mary Elizabeth
Hall, Sara Esther
Anderson, Joy
Schrenheider, Lois Marie
Phelps, Elizabeth Pearl
Fullem, Gail Baldwin
Cooper, Dorothy May
Appler, Peggy May
Dirst, Annie Nancy
Eggleston, Hilda Fay
Harlem, Teresa Eliza
Bloom, Odessa
Hanson, Sarah Mildred
Getz, Mary Mae
Martin, Dorothy Jean
Barton, Hester Ann
Schmitz, Laura Betty
Fowke, Betty Fay
Fields, June Louise
Geipe, Martha Claire
Yeager, Viola May
Arnold, Mary Helen
Smith, Jennie Lee
Moreland, June Frances
Hurley, Janet Muriel
Myers, Eileen Emma
Walker, Wilda Annetta
Birmingham, Rowena Theresa
Blumenauer, Juanita M.
Hoar, Helen Louise
Merritt, Lois Colgate
Coleman, Margaret J.
Gass, Patricia
Heinze, M. Olivia
Elliott, Margaret, 1884-1966
Nash, Jane Evans, 1880-1955
Creutzburg, Freda Lewis, 1898-1963
Nursing students--Maryland--Baltimore--1940-1950
Nurses--Maryland--Baltimore--1940-1950
Graduation ceremonies--Maryland--Baltimore--1940-1950
Nursing schools--Faculty
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
Notes:
Photographer unknown.
Number:
171552
Creator: Perkins (Baltimore, MD)
Date created:
1913
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 6 x 9 in.
Back row: 1) P. Stock; 2) E. Warfield; 3) E. Raymond; 4) A. Strong; 5) L. Creighton; 6) I. Smith; 7) M. Owens; 8) E. Cassell; 9) M. Hall; 10) M. Buchanan; 11) M. Smith; 12) H. Zurawski; 13) H. Simpson; 14) M. Elliott; 15) G. Perot; 16) E. Hagen; 17) S. Hopkins; 18) M. Sinclair; 19) L. King; 20) A. Millner. Middle row: 1) G. Hyslep; 2) A. Cron; 3) B. Sanderson; 4) M. Quigley; 5) Miss Miller; 6) Miss Baker; 7) Miss Lawler; 8) Miss Thomas; 9) Miss Taylor; 10) Miss Bailey; 11) K. Troutwine; 12) K. Wolfe; 13) B. Mount. Front row: 1) A. McConvilee; 2) M. Smith; 3) E. Herpick; 4) C. Motherwell; 5) J. Dieter; 6) K. Cowan; 7) M. Lomax; 8) K. Staples; 9) N. Glascock; 10) E. Trax; 11) R. Waterbury.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Johns Hopkins Hospital School of Nursing--People
Reinhart, Mary Buchanan
Cassell, Elizabeth
Cowan, Kate S.
Gragg, Louise Creighton
Smith, Alma Cron
Smith, Josphine Dieter
Kirkness, Mary Elliott
Neel, Nellie Glascock
Aikema, Alice Edith Hagen
Hall, Maude H.
Herpick, Eleanor E.
Hopkins, Sara S.
Sutton, Grace Hyslop
King, Lydia K. (Mrs.)
Stephensen, Mary Lomax
McConville, Adelaide N.
Ivie, Angele Millner
Motherwell, C. M.
Mount, Bess
Owens, Mabel F.
Hellier, Gladys Perot
Quigley, Marie R.
Greene, Eloise Raymond
Sanderson, Bernice
Simpson, Hazel K.
Eaton, Margaret Sinclair
Smith, Inez M.
Mooney, Mary S. Smith
Smith, Maude
McAnally, Katherine Staples
Stock, Pauline B.
Strong, Anna Violet
Hoffman, Eurith Trax
Pratt, Kathryn Troutwine
Warfield, Elizabeth Polk
Waterbury, Ruth C.
Gentry, Kittie Wolfe
Zurawski, Helen M.
Lawler, Elsie M.
Miller, Gertrude A. (1900)
Kent, Elizabeth A. Thomas
Bailey, Harriet
Taylor, Effie J.
Baker, Bessie
Nursing students--Maryland--Baltimore--1910-1920
Nurses--Maryland--Baltimore--1910-1920
Graduation ceremonies--Maryland--Baltimore--1910-1920
Portrait photographs
Group portraits
Puri is a city and a Municipality of Odisha. It is the district headquarters of Puri district, Odisha, eastern India. It is situated on the Bay of Bengal, 60 kilometres south of the state capital of Bhubaneswar. It is also known as Jagannath Puri after the 12th-century Jagannath Temple located in the city. It is one of the original Char Dham pilgrimage sites for Indian Hindus.
Puri was known by several names from the ancient times to the present, and locally called as Badadeula. Puri and the Jagannath Temple were invaded 18 times by Hindu and Muslim rulers, starting from the 4th century to the start of the 19th century with the objective of looting the treasures of the temple. Odisha, including Puri and its temple, were under the British Raj from 1803 till India attained independence in August 1947. Even though princely states do not exist in independent India, the heirs of the Gajapati Dynasty of Khurda still perform the ritual duties of the temple. The temple town has many Hindu religious maths or monasteries.
The economy of Puri town is dependent on the religious importance of the Jagannath Temple to the extent of nearly 80%. The festivals which contribute to the economy are the 24 held every year in the temple complex, including 13 major festivals; Ratha Yatra and its related festivals are the most important which are attended by millions of people every year. Sand art and applique art are some of the important crafts of the city. Puri is one of the 12 heritage cities chosen by the Government of India for holistic development.
GEOGRAPHY AND CLIMATE
GEOGRAPHY
Puri, located on the east coast of India on the Bay of Bengal, is in the center of the district of the same name. It is delimited by the Bay of Bengal on the south east, the Mauza Sipaurubilla on the west, Mauz Gopinathpur in the north and Mauza Balukhand in the east. It is within the 67 kilometres coastal stretch of sandy beaches that extends between Chilika Lake and the south of Puri city. However, the administrative jurisdiction of the Puri Municipality extends over an area of 16.3268 square kilometres spread over 30 wards, which includes a shore line of 5 kilometres.
Puri is in the coastal delta of the Mahanadi River on the shores of the Bay of Bengal. In the ancient days it was near to Sisupalgarh (Ashokan Tosali) when the land was drained by a tributary of the River Bhargavi, a branch of the Mahanadi River, which underwent a meandering course creating many arteries altering the estuary, and formed many sand hills. These sand hills could not be "cut through" by the streams. Because of the sand hills, the Bhargavi River flowing to the south of Puri, moved away towards the Chilika Lake. This shift also resulted in the creation of two lagoons known as Sar and Samang on the eastern and northern parts of Puri respectively. Sar lagoon has a length of 8.0 km in an east-west direction and has a width of 3.2 km in north-south direction. The river estuary has a shallow depth of 1.5 m only and the process of siltation is continuing. According to a 15th-century chronicle the stream that flowed at the base of the Blue Mountain or Neelachal was used as the foundation or high plinth of the present temple which was then known as Purushottama, the Supreme Being. A 16th century chronicle attributes filling up of the bed of the river which flowed through the present Grand Road, during the reign of King Narasimha II (1278–1308).
CLIMATE
According to the Köppen and Geiger the climate of Puri is classified Aw. The city has moderate and tropical climate. Humidity is fairly high throughout the year. The temperature during summer touches a maximum of 36 °C and during winter it is 17 °C. The average annual rainfall is 1,337 millimetres and the average annual temperature is 26.9 °C.
HISTORY
NAMES IN HISTORY
Puri, the holy land of Lord Jaganath, also known popularly as Badadeula in local usage, has many ancient names in the Hindu scriptures such as the Rigveda, Matsya purana, Brahma Purana, Narada Purana, Padma Purana, Skanda Purana, Kapila samhita and Niladrimahodaya. In the Rigveda, in particular, it is mentioned as a place called Purushamandama-grama meaning the place where the Creator deity of the world – Supreme Divinity deified on altar or mandapa was venerated near the coast and prayers offered with vedic hymns. Over time the name got changed to Purushottama Puri and further shortened to Puri and the Purusha became Jagannatha. Close to this place sages like Bhrigu, Atri and Markandeya had their hermitage. Its name is mentioned, conforming to the deity worshipped, as Srikshetra, Purusottama Dhāma, Purusottama Kshetra, Purusottama Puri and Jagannath Puri. Puri is however, a common usage now. It is also known the geographical features of its siting as Shankhakshetra (layout of the town is in the form of a conch shell.), Neelāchala ("blue mountain" a terminology used to name very large sand lagoon over which the temple was built but this name is not in vogue), Neelāchalakshetra, Neelādri, The word 'Puri' in Sanskrit means "town", or 'city' and is cognate with polis in Greek.
Another ancient name is Charita as identified by Cunningham which was later spelled as Che-li-ta-lo by Chinese traveller Hiuen Tsang.When the present temple was built by the Ganga king Chodangadev in the 11th and 12th centuries it was called Purushottamkshetra. However, the Moghuls, the Marathas and early British rulers called it Purushottama-chhatar or just Chhatar. In Akbar's Ain-i-Akbari and subsequent Muslim historical records it was known as Purushottama. In the Sanskrit drama authored by Murari Mishra in the 8th century it is referred as Purushottama only. It was only after twelfth century Puri came to be known by the shortened form of Jagannatha Puri, named after the deity or in a short form as Puri. In some records pertaining to the British rule, the word 'Jagannath' was used for Puri. It is the only shrine in India, where Radha, along with Lakshmi, Saraswati, Durga, Bhudevi, Sati, Parvati, and Shakti abodes with Krishna, also known as Jagannath.
ANCIENT PERIOD
According to the chronicle Madala Panji, in 318 the priests and servitors of the temple spirited away the idols to escape the wrath of the Rashtrakuta King Rakatavahu. The temple's ancient historical records also finds mention in the Brahma Purana and Skanda Purana as having been built by the king Indradyumna of Ujjayani.
According to W.J. Wilkinson, in Puri, Buddhism was once a well established practice but later Buddhists were persecuted and Brahmanism became the order of the religious practice in the town; the Buddha deity in now worshipped by the Hindus as Jagannatha. It is also said that some relics of Buddha were placed inside the idol of Jagannath which the Brahmins claimed were the bones of Krishna. Even during Ashoka’s reign in 240 BC Odisha was a Buddhist center and that a tribe known as Lohabahu (barbarians from outside Odisha) converted to Buddhism and built a temple with an idol of Buddha which is now worshipped as Jagannatha. It is also said that Lohabahu deposited some Buddha relics in the precincts of the temple.
Construction of the Jagannatha Temple started in 1136 and completed towards the later part of the 12th century. The King of the Ganga dynasty, Anangabhima dedicated his kingdom to the God, then known as the Purushottam-Jagannatha and resolved that from then on he and his descendants would rule under "divine order as Jagannatha's sons and vassals". Even though princely states do not exist in independent India, the heirs of the Gajapati dynasty of Khurda still perform the ritual duties of the temple; the king formally sweeps the road in front of the chariots before the start of the Rathayatra.
MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN PERIODS
History of the temple is the history of the town of Puri, which was invaded 18 times during its history to plunder the treasures of the Jagannath Puri temple. The first invasion was in the 8th century by Rastrakuta king Govinda-III (AD 798–814) and the last was in 1881 by the followers of Alekh Religion who did not recognize Jagannath worship. In between, from the 1205 onward there were many invasions of the city and its temple by Muslims of the Afghans and Moghuls descent, known as Yavanas or foreigners; they had mounted attacks to ransack the wealth of the temple rather than for religious reasons. In most of these invasions the idols were taken to safe places by the priests and the servitors of the temple. Destruction of the temple was prevented by timely resistance or surrender by the kings of the region. However, the treasures of the temple were repeatedly looted. Puri is the site of the Govardhana matha, one of the four cardinal institutions established by Adi Shankaracharya, when he visited Puri in 810 and since then it has become an important dham (divine centre) for the Hindus; the others being those at Sringeri, Dwaraka and Jyotirmath. The matha is headed by Jagatguru Shankarachrya. The significance of the four dhams is that the Lord Vishnu takes his dinner at Puri, has his bath at Rameshwaram, spends the night at Dwarka and does penance at Badrinath.
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu of Bengal who established the Bhakti movements of India in the sixteenth century, now known by the name the Hare Krishna movement, spent many years as a devotee of Jagannatha at Puri; he is said to have merged his "corporal self" with the deity. There is also a matha of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu here.
In the 17th century for the sailors sailing on the east coast of India, the landmark was the temple located in a plaza in the centre of the town which they called the "White Pagoda" while the Konark Sun Temple, 60 kilometres away to the east of Puri, was known as the "Black Pagoda".
The iconographic representation of the images in the Jagannath temple are believed to be the forms derived from the worship made by the tribal groups of Sabaras belonging to northern Odisha. These images are replaced at regular intervals as the wood deteriorates. This replacement is a special event carried out ritulistically by special group of carpenters.
The town has many Mathas (Monasteries of the various Hindu sects). Among the important mathas is the Emar Matha founded by the Tamil Vaishnav Saint Ramanujacharya in the 12th century AD. At present this matha is located in front of Simhadvara across the eastern corner of the Jagannath Temple is reported to have been built in the 16th century during the reign of Suryavamsi Gajapati. The matha was in the news recently for the large cache of 522 silver slabs unearthded from a closed room.
The British conquered Orissa in 1803 and recognizing the importance of the Jagannatha Temple in the life of the people of the state they initially placed an official to look after the temple's affairs and later declared it a district with the same name.
MODERN HISTORY
In 1906, Sri Yukteswar an exponent of Kriya Yoga, a resident of Puri, established an ashram in the sea-side town of Puri, naming it "Kararashram" as a spiritual training center. He died on 9 March 1936 and his body is buried in the garden of the ashram.
The city is the site of the former summer residence of British Raj built in 1913–14 during the era of governors, the Raj Bhavan.
For the people of Puri Lord Jagannath, visualized as Lord Krishna, is synonymous with their city. They believe that the Jagannatha looks after the welfare of the state. However, after the incident of the partial collapse of the Jagannatha Temple, the Amalaka part of the tower on 14 June 1990 people became apprehensive and thought it was not a good omen for the welfare of the State of Odisha. The replacement of the fallen stone by another of the same size and weight (seven tons) had to be done only in the an early morning hours after the gods had woken up after a good nights sleep which was done on 28 February 1991.
Puri has been chosen as one of the heritage cities for the Heritage City Development and Augmentation Yojana scheme of the Indian Government. It is one of 12 the heritage cities chosen with "focus on holistic development" to be implemented in 27 months by end of March 2017.
Non-Hindus are not permitted to enter the shrines but are allowed to view the temple and the proceedings from the roof of the Raghunandan library within the precincts of the temple for a small donation.
DEMOGRAPHICS
As of 2001 India census, Puri city, an urban Agglomeration governed by Municipal Corporation in Orissa state, had a population of 157,610 which increased to 200,564 in 2011. Males, 104,086, females, 96,478, children under 6 years of age, 18,471. The sex ratio is 927 females to 1000 males. Puri has an average literacy rate of 88.03 percent (91.38 percent males and 84.43 percent females). Religion-wise data is not reported.
ECONOMY
The economy of Puri is dependent on tourism to the extent of about 80%. The temple is the focal point of the entire area of the town and provides major employment to the people of the town. Agricultural production of rice, ghee, vegetables and so forth of the region meets the huge requirements of the temple, with many settlements aroiund the town exclusively catering to the other religious paraphernalia of the temple. The temple administration employs 6,000 men to perform the rituals. The temple also provides economic sustenance to 20,000 people belonging to 36 orders and 97 classes. The kitchen of the temple which is said to be the largest in the world employs 400 cooks.
CITY MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE
Puri Municipality, Puri Konark Development Authority, Public Health Engineering Organisastion, Orissa Water Supply Sewerage Board are some of the principal organizations that are devolved with the responsibility of providing for all the urban needs of civic amenities such as water supply, sewerage, waste management, street lighting, and infrastructure of roads. The major activity which puts maximum presuure on these organizations is the annual event of the Ratha Yatra held for 10 days during July when more than a million people attend the grand event. This event involves to a very large extent the development activities such as infrastructure and amenities to the pilgrims, apart from security to the pilgrims.
The civic administration of Puri is the responsibility of the Puri Municipality which came into existence in 1864 in the name of Puri Improvement Trust which got converted into Puri Municipality in 1881. After India's independence in 1947, Orissa Municipal Act-1950 was promulgated entrusting the administration of the city to the Puri Municipality. This body is represented by elected representative with a Chairperson and councilors representing the 30 wards within the municipal limits.
LANDMARKS
JAGANNATH TEMPLE AT PURI
The Temple of Jagannath at Puri is one of the major Hindu temples built in the Kalinga style of architecture, in respect of its plan, front view and structural detailing. It is one of the Pancharatha (Five chariots) type consisting of two anurathas, two konakas and one ratha with well-developed pagas. Vimana or Deula is the sanctum sanctorum where the triad (three) deities are deified on the ratnavedi (Throne of Pearls), and over which is the temple tower, known as the rekha deula; the latter is built over a rectangular base of the pidha temples as its roof is made up of pidhas that are sequentially arranged horizontal platforms built in descending order forming a pyramidal shape. The mandapa in front of the sanctum sanctorum is known as Jagamohana where devotees assemble to offer worship. The temple tower with a spire rises to a height of 58 m in height and a flag is unfurled above it fixed over a wheel (chakra). Within the temple complex is the Nata Mandir, a large hall where Garuda stamba (pillar). Chaitanya Mahaprabhu used to stand here and pray. In the interior of the Bhoga Mantap, adjoining the Nata mandir, there is profusion of decorations of sculptures and paintings which narrate the story of Lord Krishna. The temple is built on an elevated platform (of about 39,000 m2 area), 20 ft above the adjoining area. The temple rises to a height of 214 ft above the road level. The temple complex covers an area of 4,3 ha. There is double walled enclosure, rectangular in shape (rising to a height of 20 ft) surrounding the temple complex of which the outer wall is known as Meghanada Prachira, measuring 200 by 192 metres. The inner walled enclosure, known as Kurmabedha. measures 126m x 95m. There are four entry gates (in four cardinal directions to the temple located at the center of the walls in the four directions of the outer circle. These are: the eastern gate called Singhadwara (Lions Gate), the southern gate known as Ashwa Dwara (Horse Gate), the western gate called the Vyaghra Dwara (Tigers Gate) or the Khanja Gate, and the northern gate called the Hathi Dwara or (elephant gate). The four gates symbolize the four fundamental principles of Dharma (right conduct), Jnana (knowledge), Vairagya (renunciation) and Aishwarya (prosperity). The gates are crowned with pyramid shapes structures. There is stone pillar in front of the Singhadwara called the Aruna Stambha {Solar Pillar}, 11 metres in height with 16 faces, made of chlorite stone, at the top of which is mounted an elegant statue of Arun (Sun) in a prayer mode. This pillar was shifted from the Konarak Sun temple. All the gates are decorated with guardian statues in the form of lion, horse mounted men, tigers and elephants in the name and order of the gates. A pillar made of fossilized wood is used for placing lamps as offering. The Lion Gate (Singhadwara) is the main gate to the temple, which guarded by two guardian deities Jaya and Vijaya. The main gates is ascended through 22 steps known as Baisi Pahaca which are revered as it is said to possess "spiritual animation". Children are made to roll down these steps from top to bottom to bring them spiritual happiness. After entering the temple on the left hand side there is huge kitchen where food is prepared in hygienic conditions in huge quantities that it is termed as "the biggest hotel of the world".
The legend says that King Indradyumma was directed by Lord Jagannath in a dream to build a temple for him and he built it as directed. However, according to historical records the temple was started some time during the 12th century by King Chodaganga of the Eastern Ganga dynasty. It was however completed by his descendant, Anangabhima Deva, in the 12th century. The wooden images of Jagannath, Balabhadra and Subhadra were then deified here. The temple was under the control of the Hindu rulers up to 1558. Then, when Orissa was occupied by the Afghan Nawab of Bengal, it was brought under the control of the Afghan General Kalapahad. Following the defeat of the Afghan king by Raja Mansingh, the General of Mughal emperor Akbar, the temple became a part of the Mughal empire till 1751 AD. Subsequently it was under the control of the Marathas till 1803. Then, when British Raj took over Orissa, the Puri Raja was entrusted with its to management until 1947.
The triad of images in the temple are of Jagannatha, personifying Lord Krishna, Balabhadra, his older brother, and Subhadra his younger sister, which are made of wood (neem) in an unfinished form. The stumps of wood which form the images of the brothers have human arms and that of Subhadra does not have any arms. The heads are large and un-carved and are painted. The faces are made distinct with the large circular shaped eyes.
THE PANCHA TIRTHA OF PURI
Hindus consider it essential to bathe in the Pancha Tirtha or the five sacred bathing spots of Puri, India, to complete a pilgrimage to Puri. The five sacred water bodies are the Indradyumana Tank, the Rohini Kunda, the Markandeya Tank, Swetaganga Tank, and the The Sea also called the Mahodadhi is considered a sacred bathing spot in the Swargadwar area. These tanks have perennial sources of supply in the form of rain water and ground water.
GUNDICHA TEMPLE
Known as the Garden House of Jagannath, the Gundicha temple stands in the centre of a beautiful garden, surrounded by compound walls on all sides. It lies at a distance of about 3 kilometres to the north east of the Jagannath Temple. The two temples are located at the two ends of the Bada Danda (Grand Avenue) which is the pathway for the Rath Yatra. According to a legend, Gundicha was the wife of King Indradyumna who originally built the Jagannath temple.
The temple is built using light-grey sandstone and architecturally, it exemplifies typical Kalinga temple architecture in the Deula style. The complex comprises four components: vimana (tower structure containing the sanctum), jagamohana (assembly hall), nata-mandapa (festival hall) and bhoga-mandapa (hall of offerings). There is also a kitchen connected by a small passage. The temple is set within a garden, and is known as "God's Summer Garden Retreat" or garden house of Jagannath. The entire complex, including garden, is surrounded by a wall which measures 131 m × 98 m with height of 6.1 m.
Except for the 9-day Rath Yatra when triad images are worshipped in Gundicha Temple, the rest of the year it remains unoccupied. Tourists can visit the temple after paying an entry fee. Foreigners (prohibited entry in the main temple) are allowed inside this temple during this period. The temple is under the Jagannath Temple Administration, Puri – the governing body of the main temple. A small band of servitors maintain the temple.
SWARGADWAR
Swargadwar is the name given to the cremation ground or burning ghat which is located on the shores of the sea were thousands of dead bodies of Hindus are brought from faraway places to cremate. It is a belief that the Chitanya Mahaparabhu disppaeread from this Swargadwar about 500 years back.
BEACH
The beach at Puri known as the "Ballighai beach} is 8 km away at the mouth of Nunai River from the town and is fringed by casurian trees. It has golden yellow sand and has pleasant sunshine. Sunrise and sunset are pleasant scenic attractions here. Waves break in at the beach which is long and wide.
DISTRICT MUSEUM
The Puri district museum is located on the station road where the exhibits are of different types of garments worn by Lord Jagannath, local sculptures, patachitra (traditional, cloth-based scroll painting) and ancient Palm-leaf manuscripts and local craft work.
RAGHUNANDANA LIBRARY
Raghunandana Library is located in the Emmra matha complex (opposite Simhadwara or Lion gate, the main entrance gate). The Jagannatha Aitihasika Gavesana Samiti (Jagannatha Historical Center) is also located here. The library contains ancient palm leaf manuscripts of Jagannatha, His cult and the history of the city. From the roof of the library one gets a picturesque view of the temple complex.
FESTIVALS OF PURI
Puri witnesses 24 festivals every year, of which 13 are major festivals. The most important of these is the Rath Yatra or the Car festival held in the month June–July which is attended by more than 1 million people.
RATH YATRA AT PURI
The Jagannath triad are usually worshiped in the sanctum of the temple at Puri, but once during the month of Asadha (Rainy Season of Orissa, usually falling in month of June or July), they are brought out onto the Bada Danda (main street of Puri) and travel 3 kilometrer to the Shri Gundicha Temple, in huge chariots (ratha), allowing the public to have darśana (Holy view). This festival is known as Rath Yatra, meaning the journey (yatra) of the chariots (ratha). The yatra starts, according to Hindu calendar Asadha Sukla Dwitiya )the second day of bright fortnight of Asadha (June–July) every year.
Historically, the ruling Ganga dynasty instituted the Rath Yatra at the completion of the great temple around 1150 AD. This festival was one of those Hindu festivals that was reported to the Western world very early. In his own account of 1321, Odoric reported how the people put the "idols" on chariots, and the King and Queen and all the people drew them from the "church" with song and music.
The Rathas are huge wheeled wooden structures, which are built anew every year and are pulled by the devotees. The chariot for Jagannath is about 14 m high and 35 feet square and takes about 2 months to construct. Th chariot is mounted with 16 wheels, each of 2.1 m diameter. The carvings in the front of the chariot has four wooden horses drawn by Maruti. On its other three faces the wooden carvings are Rama, Surya and Vishnu. The chariot is known as Nandi Ghosha. The roof of the chariot is covered with yellow and golden coloured cloth. The next chariot is that of Balabhadra which is 13 m in height fitted with 14 wheels. The chariot is carved with Satyaki as the charioteer. The carvings on this chariot also include images of Narasimha and Rudra as Jagannath's companions. The next chariot in the order is that of Subhadra, which is 13 m in height supported on 12 wheels, roof covered in black and red colour cloth and the chariot is known as Darpa-Dalaan. The charioteer carved is Arjuna. Other images carved on the chariot are that of Vana Durga, Tara Devi and Chandi Devi. The artists and painters of Puri decorate the cars and paint flower petals and other designs on the wheels, the wood-carved charioteer and horses, and the inverted lotuses on the wall behind the throne. The huge chariots of Jagannath pulled during Rath Yatra is the etymological origin of the English word Juggernaut. The Ratha-Yatra is also termed as the Shri Gundicha yatra and Ghosha yatra
CHHERA PAHARA
The Chhera Pahara is a significant ritual associated with the Ratha-Yatra. During the festival, the Gajapati King wears the outfit of a sweeper and sweeps all around the deities and chariots in the Chera Pahara (sweeping with water) ritual. The Gajapati King cleanses the road before the chariots with a gold-handled broom and sprinkles sandalwood water and powder with utmost devotion. As per the custom, although the Gajapati King has been considered the most exalted person in the Kalingan kingdom, he still renders the menial service to Jagannath. This ritual signified that under the lordship of Jagannath, there is no distinction between the powerful sovereign Gajapati King and the most humble devotee.
CHADAN YATRA
In Akshaya Tritiya every year the Chandan Yatra festival marks the commencement of the construction of the Chariots of the Rath Yatra. It also marks the celebration of the Hindu new year.
SNANA YATRA
On the Purnima day in the month of Jyestha (June) the triad images of the Jagannath temple are ceremonially bathed and decorated every year on the occasion of Snana Yatra. Water for the bath is taken in 108 pots from the Suna kuan (meaning: "golden well") located near the northern gate of the temple. Water is drawn from this well only once in a year for the sole purpose of this religious bath of the deities. After the bath the triad images are dressed in the fashion of the elephant god, Ganesha. Later during the night the original triad images are taken out in a procession back to the main temple but kept at a place known as Anasara pindi. After this the Jhulana Yatra is when proxy images of the deities are taken out in a grand procession for 21 days, cruised over boats in the Narmada tank.
ANAVASARA OR ANASARA
Anasara literally means vacation. Every year, the triad images without the Sudarshan after the holy Snana Yatra are taken to a secret altar named Anavasara Ghar Palso known as "Anasara pindi} where they remain for the next dark fortnight (Krishna paksha). Hence devotees are not allowed to view them. Instead of this devotees go to nearby place Brahmagiri to see their beloved lord in the form of four handed form Alarnath a form of Vishnu. Then people get the first glimpse of lord on the day before Rath Yatra, which is called Navayouvana. It is said that the gods suffer from fever after taking ritual detailed bath and they are treated by the special servants named, Daitapatis for 15 days. Daitapatis perform special niti (rite) known as Netrotchhaba (a rite of painting the eyes of the triad). During this period cooked food is not offered to the deities.
NAVA KALEVARA
One of the most grandiloquent events associated with the Lord Jagannath, Naba Kalabera takes place when one lunar month of Ashadha is followed by another lunar month of Aashadha, called Adhika Masa (extra month). This can take place in 8, 12 or even 18 years. Literally meaning the "New Body" (Nava = New, Kalevar = Body), the festival is witnessed by as millions of people and the budget for this event exceeds $500,000. The event involves installation of new images in the temple and burial of the old ones in the temple premises at Koili Vaikuntha. The idols that were worshipped in the temple, installed in the year 1996, were replaced by specially made new images made of neem wood during Nabakalebara 2015 ceremony held during July 2015. More than 3 million devotees were expected to visit the temple during the Nabakalebara 2015 held in July.
SUNA BESHA
Suna Bhesha also known as Raja or Rajadhiraja bhesha or Raja Bhesha, is an event when the triad images of the Jagannath Temple are adorned with gold jewelry. This event is observed 5 times during a year. It is commonly observed on Magha Purnima (January), Bahuda Ekadashi also known as Asadha Ekadashi (July), Dashahara (Vijyadashami) (October), Karthik Purnima (November), and Pousa Purnima (December). While one such Suna Bhesha event is observed on Bahuda Ekadashi during the Rath Yatra on the chariots placed at the lion's gate or the Singhdwar; the other four Bheshas' are observed inside the temple on the Ratna Singhasana (gem studded altar). On this occasion gold plates are decorated over the hands and feet of Jagannath and Balabhadra; Jagannath is also adorned with a Chakra (disc) made of gold on the right hand while a silver conch adorns the left hand. However, Balabhadra is decorated with a plough made of gold on the left hand while a golden mace adorns his right hand.
NILADRI BIJE
Celebrated on Asadha Trayodashi. It marks the end of the 12 days Ratha yatra. The large wooden images of the triad of gods are moved from the chariots and then carried to the sanctum sanctorum, swaying rhythmically, a ritual which is known as pahandi.
SAHI YATRA
Considered the world's biggest open-air theatre, the Sahi yatra is an 11 day long traditional cultural theatre festival or folk drama which begins on Ram Navami and ending in Rama avishke (Sanskrit:anointing) every year. The festival includes plays depicting various scenes from the Ramayan. The residents of various localities or Sahis are entrusted the task of performing the drama at the street corners.
TRANSPORT
Earlier when roads did not exist people walked or travelled by animal drawn vehicles or carriages along beaten tracks. Up to Calcutta travel was by riverine craft along the Ganges and then by foot or carriages to Puri. It was only during the Maratha rule that the popular Jagannath Sadak (Road) was built around 1790. The East India Company laid the rail track from Calcutta to Puri which became operational in 1898. Puri is now well connected by rail, road and air services. A broad gauge railway line of the South Eastern Railways connects with Puri and Khurda is an important Railway junction. By rail it is about 499 kilometres away from Calcutta and 468 kilometres from Vishakhapatnam. Road network includes NH 203 that links the town with Bhubaneswar, the capital of Odisha which is about 60 kilometres away. NH 203 B connects the town with Satapada via Brahmagiri. Marine drive which is part of NH 203 A connects Puri with Konark. The nearest airport is at Bhubaneswar, about 60 kilometres away from Puri. Puri railway station is among the top hundred booking stations of Indian Railways.
ARTS AND CRAFTS
SAND ART
Sand art is a special art form that is created on the beaches of the sea coast of Puri. The art form is attributed to Balaram Das, a poet who lived in the 14th century. He started crafting the sand art forms of the triad deities of the Jagannath Temple at the Puri beach. Now sculptures in sand of various gods and famous people are created by amateur artists which are temporal in nature as they get washed away by waves. This is an art form which has gained international fame in recent years. One of the well known sand artist is Sudarshan Patnaik. He has established the Golden Sand Art Institute in 1995 at the beach to provide training to students interested in this art form.
APPLIQUE ART
Applique art work, which is a stitching based craft, unlike embroidery, which was pioneered by the Hatta Maharana of Pipili is widely used in Puri, both for decoration of the deities but also for sale. His family members are employed as darjis or tailors or sebaks by the Maharaja of Puri who prepare articles for decorating the deities in the temple for various festivals and religious ceremonies. These applique works are brightly coloured and patterned fabric in the form of canopies, umbrellas, drapery, carry bags, flags, coberings of dummy horses and cows, and other household textiles which are marketed in Puri. The cloth used are in dark colours of red, black, yellow, green, blue and turquoise blue.
CULTURE
Cultural activities, apart from religiuos festivals, held annually are: The Puri Beach Festival held between 5 and 9 November and the Shreeksherta Utsav held from 20 December to 2 January where cultural programmes include unique sand art, display of local and traditional handicrafts and food festival. In addition cultural programmes are held every Saturday for two hours on in second Saturday of the moth at the district Collector's Conference Hall near Sea Beach Polic Station. Apart from Odissi dance, Odiya music, folk dances, and cultural programmes are part of this event. Odishi dance is the cultural heritage of Puri. This dance form originated in Puri in the dances performed Devadasis (Maharis) attached to the Jagannath temple who performed dances in the Natamantapa of the temple to please the deities. Though the devadadsi practice has been discontinued, the dance form has become modern and classical and is widely popular, and many of the Odishi virtuoso artists and gurus (teachers) are from Puri.
EDUCATION
SOME OF THE EDUCATIONNAL INSTITUTIONS IN PURI
- Ghanashyama Hemalata Institute of Technology and Management
- Gangadhar Mohapatra Law College, established in 1981[84]
- Extension Unit of Regional Research Institute of Homoeopathy; Puri under Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy (CCRH), New Delhi established in March 2006
- Sri Jagannath Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, established in July 1981
- The Industrial Training Institute, a Premier Technical Institution to provide education in skilled, committed & talented technicians, established in 1966 of the Government of India
PURI PEOPLE
Gopabandhu Das
Acharya Harihar
Nilakantha Das
Kelucharan Mohapatra
Pankaj Charan Das
Manasi Pradhan
Raghunath Mohapatra
Sudarshan Patnaik
Biswanath Sahinayak
Rituraj Mohanty
WIKIPEDIA
Not sure if this image really fits this tune but for me it does. And especially now that the world gets to see what Mother Earth is capable of doing.....
For this shot ive been playing with my mums converters and extention tubes :) yes both at the same time lol
Handheld and SOOC
One of the three oldest cabins extent in Kansas (thought to have been built in 1854, the same year Kansas became a territory)--moved from its original site to this location in Meriden, Kansas to the local fairgrounds. It was taken apart and reassembled--so the logs are authentic and fitted together as they were originally, but the mortar is, of course, new. The roof extension is not authentic, however. I assume it was added as a way to protect the structure from the elements. I've never seen a cabin in Kansas with a roof like this--though they are common in tobacco country. Very strange! This photo just became the first to enter my top 200 most viewed photos without benefit of a nude or at the least, a swimsuit clad female. I find that odd. I'm not badmouthing my own photo. but there is no question that I have better photos of nature or decaying buildings, etc, than this one. So, I wonder why the viewing public chose this one?
Number:
164462
Creator:
Hughes Company
Date created:
1948
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 8 x 10 in.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Church Home and Hospital (Baltimore, Md.). School of Nursing
Allen, Elizabeth Marie
Ammons, Marie Barbara
Anderson, Alberta Lillian
Bayda, Marie
Black, Barbara Allison
Bohanan, Doris Maretta
Bohow, Barbara Wayne
Bower, Geneva Juanita
Bremer, Pauline Violet
Brice, Betty Marie
Brosius, Elizabeth Rue
Cooper, Nancy Jean
Deigert, Lillian Margaret
Dennis, Norma Emma
Droneburg, Neva Jean
Duvall, Arlene Marie
Fischer, Ruth Naomi
Fogwell, Christine Mary
Harper, Eleanor Kathleen
Harrigan, Nancy Lee
Heaton, Martha Childs
Heller, Anna Carolyn
Heller, Helen Alberta
Hepler, Clara Elizabeth
Hoffman, Ella Beatrice
Holland, Julia Frances
Libby, Martha Jane
Merrim, Mary Ann
Mosier, Jean Elizabeth
Neutzel, Audrey Lauretta
Peyton, Sarah Wynne
Plough, Shirley Juanita
Reck, Kathryn Jane
Reynolds, Nancy Virginia
Rogers, Shirley Harriet
Schelberg, Sarah Bolling
Schick, Martha Marie
Seitz, Margaret Miller
Shaive, Jeanne Adele
Shelley, Beverly June
Shock, Vivian Ruth
Snyder, Jean Lois
Stirn, Ruth Anna
Truitt, Ernestine Sterling
Wagner, Mary Lavinia
Wagoner, Helen Elizabeth
Walter, Shirley Mae
Elliott, Margaret, 1884-1966
Nash, Jane Evans, 1880-1955
Creutzburg, Freda Lewis, 1898-1963
Nursing students--Maryland--Baltimore--1940-1950
Nurses--Maryland--Baltimore--1940-1950
Graduation ceremonies--Maryland--Baltimore--1940-1950
Nursing schools--Faculty
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
swing seat | playground sets | swing set kits | hanging seat | toddler swing |
Inferable from the tenacious work of our capable specialists, we can give an expansive extent of Hanging Chair. The outfitted seat is arranged combine with mechanical norms.With the help of skillful gathering, we present a wide course of action of Swing Chair Outdoor. Our things are open in contrasted conclusions that deal with on buyer's request.
Manufacturers, Suppliers & Wholesalers of all types of Outdoor Swings, Garden Jhula & Indoor Hanging Chairs
Mail – mpmakeinindia@gmail.com and mpindia13@gmail.com
Ph- +91 – 9899993813, 9212020202, 9911319786, 9911521313, 9911421313
For more details so please click here below link
Website - outdoor-garden-swings-jhula-suppliers.blogspot.com/p/swin...
Services All Over India
Andhra Pradesh - Anantapur, Chittoor, Cuddapah, Eluru, Guntur, Kakinada, Kurnool, Nellore, Ongole, Srikakulam, Vishakhapatnam, Vizianagaram, Arunachal Pradesh - Anini, Bomdila, Changlang, Daporijo, Hawai, Khonsa, Seppa, Tezu, Yupia, Ziro, Assam - Barpeta, Bongaigaon, Dhemaji, Dhubri, Dibrugarh, Diphu, Goalpara, Golaghat, Haflong, Hailakandi, Jorhat, Karimganj, Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur, Mangaldai, Marigaon, Nagaon, Nalbari, Sibsagar, Silchar, Tezpur, Tinsukia, Bihar - Araria, Arrah, Aurangabad, Banka, Begusarai, Bhabua, Bhagalpur, Buxar, Darbhanga, Gaya, Gopalganj, Jamui, Jehanabad, Katihar, Khagaria, Kishanganj, Lakhisarai, Madhepura, Madhubani, Motihari, Munger, Muzaffarpur, Patna, Chhattisgarh - Ambikapur, Bilaspur, Dantewada, Dhamtari, Durg, Jagdalpur, Jashpur, Kanker, Kawardha, Korba, Koriya, Mahasamund, Naila Janjgir, Raigarh, Raipur, Rajnandgaon, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu, New Delhi States - Darya Ganj, Delhi, Kanjhawala, Kripa Narain Marg, Nand Nagri, Rampua, Saket, Chawri Bazar, Paharganj, Azad Market, Karol Bagh, Sadar Bazar, Shah Jahan Road, Goa - Margao, Panaji, Gujarat - Ahmedabad, Ahwa, Amreli, Anand, Bharuch, Bhavnagar, Bhuj, Dahod, Gandhinagar, Godhra, Himmatnagar, Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kheda, Mehsana, Navsari, Palanpur, Patan, Porbandar, Rajkot, Rajpipla, Surat, Surendranagar, Vadodara, Valsad, Uttar Pradesh - Agra, Akbarpur, Aligarh, Allahabad, Amroha, Auraiya, Azamgarh, Badaun, Bagpat, Bahraich, Ballia, Balrampur, Banda, Barabanki, Bareilly, Basti, Bijnor, Bulandshahr, Chandauli, Chitrakoot, Deoria, Etah, Etawah, Faizabad, Fatehgarh, Fatehpur, Firozabad, Ghaziabad, Ghazipur, Gonda, Gorakhpur, Gyanpur, Hamirpur, Hardoi, Hathras, Jaunpur, Jhansi, Kannauj, Kanpur, Khalilabad, Kheri, Lalitpur, Lucknow, Maharajganj, Mahoba, Mainpuri, Manjhanpur, Mathura, Mau, Meerut, Mirzapur, Moradabad, Muzaffarnagar, Navgarh, Greater Noida, Noida, Orai, Padarauna, Pilibhit, Pratapgarh, Rae Bareli, Rampur, Robertsganj, Saharanpur, Shahjahanpur, Shravasti, Sitapur, Sultanpur, Unnao, Varanasi, Haryana - Ambala, Bhiwani, Faridabad, Fatehabad, Gurgaon, Hissar, Jhajjar, Jind, Kaithal, Karnal, Kurukshetra, Narnaul, Nuh, Palwal, Panchkula, Panipat, Rewari, Rohtak, Sirsa, Sonepat, Yamuna Nagar, Himachal Pradesh - Bilaspur, Chamba, Dharamasala, Hamirpur, Keylong, Kulu, Mandi, Nahan, Reckong Peo, Shimla, Solan, Una, Jammu & Kashmir - Anantnag, Badgam, Kirti Nagar Market, Sikandarpur Furniture Market, Panchkuian Road , Paharganj, Jail Road Market , Hari Nagar, Munirka Furniture Market, Sharma Farms , Chhattarpur, Amar Colony Furniture Market , Lajpat Nagar - 4, Aya Nagar Furniture Market , Aya Nagar, Mg Road Ghitorni Delhi, Karol Bagh Market, Khan Market, Bandipore, Baramula, Doda, Jammu, Kargil, Kathua, Kupwara, Leh, Poonch, Pulwama, Rajauri, Srinagar, Udhampur, Jharkhand - Bokaro, Chaibasa, Chatra, Daltonganj, Deoghar, Dhanbad, Dumka, Garhwa, Giridih, Godda, Gumla, Hazaribagh, Jamshedpur, Koderma, Lohardaga, Pakur, Ramgarh, Ranchi, Sahibganj, Karnataka - Bagalkot, Bangalore, Belgaum, Bellary, Bidar, Bijapur, Chamarajanagar, Chikmagalur, Chitradurga, Davanagere, Dharwad, Gadag, Gulbarga, Hassan, Haveri, Kolar, Madikeri, Mangalore, Mysore, Raichur, Ramanagara, Shimoga, Tumkur, Udupi, Yadgir, Kerala - Alappuzha, Kakkanad, Kalpetta, Tripura, Agartala, Ambassa, Kailasahar, Udaipu, Kannur, Kasaragod, Kochin, Cochin, Kollam, Kottayam, Kozhikode, Malappuram, Painavu, Palakkad, Pathanamthitta, Thiruvananthapuram, Thrissur, Lakshadweep, Madhya Pradesh - Balaghat, Barwani, Betul, Bhind, Bhopal, Chhatarpur, Chhindwara, Damoh, Datia, Dewas, Dhar, Dindori, Guna, Gwalior, Harda, Hoshangabad, Indore, Jabalpur, Jhabua, Katni, Khandwa, Khargone, Mandla, Mandsaur, Morena, Narsinghpur, Neemuch, Panna, Raisen, Rajgarh, Ratlam, Rewa, Sagar, Satna, Sehore, Seoni, Shahdol, Shajapur, Sheopur, Shivpuri, Sidhi, Tikamgarh, Ujjain, Umaria, Vidisha, Maharashtra - Ahmednagar, Akola, Alibag, Amravati, Aurangabad, Beed, Bhandara, Buldhana, Chandrapur, Dhule, Gadchiroli, Gondiya, Hingoli, Jalgaon, Jalna, Kolhapur, Latur, Mumbai, Nagpur, Nanded, Nandurbar, Nashik, Oras, Osmanabad, Parbhani, Pune, Ratnagiri, Sangli, Satara, Solapur, Thane, Wardha, Washim, Yavatmal, Manipur, Bishnupur, Chandel, Churachandpur, Lamphelpat, Porompat, Senapati, Tamenglong, Thoubal, Ukhrul, Meghalaya, East Garo Hills, East Khasi Hills, Jaintia Hills, Ri-Bhoi, South Garo Hills, West Garo Hills, West Khasi Hills, Mizoram - Aizawl, Champhai, Kolasib, Lawngtlai, Lunglei, Saiha, Telangana - Adilabad, Hyderabad, Jagtial, Karimnagar, Khammam, Kothagudem, Mahbubnagar, Mancherial, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda, Nizamabad, Ramagundam, Siddipet, Suryapet, Warangal, Uttarakhand - Almora, Bageshwar, Champawat, Dehradun, Gopeshwar, Haridwar, Nainital, New Tehri, Pauri, Pithoragarh, Rudraprayag, Rudrapur, Uttarkashi, Nagaland - Dimapur, Kohima, Mokokchung, Mon, Phek, Tuensang, Wokha, Zunheboto, Orissa - Angul, Balangir, Baleswar, Bargarh, Baripada, Bhadrak, Bhawanipatna, Bhubaneswar, Boudh, Chhatrapur, Cuttack, Debagarh, Dhenkanal, Jagatsinghpur, Jharsuguda, Kendrapara, Kendujhar, Koraput, Malkangiri, Nabarangapur, Nayagarh, Nuapada, Panikoili, Paralakhemundi, Phulbani, Puri, Rayagada, Sambalpur, Subarnapur, Sundargarh, Puducherry - Karaikal, Pandakkal, Puducherry, Yanaon, Punjab, Amritsar, Chandigarh, Bathinda, Faridkot, Fatehgarh Sahib, Firozpur, Gurdaspur, Hoshiarpur, Jalandhar, Kapurthala, Ludhiana, Mansa, Moga, Mukatsar, Nawan Shehar, Patiala, Rupnagar, Sangrur, Rajasthan - Ajmer, Alwar, Banswara, Baran, Barmer, Bharatpur, Bhilwara, Bikaner, Bundi, Chittorgarh, Churu, Dausa, Dholpur, Dungarpur, Ganganagar, Hanumangarh, Jaipur, Jaisalmer, Jalore, Jhalawar, Jhunjhunun, Jodhpur, Karauli, Kota, Nagaur, Pali, Pratapgarh, Rajsamand, Sawai Madhopur, Sikar, Sirohi, Tonk, Udaipur, Sikkim -Gangtok, Geyzing, Mangan, Namchi, Tamil Nadu - Ariyalur, Chennai, Coimbatore, Cuddalore, Dharmapuri, Dindigul, Erode, Hosur, Kanchipuram, Karur, Madurai, Nagapattinam, Nagercoil, Namakkal, Perambalur, Pudukkottai, Ramanathapuram, Salem, Sivaganga, Tanjore, Theni, Thiruvallur, Thiruvarur, Thoothukudi, Tiruchirappalli, Tirunelveli, Tiruvannamalai, Udagamandalam, Vellore, Villupuram, West Bengal - Alipore, Baharampur, Balurghat, Bankura, Barasat, Bardhaman, Cooch Behar, Darjeeling, English Bazar, Howrah, Hugli-Chuchura, Jalpaiguri, Kolkata, Krishnanagar, Midnapore, Purulia, Raiganj, Suri, Delhi NCR – Delhi, Noida, Gurgaon, Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurugram
We are New Delhi, India, based leading Manufacturers, Contractors, Service Providers, Suppliers, Retailers, Wholesalers, Distributors, Trading Company, Dealers, Traders, Exporters, Manufacturing Companies, Producers, Production Center, Vendors, Importers, New Delhi, India of all types of standing porch swing, hanging nest chair, room swing chair, outdoor furniture swing, hammock swing stand, garden umbrella online, indoor swing chair for adults, outside swing chair, clearance swing sets, hanging porch chair, bamboo furniture online shopping, backyard swings for adults,
The nature and extent of our current national crisis, as well as its causes and cures, are the subject of intense political struggle. I offer this as a contribution to that struggle and debate in hopes of helping to place blame where it belongs -- in the hands of Mr. Brown Pelican and his ostentatious factotums. Before I launch into my rant, permit me the prelude caveat that people tell me that the theories, endeavors, and bruta fulmina that Mr. Pelican is trying to tattoo on our minds are not educational, but testy. And the people who tell me this are correct, of course. He should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory. Mr. Pelican wants to be the one who determines what information we have access to. Yet he is also a big proponent of a particularly biggety form of communism. Do you see something wrong with that picture?
Number:
164418
Date created:
1935-04-30
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 8 x 10 in.
Scope and content:
Front row: 1) Annette Mathers; 2) unidentified; 3) Malinda Engel; 4) Mary Williams; 5-10) unidentified; 11) Emily Ruark. Middle row: 1)Mary Gardner; 2-8) unidentified; 9) Myrtle Miler; 10) unidentified. Back row: 1) Georgia Lee Robinson; 2) unidentified; 3) Jessie Redding; 4) unidentified; 5) unidentified; 6) Helen Armacost; 7) Doris Wagner; 8) unidentified; 9) Mary Shoemaker; 10) unidentified; 11) unidentified
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Church Home and Hospital (Baltimore, Md.). School of Nursing
Ruark, Sophia Emily
Deane, Audrey L.
Armacost, Helen Elizabeth
Gardner, Mary M.
Weller, Yvonne
MacDowell, Marguerite
Robinson, Mazie Virginia
Fehl, Jean
Sipple, Blanche
Null, Amelia Virginia
Schmidt, Martha Christine Ruth
Shoemaker, Mary Alicia
Stansfield, Lillian Miriam
Rutherford, Alice Nilson
Wagner, Doris E.
Lamb, E. Jeanette
Mathers, Annette C.
Miller, Myrtle
Walker, Elizabeth Hazel
Roberts, Frances Mae
Vondracek, Fhama Lee
Billmire, Dorothy Mary
Tracey, Grace Louise
Williams, Mary Harris
Bullock, Margaret Helen
Redding, Jennie
Fulcher, Gracie Lutha
Robinson, Georgia Lee
Engel, Malinda H.
Nash, Jane Evans, 1880-1955
Elliott, Margaret, 1884-1966
Creutzburg, Freda Lewis, 1898-1963
Nursing students--Maryland--Baltimore--1930-1940
Nurses--Maryland--Baltimore--1930-1940
Graduation ceremonies--Maryland--Baltimore--1930-1940
Nursing schools--Faculty
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
Notes:
Photographer unknown.
St Ethelbert, Hessett, Suffolk
Hessett is a fairly ordinary kind of village to the east of Bury St Edmunds, but its church is one of the most important in East Anglia for a number of reasons, which will become obvious. Consider for one moment, if you will, the extent to which the beliefs and practices of a religious community affect the architecture of its buildings. Think of a mosque, for instance. Often square, expressing the democracy of Islam, but without any imagery of the human figure, for such things are proscribed. Think of a synagogue, focused towards the Holy Scriptures in the Ark, but designed to enable the proclaiming of the Word, and the way that early non-conformist chapels echo this architecture of Judaism - indeed, those who built the first free churches, like Ipswich's Unitarian Chapel, actually called them synagogues.
The shape of a church, then, is no accident. A typical Suffolk perpendicular church of the 15th century has wide aisles, to enable liturgical processions, a chancel for the celebration of Mass, places for other altars, niches for devotional statues, a focus towards the Blessed Sacrament in the east, a roof of angels to proclaim a hymn of praise, a large nave for devotional and social activities, and wall paintings of the Gospels and hagiographies of Saints, of the catechism and teachings of the Catholic Church. As Le Corbusier might have said if he'd been around at the time, a medieval church is a machine for making Catholicism happen.
No longer, of course. The radical and violent fracture in popular religion in the middle years of the 16th century gave birth to the Church of England, and the new church inherited buildings that were quite unsuitable for the new congregational protestant theology, a problem that the Church of England has never entirely solved.
Over the centuries, the problem has been addressed in different ways. The early reformers celebrated communion at a table in the nave, for example, and blocked off the chancel for other uses. Although this was challenged by the Laudian party in the early part of the 17th century, it was the way that many parishes reinvented their buildings, and most were to stay like that until the middle years of the 19th century. Some went further. A pulpit placed halfway down the nave, or even at the back of the church, meant that the seating could be arranged so that it no longer focused towards the east, thus breaking the link with Catholic (and Laudian) sacramentalism. For several centuries, Anglican churches focused on the pulpit rather than the altar.
With the coming to influence of the 19th century Oxford Movement, all this underwent another dramatic change, with the great majority of our medieval parish churches having their interiors restored to their medieval integrity, reinventing themselves as sacramental spaces. This is the condition in which we find most of them today, and some Anglican theologians are asking the question that the Catholic Church asked itself at Vatican II in the 1960s - is a 19th century liturgical space really appropriate for the Church of the 21st century?
So, let us hasten at once to Hessett. The church sits like a glowing jewel in its wide churchyard, right on the main road through the village. It is pretty well perfect if you are looking for a fine Suffolk exterior. An extensive 15th century rebuilding enwraps the earlier tower, which was crowned by the donor of the rebuilding, John Bacon.The nave and aisles are deliciously decorated, reminding one rather of the church at neighbouring Rougham, although this is a smaller church, and the aisles make it almost square. A dedicatory inscription on the two storey vestry in the north east corner bids us pray for the souls of John and Katherine Hoo, who donated the chancel and paid for the trimmings to the aisles. Their inscription has been damaged by protestant reformers, who obviously did not believe in the efficacy of prayers for the dead.
Although not comparable with that at Woolpit, the dressed stone porch is a grand affair, and a bold statement. You may find the south door locked, but if this is the case then the priest's door into the chancel is usually open. And in a way it is a good church to enter via the chancel, because in this way St Ethelbert unfolds its treasures slowly.You step into relative darkness - or, at least, it seems so in comparison with the nave beyond the rood screen. This is partly a result of the abundance of dark wood, and in truth the chancel seems rather overcrowded. The most striking objects in view are the return stalls, which fill the two westerly corners of the chancel. These are in the style of a college or school of priests, with their backs to the rood screen, but then 'returning' around the walls to the east. They are fine, and are certainly 15th or 16th century. But one of the stalls, that to the north, is different to the others, and seems slightly out of place. It is elaborately carved with faces, birds and foliage.
Mortlock thought that it might have been intended for a private house. The stall in front of it has heads on it that appear to be wearing 18th century wigs. The sanctuary is largely Victorianised, with a great east window depicting Saints. The south windows of the chancel depict a lovely Adoration scene by the O'Connors. The chancel is separated from the nave by the 15th century rood screen, which is elegantly painted and gilt on the west side, the beautifully tracery intricately carved above. The rood screen has been fitted with attractive iron gates, presumably evidence of Anglo-catholic enthusiasm here in the early 20th century, and you step down through them into the light. A first impression is that you are entering a much older space than the one you have left. There is an 18th century mustiness, enhanced by the box pews that line the aisles. And, beyond, on walls and in windows, are wonderful things.
The number of surviving wall paintings in England is a tiny fraction of those which existed before the 15th and 16th centuries. All churches had them, and in profusion. It isn't enough to say that they were a 'teaching aid' of a church of illiterate peasants. In the main, they were devotional, and that is why they were destroyed. However, it is more complicated than that. Research in recent years has indicated that many wall paintings were destroyed before the Reformation, perhaps a century before. In some churches, they have been punched through with Perpendicular windows, which are clearly pre-Reformation. In the decades after the Black Death, there seems to have been a sea change in the liturgical use of these buildings, a move away from an individualistic, devotional usage to a corporate liturgical one. There is a change of emphasis towards more education and exegesis. This is the time that pulpits and benches appear, long before protestantism was on the agenda. What seems to happen is that many buildings were intended now to be full of light, and devotional wall paintings were either whitewashed, or replaced with catechetical ones.
The decoration of the nave was the responsibility of the people of the parish, not of the Priest. The wall paintings of England can be divided into roughly three groups. Roughly speaking, the development of wall paintings over the later medieval period is in terms of these three overlapping emphases.
Firstly, the hagiographies - stories of the Saints. These might have had a local devotion, although some saints were popular over a wide area, and most churches seem to have supported a devotion to St Christopher right up until the Reformation.
Secondly came those which illustrate incidents in the life of Christ and his mother, the Blessed Virgin. Although partly pedagogical, they were also enabling tools, since private devotions often involved a contemplation upon them, and at Mass the larger part of those present would have been involved in private devotions. These scriptural stories were as likely to have been derived from apocryphal texts like the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew as from the actual Gospels themselves.
Lastly, there are catechetical wall paintings, illustrating the teachings of the Catholic church. It should not be assumed that these are dogmatic. Many are simply artistic representations of stories, and others are simplifications of theological ideas, as with the seven deadly sins and the seven cardinal virtues. Some warn against occasions of sin (gossiping, for example) and generally wall paintings provided a local site for discussion and exemplification.
To an extent, all the above is largely true of stained glass, as well, with the caveat that stained glass was more expensive, relied on local patronage, and often has this patronage as a subtext, hence the large number of heraldic devices and images of local worthies. But it was also devotional, and so it was also destroyed.
So - what survives at Hessett? The wall paintings first.
Starting in the south east corner of the nave, we have Suffolk's finest representation of St Barbara, presenting a tower. St Barbara was very popular in medieval times, because she was invoked against strikes by lightning and sudden fires. This resulted from her legend, for her father, on finding her to be a Christian, walled her up in a tower until she repented. As a result, he was struck by lightning, and reduced to ashes. She was also the patron saint of the powerful building trade, and as such her image graced their guild altars - perhaps that was the case here.
Above the south door is another figure, often identified as St Christopher, but I do not think that this can be the case. St Christopher is found nowhere else in Suffolk above a south door. The traditional iconography of this mythical saint is not in place here, and it is hard to see how this figure could ever have been interpreted as such. I suspect it is a result of an early account confusing the two images over the north and south doors, and the mistake being repeated in later accounts.
In fact, digital enhancement seems to suggest that there are two figures above the south door, overlapping each other slightly. The figure on the right is barefoot, that on the left is wearing a white gown. There appears to be water under their feet, and so I think this is an image of the Baptism of Christ. Perhaps it was once part of a sequence.
The wall painting opposite, above the north door, is St Christopher. Although it isn't as clear as himself at, say, nearby Bradfield Combust, he bestrides the river in the customary manner, staff in hand. The Christ child is difficult to discern, but you can see the fish in the water. Also in the water, and rather unusual, are two figures. They are rendered rather crudely, almost like gingerbread men. Could they be the donors of the north aisle, John and Katherine Hoo in person?
Moving along the north aisle, we come to the set of paintings for which Hessett is justifiably famous. They are set one above the other between two windows, at the point where might expect the now-vanished screen to a chapel to have been. The upper section was here first. It shows the seven deadly sins (described wrongly in some text books as a tree of Jesse, or ancestry of Christ). Two devils look on as, from the mouth of hell, a great tree sprouts, ending in seven images. Pride is at the top, and in pairs beneath are Gluttony and Anger, Vanity and Envy, Avarice and Lust. Mortlock suggests that some attempt has been made to erase the image for Lust, which may simply be mid-16th century puritan prurience on the part of some reformer here. This would suggest that this catechetical tool was here right up until the Reformation.
The idea of 'Seven Deadly Sins' was anathema to the reformers, because it is entirely unscriptural. Rather, as a catechetical tool, it is a way of drawing together a multitude of sins into a simplistic aide memoire. This could then be used in confession, taking each of them one at a time and examining ones conscience accordingly. It should not be seen simply as a 'warning' to ignorant peasants, for the evidence is that the ordinary rural people of late medieval England were theologically very articulate. Rather, it was a tool for use, in contemplation and preparation for the sacrament of reconciliation, which may well have ordinarily taken place in the chapel here.
The wall painting beneath the Sins is even more interesting. This is a very rare 'Christ of the Trades', and dates from the early 15th century, about a hundred years after the painting above. It is rather faded, and takes a while to discern, and not all of it is decodable. However, enough is there to be fascinating. The image of the 'Christ of the Trades' is known throughout Christendom, and contemporary versions with this can be found in other parts of Europe. It shows the risen Christ in the centre, and around him a vast array of the tools and symbols of various trades. One theory is that it depicts activities that should not take place on a Sunday, a holy day of obligation to refrain from work, and that these activities are wounding Christ anew.
Perhaps the most fascinating symbol, and the one that everyone notices, is the playing card. It shows the six of diamonds. Does it represent the makers of playing cards? If so, it might suggest a Flemish influence. Or could it be intended to represent something else? Whatever, it is one of the earliest representations of a playing card in England. Why is this here? It may very well be that there was a trades gild chantry chapel at the east end of the north aisle, and this painting was at its entrance.
At the east end of the north aisle now is the church's set of royal arms. Cautley saw it in the vestry in the 1930s, and identified it as a Queen Anne set. Now, with additions stripped away, it is revealed as a Charles II set from the 1660s, and a very fine one. It is fascinating to see it at such close range. Usually, they are set above the south door now, although they would originally have been placed above the chancel arch, in full view of the congregation, a gentle reminder of who was in charge.
And so to the glass, which on its own would be worth coming to Hessett to see. Few Suffolk churches have such an expanse, none have such a variety, or glass of such quality and interest. It consists essentially of two ranges, the life and Passion of Christ in the north aisle (although some glass has been reset across the church), and images and hagiographies of Saints in the south aisle.
In the north aisle, the scourging of Christ stands out, the wicked grins of the persecutors contrasting with the pained nobility of the Christ figure. In the next window, Christ rises from the dead, coming out of his tomb like the corpses in the doom paintings at Stanningfield, North Cove and Wenhaston. The Roman centurion sleeps soundly in the foreground.
The most famous image is in the east window of the south aisle. Apparently, it shows a bishop holding the chain to a bag, with four children playing at his feet. I say apparently, because there is rather more going on here than meets the eye. The reason that this image is so famous is that the small child in the foreground is holding what appears to be a golf club or hockey stick, and this would be the earliest representation of such an object in all Europe. The whole image has been said to represent St Nicholas, who was a Bishop, and whose legends include a bag of gold and a group of children.
Unfortunately, this is not the case. St Nicholas is never symbolised by a bag of gold, and there are three children in the St Nicholas legend, not four. In any case, the hand in the picture is not holding the chain to a bag at all, but a rosary, and the hockey stick is actually a fuller's club, used for dyeing clothes, and the symbol of St James the Less.
What has happened here is that the head of a Bishop has been grafted on to the body of a figure which is probably still in its original location. The three lights of this window contained a set of the Holy Kinship. The light to the north of the 'Bishop' contains two children playing with what ae apparently toys, but when you look closely you can see that one is holding a golden shell, and the other a poisoned chalice. They are the infant St James and St John, and the lost figure above them was their mother, Mary Salome.
This means that the figure with the Bishop's head is actually Mary Cleophas, mother of four children including St James the Less. The third light to the south, of course, would have depicted the Blessed Virgin and child, but she is lost to us.
Not only this, but Hessett has some very good 19th Century glass which complements and does not overly intrude. The best is beneath the tower, the west window in a fully 15th Century style of scenes by Clayton & Bell. The east window, depicting saints, is by William Warrington, and the chancel also has the O'Connor glass already mentioned.
If the windows and wall paintings were all there was, then Hessett would be remarkable enough. But there is something else, two things, actually, that elevate it above all other Suffolk churches, and all the churches of England. For St Ethelbert is the proud owner of two unique survivals. At the back of the church is a chest, no different from those you'll find in many a parish church. In common with those, it has three separate locks, the idea being that the Rector and two Churchwardens would have a key each, and it would be necessary for all three of them to be present for the chest to be opened. It was used for storing parish records and valuables.
At some point, one of the keys was lost. There is an old story about the iconoclast William Dowsing turning up here and demanding the chest be opened, but on account of the missing key it couldn't be. Unfortunately, this story isn't true, for Dowsing never recorded a visit Hessett. The chest was eventually opened in the 19th century. Inside were found two extraordinary pre-Reformation survivals. These are a pyx cloth and a burse. The pyx cloth was draped over the wooden canopy that enclosed the blessed sacrament (one of England's four surviving medieval pyxes is also in Suffolk, at Dennington) before it was raised above the high altar. The burse was used to contain the host before consecration at the Mass. They are England's only surviving examples, and they're both here. Or, more precisely they aren't, for both have been purloined by the British Museum, the kind of theft that no locked church can prevent.
But there are life-size photos of both either side of the tower arch. The burse is basically an envelope, and features the Veronica face of Christ on one side with the four evangelistic symbols in each corner. On the other is an Agnus Dei, the Lamb of God. The survival of both is extraordinary. It is one thing to explore the furnishings of lost Catholic England, quite another to come face to face with articles that were actually used in the liturgy.
In front of the pictures stands the font, a relatively good one of the early 15th century, though rather less exciting than everything going on around it. The dedicatory inscription survives, to a pair of Hoos of an earlier generation than the ones on the vestry.Turning east again, the ranks of simple 15th century benches are all of a piece with their church. They have survived the violent transitions of the centuries, and have seated generation after generation of Hessett people. They were new here when this church was alive with coloured light, with the hundreds of candles flickering on the rood beam, the processions, the festivals, and the people's lives totally integrated with the liturgy of the seasons. For the people of Catholic England, their religion was as much a part of them as the air they breathed. They little knew how soon it would all come to an end.
And so, there it is - one of the most fascinating and satisfactory of all East Anglia's churches. And yet, not many people know about it. We are only three miles from the brown-signed honeypot of Woolpit, where a constant stream of visitors come and go. I've visited Hessett many times, and never once encountered another visitor. Still, there you are, I suppose. Perhaps some places are better kept secret. But come here if you can, for here is a medieval worship space with much surviving evidence of what it was actually meant to be, and meant to do.
St Ethelbert, Hessett, Suffolk
Hessett is a fairly ordinary kind of village to the east of Bury St Edmunds, but its church is one of the most important in East Anglia for a number of reasons, which will become obvious. Consider for one moment, if you will, the extent to which the beliefs and practices of a religious community affect the architecture of its buildings. Think of a mosque, for instance. Often square, expressing the democracy of Islam, but without any imagery of the human figure, for such things are proscribed. Think of a synagogue, focused towards the Holy Scriptures in the Ark, but designed to enable the proclaiming of the Word, and the way that early non-conformist chapels echo this architecture of Judaism - indeed, those who built the first free churches, like Ipswich's Unitarian Chapel, actually called them synagogues.
The shape of a church, then, is no accident. A typical Suffolk perpendicular church of the 15th century has wide aisles, to enable liturgical processions, a chancel for the celebration of Mass, places for other altars, niches for devotional statues, a focus towards the Blessed Sacrament in the east, a roof of angels to proclaim a hymn of praise, a large nave for devotional and social activities, and wall paintings of the Gospels and hagiographies of Saints, of the catechism and teachings of the Catholic Church. As Le Corbusier might have said if he'd been around at the time, a medieval church is a machine for making Catholicism happen.
No longer, of course. The radical and violent fracture in popular religion in the middle years of the 16th century gave birth to the Church of England, and the new church inherited buildings that were quite unsuitable for the new congregational protestant theology, a problem that the Church of England has never entirely solved.
Over the centuries, the problem has been addressed in different ways. The early reformers celebrated communion at a table in the nave, for example, and blocked off the chancel for other uses. Although this was challenged by the Laudian party in the early part of the 17th century, it was the way that many parishes reinvented their buildings, and most were to stay like that until the middle years of the 19th century. Some went further. A pulpit placed halfway down the nave, or even at the back of the church, meant that the seating could be arranged so that it no longer focused towards the east, thus breaking the link with Catholic (and Laudian) sacramentalism. For several centuries, Anglican churches focused on the pulpit rather than the altar.
With the coming to influence of the 19th century Oxford Movement, all this underwent another dramatic change, with the great majority of our medieval parish churches having their interiors restored to their medieval integrity, reinventing themselves as sacramental spaces. This is the condition in which we find most of them today, and some Anglican theologians are asking the question that the Catholic Church asked itself at Vatican II in the 1960s - is a 19th century liturgical space really appropriate for the Church of the 21st century?
So, let us hasten at once to Hessett. The church sits like a glowing jewel in its wide churchyard, right on the main road through the village. It is pretty well perfect if you are looking for a fine Suffolk exterior. An extensive 15th century rebuilding enwraps the earlier tower, which was crowned by the donor of the rebuilding, John Bacon.The nave and aisles are deliciously decorated, reminding one rather of the church at neighbouring Rougham, although this is a smaller church, and the aisles make it almost square. A dedicatory inscription on the two storey vestry in the north east corner bids us pray for the souls of John and Katherine Hoo, who donated the chancel and paid for the trimmings to the aisles. Their inscription has been damaged by protestant reformers, who obviously did not believe in the efficacy of prayers for the dead.
Although not comparable with that at Woolpit, the dressed stone porch is a grand affair, and a bold statement. You may find the south door locked, but if this is the case then the priest's door into the chancel is usually open. And in a way it is a good church to enter via the chancel, because in this way St Ethelbert unfolds its treasures slowly.You step into relative darkness - or, at least, it seems so in comparison with the nave beyond the rood screen. This is partly a result of the abundance of dark wood, and in truth the chancel seems rather overcrowded. The most striking objects in view are the return stalls, which fill the two westerly corners of the chancel. These are in the style of a college or school of priests, with their backs to the rood screen, but then 'returning' around the walls to the east. They are fine, and are certainly 15th or 16th century. But one of the stalls, that to the north, is different to the others, and seems slightly out of place. It is elaborately carved with faces, birds and foliage.
Mortlock thought that it might have been intended for a private house. The stall in front of it has heads on it that appear to be wearing 18th century wigs. The sanctuary is largely Victorianised, with a great east window depicting Saints. The south windows of the chancel depict a lovely Adoration scene by the O'Connors. The chancel is separated from the nave by the 15th century rood screen, which is elegantly painted and gilt on the west side, the beautifully tracery intricately carved above. The rood screen has been fitted with attractive iron gates, presumably evidence of Anglo-catholic enthusiasm here in the early 20th century, and you step down through them into the light. A first impression is that you are entering a much older space than the one you have left. There is an 18th century mustiness, enhanced by the box pews that line the aisles. And, beyond, on walls and in windows, are wonderful things.
The number of surviving wall paintings in England is a tiny fraction of those which existed before the 15th and 16th centuries. All churches had them, and in profusion. It isn't enough to say that they were a 'teaching aid' of a church of illiterate peasants. In the main, they were devotional, and that is why they were destroyed. However, it is more complicated than that. Research in recent years has indicated that many wall paintings were destroyed before the Reformation, perhaps a century before. In some churches, they have been punched through with Perpendicular windows, which are clearly pre-Reformation. In the decades after the Black Death, there seems to have been a sea change in the liturgical use of these buildings, a move away from an individualistic, devotional usage to a corporate liturgical one. There is a change of emphasis towards more education and exegesis. This is the time that pulpits and benches appear, long before protestantism was on the agenda. What seems to happen is that many buildings were intended now to be full of light, and devotional wall paintings were either whitewashed, or replaced with catechetical ones.
The decoration of the nave was the responsibility of the people of the parish, not of the Priest. The wall paintings of England can be divided into roughly three groups. Roughly speaking, the development of wall paintings over the later medieval period is in terms of these three overlapping emphases.
Firstly, the hagiographies - stories of the Saints. These might have had a local devotion, although some saints were popular over a wide area, and most churches seem to have supported a devotion to St Christopher right up until the Reformation.
Secondly came those which illustrate incidents in the life of Christ and his mother, the Blessed Virgin. Although partly pedagogical, they were also enabling tools, since private devotions often involved a contemplation upon them, and at Mass the larger part of those present would have been involved in private devotions. These scriptural stories were as likely to have been derived from apocryphal texts like the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew as from the actual Gospels themselves.
Lastly, there are catechetical wall paintings, illustrating the teachings of the Catholic church. It should not be assumed that these are dogmatic. Many are simply artistic representations of stories, and others are simplifications of theological ideas, as with the seven deadly sins and the seven cardinal virtues. Some warn against occasions of sin (gossiping, for example) and generally wall paintings provided a local site for discussion and exemplification.
To an extent, all the above is largely true of stained glass, as well, with the caveat that stained glass was more expensive, relied on local patronage, and often has this patronage as a subtext, hence the large number of heraldic devices and images of local worthies. But it was also devotional, and so it was also destroyed.
So - what survives at Hessett? The wall paintings first.
Starting in the south east corner of the nave, we have Suffolk's finest representation of St Barbara, presenting a tower. St Barbara was very popular in medieval times, because she was invoked against strikes by lightning and sudden fires. This resulted from her legend, for her father, on finding her to be a Christian, walled her up in a tower until she repented. As a result, he was struck by lightning, and reduced to ashes. She was also the patron saint of the powerful building trade, and as such her image graced their guild altars - perhaps that was the case here.
Above the south door is another figure, often identified as St Christopher, but I do not think that this can be the case. St Christopher is found nowhere else in Suffolk above a south door. The traditional iconography of this mythical saint is not in place here, and it is hard to see how this figure could ever have been interpreted as such. I suspect it is a result of an early account confusing the two images over the north and south doors, and the mistake being repeated in later accounts.
In fact, digital enhancement seems to suggest that there are two figures above the south door, overlapping each other slightly. The figure on the right is barefoot, that on the left is wearing a white gown. There appears to be water under their feet, and so I think this is an image of the Baptism of Christ. Perhaps it was once part of a sequence.
The wall painting opposite, above the north door, is St Christopher. Although it isn't as clear as himself at, say, nearby Bradfield Combust, he bestrides the river in the customary manner, staff in hand. The Christ child is difficult to discern, but you can see the fish in the water. Also in the water, and rather unusual, are two figures. They are rendered rather crudely, almost like gingerbread men. Could they be the donors of the north aisle, John and Katherine Hoo in person?
Moving along the north aisle, we come to the set of paintings for which Hessett is justifiably famous. They are set one above the other between two windows, at the point where might expect the now-vanished screen to a chapel to have been. The upper section was here first. It shows the seven deadly sins (described wrongly in some text books as a tree of Jesse, or ancestry of Christ). Two devils look on as, from the mouth of hell, a great tree sprouts, ending in seven images. Pride is at the top, and in pairs beneath are Gluttony and Anger, Vanity and Envy, Avarice and Lust. Mortlock suggests that some attempt has been made to erase the image for Lust, which may simply be mid-16th century puritan prurience on the part of some reformer here. This would suggest that this catechetical tool was here right up until the Reformation.
The idea of 'Seven Deadly Sins' was anathema to the reformers, because it is entirely unscriptural. Rather, as a catechetical tool, it is a way of drawing together a multitude of sins into a simplistic aide memoire. This could then be used in confession, taking each of them one at a time and examining ones conscience accordingly. It should not be seen simply as a 'warning' to ignorant peasants, for the evidence is that the ordinary rural people of late medieval England were theologically very articulate. Rather, it was a tool for use, in contemplation and preparation for the sacrament of reconciliation, which may well have ordinarily taken place in the chapel here.
The wall painting beneath the Sins is even more interesting. This is a very rare 'Christ of the Trades', and dates from the early 15th century, about a hundred years after the painting above. It is rather faded, and takes a while to discern, and not all of it is decodable. However, enough is there to be fascinating. The image of the 'Christ of the Trades' is known throughout Christendom, and contemporary versions with this can be found in other parts of Europe. It shows the risen Christ in the centre, and around him a vast array of the tools and symbols of various trades. One theory is that it depicts activities that should not take place on a Sunday, a holy day of obligation to refrain from work, and that these activities are wounding Christ anew.
Perhaps the most fascinating symbol, and the one that everyone notices, is the playing card. It shows the six of diamonds. Does it represent the makers of playing cards? If so, it might suggest a Flemish influence. Or could it be intended to represent something else? Whatever, it is one of the earliest representations of a playing card in England. Why is this here? It may very well be that there was a trades gild chantry chapel at the east end of the north aisle, and this painting was at its entrance.
At the east end of the north aisle now is the church's set of royal arms. Cautley saw it in the vestry in the 1930s, and identified it as a Queen Anne set. Now, with additions stripped away, it is revealed as a Charles II set from the 1660s, and a very fine one. It is fascinating to see it at such close range. Usually, they are set above the south door now, although they would originally have been placed above the chancel arch, in full view of the congregation, a gentle reminder of who was in charge.
And so to the glass, which on its own would be worth coming to Hessett to see. Few Suffolk churches have such an expanse, none have such a variety, or glass of such quality and interest. It consists essentially of two ranges, the life and Passion of Christ in the north aisle (although some glass has been reset across the church), and images and hagiographies of Saints in the south aisle.
In the north aisle, the scourging of Christ stands out, the wicked grins of the persecutors contrasting with the pained nobility of the Christ figure. In the next window, Christ rises from the dead, coming out of his tomb like the corpses in the doom paintings at Stanningfield, North Cove and Wenhaston. The Roman centurion sleeps soundly in the foreground.
The most famous image is in the east window of the south aisle. Apparently, it shows a bishop holding the chain to a bag, with four children playing at his feet. I say apparently, because there is rather more going on here than meets the eye. The reason that this image is so famous is that the small child in the foreground is holding what appears to be a golf club or hockey stick, and this would be the earliest representation of such an object in all Europe. The whole image has been said to represent St Nicholas, who was a Bishop, and whose legends include a bag of gold and a group of children.
Unfortunately, this is not the case. St Nicholas is never symbolised by a bag of gold, and there are three children in the St Nicholas legend, not four. In any case, the hand in the picture is not holding the chain to a bag at all, but a rosary, and the hockey stick is actually a fuller's club, used for dyeing clothes, and the symbol of St James the Less.
What has happened here is that the head of a Bishop has been grafted on to the body of a figure which is probably still in its original location. The three lights of this window contained a set of the Holy Kinship. The light to the north of the 'Bishop' contains two children playing with what ae apparently toys, but when you look closely you can see that one is holding a golden shell, and the other a poisoned chalice. They are the infant St James and St John, and the lost figure above them was their mother, Mary Salome.
This means that the figure with the Bishop's head is actually Mary Cleophas, mother of four children including St James the Less. The third light to the south, of course, would have depicted the Blessed Virgin and child, but she is lost to us.
Not only this, but Hessett has some very good 19th Century glass which complements and does not overly intrude. The best is beneath the tower, the west window in a fully 15th Century style of scenes by Clayton & Bell. The east window, depicting saints, is by William Warrington, and the chancel also has the O'Connor glass already mentioned.
If the windows and wall paintings were all there was, then Hessett would be remarkable enough. But there is something else, two things, actually, that elevate it above all other Suffolk churches, and all the churches of England. For St Ethelbert is the proud owner of two unique survivals. At the back of the church is a chest, no different from those you'll find in many a parish church. In common with those, it has three separate locks, the idea being that the Rector and two Churchwardens would have a key each, and it would be necessary for all three of them to be present for the chest to be opened. It was used for storing parish records and valuables.
At some point, one of the keys was lost. There is an old story about the iconoclast William Dowsing turning up here and demanding the chest be opened, but on account of the missing key it couldn't be. Unfortunately, this story isn't true, for Dowsing never recorded a visit Hessett. The chest was eventually opened in the 19th century. Inside were found two extraordinary pre-Reformation survivals. These are a pyx cloth and a burse. The pyx cloth was draped over the wooden canopy that enclosed the blessed sacrament (one of England's four surviving medieval pyxes is also in Suffolk, at Dennington) before it was raised above the high altar. The burse was used to contain the host before consecration at the Mass. They are England's only surviving examples, and they're both here. Or, more precisely they aren't, for both have been purloined by the British Museum, the kind of theft that no locked church can prevent.
But there are life-size photos of both either side of the tower arch. The burse is basically an envelope, and features the Veronica face of Christ on one side with the four evangelistic symbols in each corner. On the other is an Agnus Dei, the Lamb of God. The survival of both is extraordinary. It is one thing to explore the furnishings of lost Catholic England, quite another to come face to face with articles that were actually used in the liturgy.
In front of the pictures stands the font, a relatively good one of the early 15th century, though rather less exciting than everything going on around it. The dedicatory inscription survives, to a pair of Hoos of an earlier generation than the ones on the vestry.Turning east again, the ranks of simple 15th century benches are all of a piece with their church. They have survived the violent transitions of the centuries, and have seated generation after generation of Hessett people. They were new here when this church was alive with coloured light, with the hundreds of candles flickering on the rood beam, the processions, the festivals, and the people's lives totally integrated with the liturgy of the seasons. For the people of Catholic England, their religion was as much a part of them as the air they breathed. They little knew how soon it would all come to an end.
And so, there it is - one of the most fascinating and satisfactory of all East Anglia's churches. And yet, not many people know about it. We are only three miles from the brown-signed honeypot of Woolpit, where a constant stream of visitors come and go. I've visited Hessett many times, and never once encountered another visitor. Still, there you are, I suppose. Perhaps some places are better kept secret. But come here if you can, for here is a medieval worship space with much surviving evidence of what it was actually meant to be, and meant to do.
In absolute figures, the Amazon region has been the champion of forest destruction since the 1970s, and Brazil has always been responsible for the lion’s share of this development. Given the continental size of the Amazon forest area, however, other regions and countries have deforested much larger percentages of their remaining forests. From 2000 to 2010 the Amazon lost 216,000 km2, an area equivalent to 90% of the United Kingdom.16 In spite of this, dense humid forest still covered more than 5.8 million km2 in the Amazon basin in 2010.17 It must be added, though, that a significant proportion of this forest has been affected by human activities, displaying varying degrees of forest degradation.
For any form of publication, please include the link to this page:
This photo has been graciously provided to be used in the GRID-Arendal resources library by: GRID-Arendal
Number:
179472
Date created:
1983
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 7.5 x 9.5 in.
Description:
Front row, from left to right: 1) Thuma; 2) Littlefield; 3) Simmons; 4) Cole.
Second row, from left to right: 1) Wiley; 2) Epple; 3) Buchanan; 4) Kipp; 5) Pinheiro; 6) Kokotailo; 7) Bender; 8) Murphy; 9) P. Rowe.
Third row, form left to right: 1) Jackson; 2) Silber; 3) Saba; 4) Nguyen; 5) Pride-Boone; 6) Ragavan; 7) Marini; 8) Nogee; 9) Virshup.
Fourth row, from left to right: 1) Morban; 2) Zucker; 3) Kayne; 4) Dalos; 5) Cohen; 6) Murdaugh; 7) Crissinger; 8) Maldonado; 9) Gabriel; 10) Zuckerman.
Fifth row, from left to right: 1) Narayanan; 2) Schonwetter; 3) Bearer; 4) Babcock; 5) Mussman; 6) Peek; 7) Merrick; 8) Young-Lin; 9) Goodman.
Back row, from left to right: 1) Rekedal; 2) Hudak; 3) Behar; 4) Upchurch; 5) Fackler; 6) Bordy; 7) Lemons.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Johns Hopkins Hospital. Department of Pediatrics--People
Thuma, Philip E.
Littlefield, John W.
Simmons, Michael
Cole, Cynthia H.
Wiley, Joseph Byron
Epple, Lawrence King Jr.
Buchanan, Donald E.
Kipp, David F.
Pinheiro, Joaquim M. B.
Kokotailo, Patricia K.
Bender, Karen S.
Murphy, Anne Margaret
Rowe, Peter C.
Jackson, William Daniel
Silber, Jeffrey Howard
Saba, Norman Morris
Nguyen, Quan C.
Pride-Boone, Janice B.
Ragavan, Nilima
Marini, Joan C.
Nogee, Lawrence Mark
Virshup, David Marc
Marban, Sharon L.
Zucker, Howard A.
Kayne, Richard David
Dalos, Nancy Patricia
Cohen, Steven Roger
Crissinger, Karen Denise
Maldonado, Yvonne A.
Gabriel, Abram
Zuckerman, Andrea L.
Narayanan, Vinodh
Schonwetter, Barry S.
Bearer, Cynthia Frances
Babcock, Debra A.
Mussman, Mary G.
Peek, Sharon K.
Merrick, Henri F.
Young-Lin, Mary E.
Goodman, David C.
Rekedal, Kirby D.
Hudak, Mark Lawrence
Behar, Miriam Joy
Upchurch, Brent H.
Fackler, James C.
Bordy, Marjorie E.
Lemons, Richard S.
Pediatricians
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
Notes: Photographer unknown.
Number:
180155
Date created:
1957
Extent:
1 photographic print : gelatin silver ; 7.5 x 9.5 in.
Description:
Front row, from left to right: 1) Schaffer; 2) ___; 3) Najjar; 4) Wilkins; 5) Cooke; 6) Taussig; 7) Guild; 8) Kanner; 9) Holman.
Second row, from left to right: 1) Gamble; 2) James; 3) Odell; 4) Childs; 5) ___; 6) Eisenberg; 7) Brailey; 8) Lavenstein; 9) Kenny; 10) Gruskay.
Third row, from left to right: 1) Ashenden; 2) Dodson; 3) Glasner; 4) ___; 5) Sperling; 6) Stempfel; 7) Nakamura; 8) Bunnell.
Fourth row, from left to right: 1) Shaver; 2) Ruben; 3) Elliott; 4) Kolls; 5) Avery; 6) Migeon; 7) Cavanaugh; 8) Seidel.
Fifth row, from left to right: 1) Ferrara; 2) Chandler; 3) Neill; 4) Larson; 5) Witherspoon; 6) Kline.
Sixth row, from left to right: 1) Gochberg; 2) Ganelin; 3) Hopkins; 4) Hardy; 5) Kajdi; 6) Wood; 7) Cushman; 8) Haddad; 9) Martin.
Seventh row, from left to right: 1) Smith; 2) McKahnn; 3) ___; 4) ___; Blizzard.
Eighth row, from left to right: 1) ___; 2) Breger; 3) Levin; 4) Bramley; 5) Pinkerton; 6) McLean.
Rights:
Photograph is subject to copyright restrictions. Contact the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives for reproduction permissions.
Subjects:
Johns Hopkins Hospital. Department of Pediatrics--People
Schaffer, Alexander J.
Najjar, Victor
Wilkins, Lawson
Cooke, Robert E.
Taussig, Helen
Guild, Harriet Griggs
Kanner, Leo
Holman, Gerald H.
Gamble, James L. Jr.
James, Charles A.
Odell, Gerard B.
Childs, Barton
Eisenberg, Leon
Brailey, Miriam E.
Kenny, Frederic M.
Gruskay, Frank Ashenden, Barbara J.
Dodson, Jerry G.
Glasner, Philip J.
Sperling, Donald R.
Stempfel, Robert S. Jr.
Nakamura, Frances F.
Bunnell, David J. Jr.
Shaver, Benjamin A. Jr.
Ruben, Barbara L.
Rubin, Richard Elliott
Kolls, Alfred C. Jr.
Avery, Mary E.
Migeon, Claude J.
Cavanaugh, James J. A.
Ferrara, Joseph D.
Chandler, Caroline A.
Neill, Catherine
Larson, Mary Irene
Witherspoon, May G.
Seidel, Henry M.
Kline, Allen H.
Gochberg, Sumner H.
Ganelin, Robert S.
Hopkins, Edward W.
Hardy, Janet B.
Kajdi, L.
Wood, David E.
Cushman, Marjorie
Haddad, Heskel M.
Martin, M. Mencer
Smith, Lex
McKhann, Guy M.
Blizzard, Robert M.
Bramley, Gertrude L.
Pinkerton, Herman H. Jr.
McLean, William H.
Pediatricians
Group portraits
Portrait photographs
Notes: Photographer unknown.
The Coachella Valley is a valley in Southern California which extends for approximately 45 mi (72 km) in Riverside County southeast from the San Bernardino Mountains to the northern shore of the Salton Sea. It is the northernmost extent of the vast trough which includes the Salton Sea, the Imperial Valley and the Gulf of California. It is approximately 15 mi (24 km) wide along most of its length, bounded on the west by the San Jacinto Mountains and the Santa Rosa Mountains and on the north and east by the Little San Bernardino Mountains. The San Andreas Fault crosses the valley from the Chocolate Mountains in the southeast corner and along the centerline of the Little San Bernardinos. The fault is easily visible along its northern length as a strip of greenery against an otherwise bare mountain.
The Chocolate Mountains are home to a United States Navy live gunnery range and are mostly off-limits to the public. In comparison to the "Inland Empire (IE)" (Riverside-San Bernardino area and the California desert), some people refer to the IE's sub-region Coachella Valley as the "Desert Empire" to differentiate it from the neighboring Imperial Valley. Geographers and geologists sometimes call the area, along with the Imperial Valley to the south, the "Cahuilla Basin" or the "Salton Trough".
The valley communicates with the Greater Los Angeles area to the west via the San Gorgonio Pass, a major transportation corridor that includes I-10 and the Union Pacific Railroad.
Populated by nearly 600,000 people, the valley is part of the 13th-largest metropolitan area in the United States, the Inland Empire. The famous desert resort cities of Palm Springs and Palm Desert lie in the Coachella Valley. The Coachella Valley is the second largest sub-region in the Inland Empire metropolitan area, after the Greater San Bernardino Area which may be due to the number of seasonal residents in the winter months which at peak times may surpass 100,000 with another 3.5 million annual conventioneers and tourists.
The area is surrounded on the southwest by the Santa Rosa Mountains, by the San Jacinto Mountains to the west, the Little San Bernardino Mountains to the east and San Gorgonio Mountain to the north. These mountains peak at around 11,000 feet (3,400 m) and tend to average between 5,000 to 7,000 feet (1,500 to 2,000 m). Elevations on the Valley floor range from 1600 ft above sea level at the north end of the Valley to 250 ft below sea level around Mecca. In the summer months daytime temperatures range from 104 °F (40 °C) to 112 °F (44 °C) and nighttime lows from 75 °F (24 °C) to 86 °F (30 °C). During winter, the daytime temperatures range from 68 °F (20 °C) to 88 °F (31 °C) and corresponding nights range from 46 °F (8 °C) to 65 °F (18 °C) making it a popular winter resort destination. The surrounding mountains create Thermal Belts in the immediate foothills of the Coachella Valley, leading to higher night-time temperatures in the winter months, and lower daytime temps during the summer months. Due to its warm year-round climate the region's agricultural sector produces fruits such as mangoes, figs and dates.
The Valley is the northwestern extension of the Sonoran Desert to the southeast, and as such, is extremely arid. Most precipitation falls during the winter months from passing mid-latitude frontal systems from the north and west, nearly all of it as rain, but with snow atop the surrounding mountains. Rain also falls during the summer months as surges of moisture from both the Gulf of Mexico and the Gulf of California are drawn into the area by the desert monsoon. Occasionally, the remnants of a Pacific tropical cyclone can also affect the valley.
Although the irrigation of over 100,000 acres (40,500 ha) of the Valley since the early 20th century has allowed widespread agriculture. In its 2006 annual report, the Coachella Valley Water District listed the year's total crop value at over $576 million or almost $12,000 per acre. The Coachella Canal, a concrete-lined aqueduct built between 1938 and 1948 as a branch of the All-American Canal, brings water from the Colorado River to the Valley. The Colorado River Aqueduct, which provides drinking water to Los Angeles and San Diego, crosses the northeast end of the Valley along the base of the Little San Bernardino Mountains (the Joshua Tree National Park).
The San Andreas Fault traverses the Valley's east side. Because of this fault, the Valley has many hot springs. The Santa Rosa Mountains to the West are part of the Elsinore Fault Zone. The results of a prehistoric sturzstrom can be seen in Martinez Canyon. The Painted Canyons of Mecca feature smaller faults as well as Precambrian, Tertiary and Quaternary rock formations, unconformities, badlands and desert landforms.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coachella_Valley
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_...
St Ethelbert, Hessett, Suffolk
Hessett is a fairly ordinary kind of village to the east of Bury St Edmunds, but its church is one of the most important in East Anglia for a number of reasons, which will become obvious. Consider for one moment, if you will, the extent to which the beliefs and practices of a religious community affect the architecture of its buildings. Think of a mosque, for instance. Often square, expressing the democracy of Islam, but without any imagery of the human figure, for such things are proscribed. Think of a synagogue, focused towards the Holy Scriptures in the Ark, but designed to enable the proclaiming of the Word, and the way that early non-conformist chapels echo this architecture of Judaism - indeed, those who built the first free churches, like Ipswich's Unitarian Chapel, actually called them synagogues.
The shape of a church, then, is no accident. A typical Suffolk perpendicular church of the 15th century has wide aisles, to enable liturgical processions, a chancel for the celebration of Mass, places for other altars, niches for devotional statues, a focus towards the Blessed Sacrament in the east, a roof of angels to proclaim a hymn of praise, a large nave for devotional and social activities, and wall paintings of the Gospels and hagiographies of Saints, of the catechism and teachings of the Catholic Church. As Le Corbusier might have said if he'd been around at the time, a medieval church is a machine for making Catholicism happen.
No longer, of course. The radical and violent fracture in popular religion in the middle years of the 16th century gave birth to the Church of England, and the new church inherited buildings that were quite unsuitable for the new congregational protestant theology, a problem that the Church of England has never entirely solved.
Over the centuries, the problem has been addressed in different ways. The early reformers celebrated communion at a table in the nave, for example, and blocked off the chancel for other uses. Although this was challenged by the Laudian party in the early part of the 17th century, it was the way that many parishes reinvented their buildings, and most were to stay like that until the middle years of the 19th century. Some went further. A pulpit placed halfway down the nave, or even at the back of the church, meant that the seating could be arranged so that it no longer focused towards the east, thus breaking the link with Catholic (and Laudian) sacramentalism. For several centuries, Anglican churches focused on the pulpit rather than the altar.
With the coming to influence of the 19th century Oxford Movement, all this underwent another dramatic change, with the great majority of our medieval parish churches having their interiors restored to their medieval integrity, reinventing themselves as sacramental spaces. This is the condition in which we find most of them today, and some Anglican theologians are asking the question that the Catholic Church asked itself at Vatican II in the 1960s - is a 19th century liturgical space really appropriate for the Church of the 21st century?
So, let us hasten at once to Hessett. The church sits like a glowing jewel in its wide churchyard, right on the main road through the village. It is pretty well perfect if you are looking for a fine Suffolk exterior. An extensive 15th century rebuilding enwraps the earlier tower, which was crowned by the donor of the rebuilding, John Bacon.The nave and aisles are deliciously decorated, reminding one rather of the church at neighbouring Rougham, although this is a smaller church, and the aisles make it almost square. A dedicatory inscription on the two storey vestry in the north east corner bids us pray for the souls of John and Katherine Hoo, who donated the chancel and paid for the trimmings to the aisles. Their inscription has been damaged by protestant reformers, who obviously did not believe in the efficacy of prayers for the dead.
Although not comparable with that at Woolpit, the dressed stone porch is a grand affair, and a bold statement. You may find the south door locked, but if this is the case then the priest's door into the chancel is usually open. And in a way it is a good church to enter via the chancel, because in this way St Ethelbert unfolds its treasures slowly.You step into relative darkness - or, at least, it seems so in comparison with the nave beyond the rood screen. This is partly a result of the abundance of dark wood, and in truth the chancel seems rather overcrowded. The most striking objects in view are the return stalls, which fill the two westerly corners of the chancel. These are in the style of a college or school of priests, with their backs to the rood screen, but then 'returning' around the walls to the east. They are fine, and are certainly 15th or 16th century. But one of the stalls, that to the north, is different to the others, and seems slightly out of place. It is elaborately carved with faces, birds and foliage.
Mortlock thought that it might have been intended for a private house. The stall in front of it has heads on it that appear to be wearing 18th century wigs. The sanctuary is largely Victorianised, with a great east window depicting Saints. The south windows of the chancel depict a lovely Adoration scene by the O'Connors. The chancel is separated from the nave by the 15th century rood screen, which is elegantly painted and gilt on the west side, the beautifully tracery intricately carved above. The rood screen has been fitted with attractive iron gates, presumably evidence of Anglo-catholic enthusiasm here in the early 20th century, and you step down through them into the light. A first impression is that you are entering a much older space than the one you have left. There is an 18th century mustiness, enhanced by the box pews that line the aisles. And, beyond, on walls and in windows, are wonderful things.
The number of surviving wall paintings in England is a tiny fraction of those which existed before the 15th and 16th centuries. All churches had them, and in profusion. It isn't enough to say that they were a 'teaching aid' of a church of illiterate peasants. In the main, they were devotional, and that is why they were destroyed. However, it is more complicated than that. Research in recent years has indicated that many wall paintings were destroyed before the Reformation, perhaps a century before. In some churches, they have been punched through with Perpendicular windows, which are clearly pre-Reformation. In the decades after the Black Death, there seems to have been a sea change in the liturgical use of these buildings, a move away from an individualistic, devotional usage to a corporate liturgical one. There is a change of emphasis towards more education and exegesis. This is the time that pulpits and benches appear, long before protestantism was on the agenda. What seems to happen is that many buildings were intended now to be full of light, and devotional wall paintings were either whitewashed, or replaced with catechetical ones.
The decoration of the nave was the responsibility of the people of the parish, not of the Priest. The wall paintings of England can be divided into roughly three groups. Roughly speaking, the development of wall paintings over the later medieval period is in terms of these three overlapping emphases.
Firstly, the hagiographies - stories of the Saints. These might have had a local devotion, although some saints were popular over a wide area, and most churches seem to have supported a devotion to St Christopher right up until the Reformation.
Secondly came those which illustrate incidents in the life of Christ and his mother, the Blessed Virgin. Although partly pedagogical, they were also enabling tools, since private devotions often involved a contemplation upon them, and at Mass the larger part of those present would have been involved in private devotions. These scriptural stories were as likely to have been derived from apocryphal texts like the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew as from the actual Gospels themselves.
Lastly, there are catechetical wall paintings, illustrating the teachings of the Catholic church. It should not be assumed that these are dogmatic. Many are simply artistic representations of stories, and others are simplifications of theological ideas, as with the seven deadly sins and the seven cardinal virtues. Some warn against occasions of sin (gossiping, for example) and generally wall paintings provided a local site for discussion and exemplification.
To an extent, all the above is largely true of stained glass, as well, with the caveat that stained glass was more expensive, relied on local patronage, and often has this patronage as a subtext, hence the large number of heraldic devices and images of local worthies. But it was also devotional, and so it was also destroyed.
So - what survives at Hessett? The wall paintings first.
Starting in the south east corner of the nave, we have Suffolk's finest representation of St Barbara, presenting a tower. St Barbara was very popular in medieval times, because she was invoked against strikes by lightning and sudden fires. This resulted from her legend, for her father, on finding her to be a Christian, walled her up in a tower until she repented. As a result, he was struck by lightning, and reduced to ashes. She was also the patron saint of the powerful building trade, and as such her image graced their guild altars - perhaps that was the case here.
Above the south door is another figure, often identified as St Christopher, but I do not think that this can be the case. St Christopher is found nowhere else in Suffolk above a south door. The traditional iconography of this mythical saint is not in place here, and it is hard to see how this figure could ever have been interpreted as such. I suspect it is a result of an early account confusing the two images over the north and south doors, and the mistake being repeated in later accounts.
In fact, digital enhancement seems to suggest that there are two figures above the south door, overlapping each other slightly. The figure on the right is barefoot, that on the left is wearing a white gown. There appears to be water under their feet, and so I think this is an image of the Baptism of Christ. Perhaps it was once part of a sequence.
The wall painting opposite, above the north door, is St Christopher. Although it isn't as clear as himself at, say, nearby Bradfield Combust, he bestrides the river in the customary manner, staff in hand. The Christ child is difficult to discern, but you can see the fish in the water. Also in the water, and rather unusual, are two figures. They are rendered rather crudely, almost like gingerbread men. Could they be the donors of the north aisle, John and Katherine Hoo in person?
Moving along the north aisle, we come to the set of paintings for which Hessett is justifiably famous. They are set one above the other between two windows, at the point where might expect the now-vanished screen to a chapel to have been. The upper section was here first. It shows the seven deadly sins (described wrongly in some text books as a tree of Jesse, or ancestry of Christ). Two devils look on as, from the mouth of hell, a great tree sprouts, ending in seven images. Pride is at the top, and in pairs beneath are Gluttony and Anger, Vanity and Envy, Avarice and Lust. Mortlock suggests that some attempt has been made to erase the image for Lust, which may simply be mid-16th century puritan prurience on the part of some reformer here. This would suggest that this catechetical tool was here right up until the Reformation.
The idea of 'Seven Deadly Sins' was anathema to the reformers, because it is entirely unscriptural. Rather, as a catechetical tool, it is a way of drawing together a multitude of sins into a simplistic aide memoire. This could then be used in confession, taking each of them one at a time and examining ones conscience accordingly. It should not be seen simply as a 'warning' to ignorant peasants, for the evidence is that the ordinary rural people of late medieval England were theologically very articulate. Rather, it was a tool for use, in contemplation and preparation for the sacrament of reconciliation, which may well have ordinarily taken place in the chapel here.
The wall painting beneath the Sins is even more interesting. This is a very rare 'Christ of the Trades', and dates from the early 15th century, about a hundred years after the painting above. It is rather faded, and takes a while to discern, and not all of it is decodable. However, enough is there to be fascinating. The image of the 'Christ of the Trades' is known throughout Christendom, and contemporary versions with this can be found in other parts of Europe. It shows the risen Christ in the centre, and around him a vast array of the tools and symbols of various trades. One theory is that it depicts activities that should not take place on a Sunday, a holy day of obligation to refrain from work, and that these activities are wounding Christ anew.
Perhaps the most fascinating symbol, and the one that everyone notices, is the playing card. It shows the six of diamonds. Does it represent the makers of playing cards? If so, it might suggest a Flemish influence. Or could it be intended to represent something else? Whatever, it is one of the earliest representations of a playing card in England. Why is this here? It may very well be that there was a trades gild chantry chapel at the east end of the north aisle, and this painting was at its entrance.
At the east end of the north aisle now is the church's set of royal arms. Cautley saw it in the vestry in the 1930s, and identified it as a Queen Anne set. Now, with additions stripped away, it is revealed as a Charles II set from the 1660s, and a very fine one. It is fascinating to see it at such close range. Usually, they are set above the south door now, although they would originally have been placed above the chancel arch, in full view of the congregation, a gentle reminder of who was in charge.
And so to the glass, which on its own would be worth coming to Hessett to see. Few Suffolk churches have such an expanse, none have such a variety, or glass of such quality and interest. It consists essentially of two ranges, the life and Passion of Christ in the north aisle (although some glass has been reset across the church), and images and hagiographies of Saints in the south aisle.
In the north aisle, the scourging of Christ stands out, the wicked grins of the persecutors contrasting with the pained nobility of the Christ figure. In the next window, Christ rises from the dead, coming out of his tomb like the corpses in the doom paintings at Stanningfield, North Cove and Wenhaston. The Roman centurion sleeps soundly in the foreground.
The most famous image is in the east window of the south aisle. Apparently, it shows a bishop holding the chain to a bag, with four children playing at his feet. I say apparently, because there is rather more going on here than meets the eye. The reason that this image is so famous is that the small child in the foreground is holding what appears to be a golf club or hockey stick, and this would be the earliest representation of such an object in all Europe. The whole image has been said to represent St Nicholas, who was a Bishop, and whose legends include a bag of gold and a group of children.
Unfortunately, this is not the case. St Nicholas is never symbolised by a bag of gold, and there are three children in the St Nicholas legend, not four. In any case, the hand in the picture is not holding the chain to a bag at all, but a rosary, and the hockey stick is actually a fuller's club, used for dyeing clothes, and the symbol of St James the Less.
What has happened here is that the head of a Bishop has been grafted on to the body of a figure which is probably still in its original location. The three lights of this window contained a set of the Holy Kinship. The light to the north of the 'Bishop' contains two children playing with what ae apparently toys, but when you look closely you can see that one is holding a golden shell, and the other a poisoned chalice. They are the infant St James and St John, and the lost figure above them was their mother, Mary Salome.
This means that the figure with the Bishop's head is actually Mary Cleophas, mother of four children including St James the Less. The third light to the south, of course, would have depicted the Blessed Virgin and child, but she is lost to us.
Not only this, but Hessett has some very good 19th Century glass which complements and does not overly intrude. The best is beneath the tower, the west window in a fully 15th Century style of scenes by Clayton & Bell. The east window, depicting saints, is by William Warrington, and the chancel also has the O'Connor glass already mentioned.
If the windows and wall paintings were all there was, then Hessett would be remarkable enough. But there is something else, two things, actually, that elevate it above all other Suffolk churches, and all the churches of England. For St Ethelbert is the proud owner of two unique survivals. At the back of the church is a chest, no different from those you'll find in many a parish church. In common with those, it has three separate locks, the idea being that the Rector and two Churchwardens would have a key each, and it would be necessary for all three of them to be present for the chest to be opened. It was used for storing parish records and valuables.
At some point, one of the keys was lost. There is an old story about the iconoclast William Dowsing turning up here and demanding the chest be opened, but on account of the missing key it couldn't be. Unfortunately, this story isn't true, for Dowsing never recorded a visit Hessett. The chest was eventually opened in the 19th century. Inside were found two extraordinary pre-Reformation survivals. These are a pyx cloth and a burse. The pyx cloth was draped over the wooden canopy that enclosed the blessed sacrament (one of England's four surviving medieval pyxes is also in Suffolk, at Dennington) before it was raised above the high altar. The burse was used to contain the host before consecration at the Mass. They are England's only surviving examples, and they're both here. Or, more precisely they aren't, for both have been purloined by the British Museum, the kind of theft that no locked church can prevent.
But there are life-size photos of both either side of the tower arch. The burse is basically an envelope, and features the Veronica face of Christ on one side with the four evangelistic symbols in each corner. On the other is an Agnus Dei, the Lamb of God. The survival of both is extraordinary. It is one thing to explore the furnishings of lost Catholic England, quite another to come face to face with articles that were actually used in the liturgy.
In front of the pictures stands the font, a relatively good one of the early 15th century, though rather less exciting than everything going on around it. The dedicatory inscription survives, to a pair of Hoos of an earlier generation than the ones on the vestry.Turning east again, the ranks of simple 15th century benches are all of a piece with their church. They have survived the violent transitions of the centuries, and have seated generation after generation of Hessett people. They were new here when this church was alive with coloured light, with the hundreds of candles flickering on the rood beam, the processions, the festivals, and the people's lives totally integrated with the liturgy of the seasons. For the people of Catholic England, their religion was as much a part of them as the air they breathed. They little knew how soon it would all come to an end.
And so, there it is - one of the most fascinating and satisfactory of all East Anglia's churches. And yet, not many people know about it. We are only three miles from the brown-signed honeypot of Woolpit, where a constant stream of visitors come and go. I've visited Hessett many times, and never once encountered another visitor. Still, there you are, I suppose. Perhaps some places are better kept secret. But come here if you can, for here is a medieval worship space with much surviving evidence of what it was actually meant to be, and meant to do.
St Ethelbert, Hessett, Suffolk
Hessett is a fairly ordinary kind of village to the east of Bury St Edmunds, but its church is one of the most important in East Anglia for a number of reasons, which will become obvious. Consider for one moment, if you will, the extent to which the beliefs and practices of a religious community affect the architecture of its buildings. Think of a mosque, for instance. Often square, expressing the democracy of Islam, but without any imagery of the human figure, for such things are proscribed. Think of a synagogue, focused towards the Holy Scriptures in the Ark, but designed to enable the proclaiming of the Word, and the way that early non-conformist chapels echo this architecture of Judaism - indeed, those who built the first free churches, like Ipswich's Unitarian Chapel, actually called them synagogues.
The shape of a church, then, is no accident. A typical Suffolk perpendicular church of the 15th century has wide aisles, to enable liturgical processions, a chancel for the celebration of Mass, places for other altars, niches for devotional statues, a focus towards the Blessed Sacrament in the east, a roof of angels to proclaim a hymn of praise, a large nave for devotional and social activities, and wall paintings of the Gospels and hagiographies of Saints, of the catechism and teachings of the Catholic Church. As Le Corbusier might have said if he'd been around at the time, a medieval church is a machine for making Catholicism happen.
No longer, of course. The radical and violent fracture in popular religion in the middle years of the 16th century gave birth to the Church of England, and the new church inherited buildings that were quite unsuitable for the new congregational protestant theology, a problem that the Church of England has never entirely solved.
Over the centuries, the problem has been addressed in different ways. The early reformers celebrated communion at a table in the nave, for example, and blocked off the chancel for other uses. Although this was challenged by the Laudian party in the early part of the 17th century, it was the way that many parishes reinvented their buildings, and most were to stay like that until the middle years of the 19th century. Some went further. A pulpit placed halfway down the nave, or even at the back of the church, meant that the seating could be arranged so that it no longer focused towards the east, thus breaking the link with Catholic (and Laudian) sacramentalism. For several centuries, Anglican churches focused on the pulpit rather than the altar.
With the coming to influence of the 19th century Oxford Movement, all this underwent another dramatic change, with the great majority of our medieval parish churches having their interiors restored to their medieval integrity, reinventing themselves as sacramental spaces. This is the condition in which we find most of them today, and some Anglican theologians are asking the question that the Catholic Church asked itself at Vatican II in the 1960s - is a 19th century liturgical space really appropriate for the Church of the 21st century?
So, let us hasten at once to Hessett. The church sits like a glowing jewel in its wide churchyard, right on the main road through the village. It is pretty well perfect if you are looking for a fine Suffolk exterior. An extensive 15th century rebuilding enwraps the earlier tower, which was crowned by the donor of the rebuilding, John Bacon.The nave and aisles are deliciously decorated, reminding one rather of the church at neighbouring Rougham, although this is a smaller church, and the aisles make it almost square. A dedicatory inscription on the two storey vestry in the north east corner bids us pray for the souls of John and Katherine Hoo, who donated the chancel and paid for the trimmings to the aisles. Their inscription has been damaged by protestant reformers, who obviously did not believe in the efficacy of prayers for the dead.
Although not comparable with that at Woolpit, the dressed stone porch is a grand affair, and a bold statement. You may find the south door locked, but if this is the case then the priest's door into the chancel is usually open. And in a way it is a good church to enter via the chancel, because in this way St Ethelbert unfolds its treasures slowly.You step into relative darkness - or, at least, it seems so in comparison with the nave beyond the rood screen. This is partly a result of the abundance of dark wood, and in truth the chancel seems rather overcrowded. The most striking objects in view are the return stalls, which fill the two westerly corners of the chancel. These are in the style of a college or school of priests, with their backs to the rood screen, but then 'returning' around the walls to the east. They are fine, and are certainly 15th or 16th century. But one of the stalls, that to the north, is different to the others, and seems slightly out of place. It is elaborately carved with faces, birds and foliage.
Mortlock thought that it might have been intended for a private house. The stall in front of it has heads on it that appear to be wearing 18th century wigs. The sanctuary is largely Victorianised, with a great east window depicting Saints. The south windows of the chancel depict a lovely Adoration scene by the O'Connors. The chancel is separated from the nave by the 15th century rood screen, which is elegantly painted and gilt on the west side, the beautifully tracery intricately carved above. The rood screen has been fitted with attractive iron gates, presumably evidence of Anglo-catholic enthusiasm here in the early 20th century, and you step down through them into the light. A first impression is that you are entering a much older space than the one you have left. There is an 18th century mustiness, enhanced by the box pews that line the aisles. And, beyond, on walls and in windows, are wonderful things.
The number of surviving wall paintings in England is a tiny fraction of those which existed before the 15th and 16th centuries. All churches had them, and in profusion. It isn't enough to say that they were a 'teaching aid' of a church of illiterate peasants. In the main, they were devotional, and that is why they were destroyed. However, it is more complicated than that. Research in recent years has indicated that many wall paintings were destroyed before the Reformation, perhaps a century before. In some churches, they have been punched through with Perpendicular windows, which are clearly pre-Reformation. In the decades after the Black Death, there seems to have been a sea change in the liturgical use of these buildings, a move away from an individualistic, devotional usage to a corporate liturgical one. There is a change of emphasis towards more education and exegesis. This is the time that pulpits and benches appear, long before protestantism was on the agenda. What seems to happen is that many buildings were intended now to be full of light, and devotional wall paintings were either whitewashed, or replaced with catechetical ones.
The decoration of the nave was the responsibility of the people of the parish, not of the Priest. The wall paintings of England can be divided into roughly three groups. Roughly speaking, the development of wall paintings over the later medieval period is in terms of these three overlapping emphases.
Firstly, the hagiographies - stories of the Saints. These might have had a local devotion, although some saints were popular over a wide area, and most churches seem to have supported a devotion to St Christopher right up until the Reformation.
Secondly came those which illustrate incidents in the life of Christ and his mother, the Blessed Virgin. Although partly pedagogical, they were also enabling tools, since private devotions often involved a contemplation upon them, and at Mass the larger part of those present would have been involved in private devotions. These scriptural stories were as likely to have been derived from apocryphal texts like the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew as from the actual Gospels themselves.
Lastly, there are catechetical wall paintings, illustrating the teachings of the Catholic church. It should not be assumed that these are dogmatic. Many are simply artistic representations of stories, and others are simplifications of theological ideas, as with the seven deadly sins and the seven cardinal virtues. Some warn against occasions of sin (gossiping, for example) and generally wall paintings provided a local site for discussion and exemplification.
To an extent, all the above is largely true of stained glass, as well, with the caveat that stained glass was more expensive, relied on local patronage, and often has this patronage as a subtext, hence the large number of heraldic devices and images of local worthies. But it was also devotional, and so it was also destroyed.
So - what survives at Hessett? The wall paintings first.
Starting in the south east corner of the nave, we have Suffolk's finest representation of St Barbara, presenting a tower. St Barbara was very popular in medieval times, because she was invoked against strikes by lightning and sudden fires. This resulted from her legend, for her father, on finding her to be a Christian, walled her up in a tower until she repented. As a result, he was struck by lightning, and reduced to ashes. She was also the patron saint of the powerful building trade, and as such her image graced their guild altars - perhaps that was the case here.
Above the south door is another figure, often identified as St Christopher, but I do not think that this can be the case. St Christopher is found nowhere else in Suffolk above a south door. The traditional iconography of this mythical saint is not in place here, and it is hard to see how this figure could ever have been interpreted as such. I suspect it is a result of an early account confusing the two images over the north and south doors, and the mistake being repeated in later accounts.
In fact, digital enhancement seems to suggest that there are two figures above the south door, overlapping each other slightly. The figure on the right is barefoot, that on the left is wearing a white gown. There appears to be water under their feet, and so I think this is an image of the Baptism of Christ. Perhaps it was once part of a sequence.
The wall painting opposite, above the north door, is St Christopher. Although it isn't as clear as himself at, say, nearby Bradfield Combust, he bestrides the river in the customary manner, staff in hand. The Christ child is difficult to discern, but you can see the fish in the water. Also in the water, and rather unusual, are two figures. They are rendered rather crudely, almost like gingerbread men. Could they be the donors of the north aisle, John and Katherine Hoo in person?
Moving along the north aisle, we come to the set of paintings for which Hessett is justifiably famous. They are set one above the other between two windows, at the point where might expect the now-vanished screen to a chapel to have been. The upper section was here first. It shows the seven deadly sins (described wrongly in some text books as a tree of Jesse, or ancestry of Christ). Two devils look on as, from the mouth of hell, a great tree sprouts, ending in seven images. Pride is at the top, and in pairs beneath are Gluttony and Anger, Vanity and Envy, Avarice and Lust. Mortlock suggests that some attempt has been made to erase the image for Lust, which may simply be mid-16th century puritan prurience on the part of some reformer here. This would suggest that this catechetical tool was here right up until the Reformation.
The idea of 'Seven Deadly Sins' was anathema to the reformers, because it is entirely unscriptural. Rather, as a catechetical tool, it is a way of drawing together a multitude of sins into a simplistic aide memoire. This could then be used in confession, taking each of them one at a time and examining ones conscience accordingly. It should not be seen simply as a 'warning' to ignorant peasants, for the evidence is that the ordinary rural people of late medieval England were theologically very articulate. Rather, it was a tool for use, in contemplation and preparation for the sacrament of reconciliation, which may well have ordinarily taken place in the chapel here.
The wall painting beneath the Sins is even more interesting. This is a very rare 'Christ of the Trades', and dates from the early 15th century, about a hundred years after the painting above. It is rather faded, and takes a while to discern, and not all of it is decodable. However, enough is there to be fascinating. The image of the 'Christ of the Trades' is known throughout Christendom, and contemporary versions with this can be found in other parts of Europe. It shows the risen Christ in the centre, and around him a vast array of the tools and symbols of various trades. One theory is that it depicts activities that should not take place on a Sunday, a holy day of obligation to refrain from work, and that these activities are wounding Christ anew.
Perhaps the most fascinating symbol, and the one that everyone notices, is the playing card. It shows the six of diamonds. Does it represent the makers of playing cards? If so, it might suggest a Flemish influence. Or could it be intended to represent something else? Whatever, it is one of the earliest representations of a playing card in England. Why is this here? It may very well be that there was a trades gild chantry chapel at the east end of the north aisle, and this painting was at its entrance.
At the east end of the north aisle now is the church's set of royal arms. Cautley saw it in the vestry in the 1930s, and identified it as a Queen Anne set. Now, with additions stripped away, it is revealed as a Charles II set from the 1660s, and a very fine one. It is fascinating to see it at such close range. Usually, they are set above the south door now, although they would originally have been placed above the chancel arch, in full view of the congregation, a gentle reminder of who was in charge.
And so to the glass, which on its own would be worth coming to Hessett to see. Few Suffolk churches have such an expanse, none have such a variety, or glass of such quality and interest. It consists essentially of two ranges, the life and Passion of Christ in the north aisle (although some glass has been reset across the church), and images and hagiographies of Saints in the south aisle.
In the north aisle, the scourging of Christ stands out, the wicked grins of the persecutors contrasting with the pained nobility of the Christ figure. In the next window, Christ rises from the dead, coming out of his tomb like the corpses in the doom paintings at Stanningfield, North Cove and Wenhaston. The Roman centurion sleeps soundly in the foreground.
The most famous image is in the east window of the south aisle. Apparently, it shows a bishop holding the chain to a bag, with four children playing at his feet. I say apparently, because there is rather more going on here than meets the eye. The reason that this image is so famous is that the small child in the foreground is holding what appears to be a golf club or hockey stick, and this would be the earliest representation of such an object in all Europe. The whole image has been said to represent St Nicholas, who was a Bishop, and whose legends include a bag of gold and a group of children.
Unfortunately, this is not the case. St Nicholas is never symbolised by a bag of gold, and there are three children in the St Nicholas legend, not four. In any case, the hand in the picture is not holding the chain to a bag at all, but a rosary, and the hockey stick is actually a fuller's club, used for dyeing clothes, and the symbol of St James the Less.
What has happened here is that the head of a Bishop has been grafted on to the body of a figure which is probably still in its original location. The three lights of this window contained a set of the Holy Kinship. The light to the north of the 'Bishop' contains two children playing with what ae apparently toys, but when you look closely you can see that one is holding a golden shell, and the other a poisoned chalice. They are the infant St James and St John, and the lost figure above them was their mother, Mary Salome.
This means that the figure with the Bishop's head is actually Mary Cleophas, mother of four children including St James the Less. The third light to the south, of course, would have depicted the Blessed Virgin and child, but she is lost to us.
Not only this, but Hessett has some very good 19th Century glass which complements and does not overly intrude. The best is beneath the tower, the west window in a fully 15th Century style of scenes by Clayton & Bell. The east window, depicting saints, is by William Warrington, and the chancel also has the O'Connor glass already mentioned.
If the windows and wall paintings were all there was, then Hessett would be remarkable enough. But there is something else, two things, actually, that elevate it above all other Suffolk churches, and all the churches of England. For St Ethelbert is the proud owner of two unique survivals. At the back of the church is a chest, no different from those you'll find in many a parish church. In common with those, it has three separate locks, the idea being that the Rector and two Churchwardens would have a key each, and it would be necessary for all three of them to be present for the chest to be opened. It was used for storing parish records and valuables.
At some point, one of the keys was lost. There is an old story about the iconoclast William Dowsing turning up here and demanding the chest be opened, but on account of the missing key it couldn't be. Unfortunately, this story isn't true, for Dowsing never recorded a visit Hessett. The chest was eventually opened in the 19th century. Inside were found two extraordinary pre-Reformation survivals. These are a pyx cloth and a burse. The pyx cloth was draped over the wooden canopy that enclosed the blessed sacrament (one of England's four surviving medieval pyxes is also in Suffolk, at Dennington) before it was raised above the high altar. The burse was used to contain the host before consecration at the Mass. They are England's only surviving examples, and they're both here. Or, more precisely they aren't, for both have been purloined by the British Museum, the kind of theft that no locked church can prevent.
But there are life-size photos of both either side of the tower arch. The burse is basically an envelope, and features the Veronica face of Christ on one side with the four evangelistic symbols in each corner. On the other is an Agnus Dei, the Lamb of God. The survival of both is extraordinary. It is one thing to explore the furnishings of lost Catholic England, quite another to come face to face with articles that were actually used in the liturgy.
In front of the pictures stands the font, a relatively good one of the early 15th century, though rather less exciting than everything going on around it. The dedicatory inscription survives, to a pair of Hoos of an earlier generation than the ones on the vestry.Turning east again, the ranks of simple 15th century benches are all of a piece with their church. They have survived the violent transitions of the centuries, and have seated generation after generation of Hessett people. They were new here when this church was alive with coloured light, with the hundreds of candles flickering on the rood beam, the processions, the festivals, and the people's lives totally integrated with the liturgy of the seasons. For the people of Catholic England, their religion was as much a part of them as the air they breathed. They little knew how soon it would all come to an end.
And so, there it is - one of the most fascinating and satisfactory of all East Anglia's churches. And yet, not many people know about it. We are only three miles from the brown-signed honeypot of Woolpit, where a constant stream of visitors come and go. I've visited Hessett many times, and never once encountered another visitor. Still, there you are, I suppose. Perhaps some places are better kept secret. But come here if you can, for here is a medieval worship space with much surviving evidence of what it was actually meant to be, and meant to do.
The pressure on forests in Southeast Asia and Oceania will continue if strict measures are not taken to regulate the operations of plantation companies and extractive industries in natural forest areas. Malaysia, According to the FAO, it is estimated that with continued conversion of forest, between 13% and 42% of the species will be lost in Southeast Asia by 2100.71 In a recent regional assessment of forest cover of Southeast Asia and Papua New Guinea, the forest extent is estimated to 2.68 million km2 in 1990, and the forest loss between 1990 and 2010 to 320,000 km2 – approximately the size of Norway. The study confirms that the conversion of forest to cash crops plantations, such as oil palm, is the main cause of forest loss, with logging and the establishment of monoculture forest plantations as other major drivers of deforestation.
For any form of publication, please include the link to this page:
This photo has been graciously provided to be used in the GRID-Arendal resources library by: GRID-Arendal