View allAll Photos Tagged published
Halsey
Webster Hall
New York City
Thursday, Oktober 22nd, 2015
© 2015 LEROE24FOTOS.COM
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
THIS MATERIAL MAY NOT BE PUBLISHED,
BROADCAST, REWRITTEN OR REDISTRIBUTED.
© sergione infuso - all rights reserved
follow me on www.sergione.info
You may not modify, publish or use any files on
this page without written permission and consent.
-----------------------------
LP in concerto a Milano, ai Magazzini Generali il 24 novembre 2016.
Dietro al nome d’arte LP si cela la 35enne cantautrice di origini italiane nata a New York Laura Pergolizzi.
Capelli ricci ribelli, il look e la voce graffiante richiamano alla mente i grandi nomi rock al femminile degli anni settanta/ottanta. Il suo primo album in studio nel 2001; da allora ad oggi, oltre alla realizzazione di altri tre dischi incluso un EP, ha lavorato nel mondo della musica come autrice di grandi star del calibro di RitaOra Rihanna, e Christina Aguilera. Ma è il suo nuovo singolo Lost On You che nell’estate del 2016 le fa raggiunge la fama mondiale ed ora finalmente la potremo ascoltare per il suo unico appuntamento Italiano
The Postcard
A postally unused carte postale that was published by Lichtenstern & Harari. The card has an undivided back.
Qaitbay
Sultan Abu Al-Nasr Sayf ad-Din Al-Ashraf Qaitbay (Arabic: السلطان أبو النصر سيف الدين الأشرف قايتباي), otherwise known as Kait Bey was born circa 1416/1418.
He was the eighteenth Burji Mamluk Sultan of Egypt from 1468–1496 C.E. He was Circassian by birth, and was purchased by the ninth sultan Barsbay (1422 to 1438) before being freed by the eleventh Sultan Jaqmaq (1438 to 1453).
During his reign, Qaitbay stabilized the Mamluk state and economy, consolidated the northern boundaries of the Sultanate with the Ottoman Empire, engaged in trade with other countries, and emerged as a great patron of art and architecture.
In fact, although Qaitbay fought sixteen military campaigns, he is best remembered for the spectacular building projects that he sponsored, leaving his mark as an architectural patron on Mecca, Medina, Jerusalem, Damascus, Aleppo, Alexandria, and every quarter of Cairo.
Qaitbay - The Early Years
Qaitbay was born in Great Circassia of the Caucasus. His skill in archery and horsemanship attracted the attention of a slave merchant who purchased him and brought him to Cairo when he was already over twenty years of age. He was quickly purchased by the reigning sultan Barsbay and became a member of the palace guard.
He was freed by Barsbay's successor, Jaqmaq, after learning that Qaitbay was a descendant of Al-Ashraf Musa Abu'l-Fath al-Muzaffar ad-Din, and appointed the third executive secretary.
Under the reigns of Sayf ad-Din Inal, Khushqadam and Yilbay, he was further promoted through the Mamluk military hierarchy, eventually becoming taqaddimat alf, commander of a thousand Mamluks.
Under the Sultan Timurbugha, Qaitbay was appointed atabak, or field marshal of the entire Mamluk army. During this period, Qaitbay amassed a considerable personal fortune which would enable him to exercise substantial acts of beneficence as sultan without draining the royal treasury.
Accession
The reign of Timurbugha lasted less than two months, as he was dethroned in a palace coup on the 30th. January 1468. Qaitbay was proposed as a compromise candidate acceptable to the various court factions.
Despite some apparent reluctance, he was enthroned on the 31st. January 1468. Qaitbay insisted that Timurbugha be granted an honorable retirement, instead of the enforced exile usually imposed on dethroned sovereigns.
He did, however, exile the leaders of the coup, and created a new ruling council composed of his own followers and veteran courtiers who had fallen into disgrace under his predecessors.
Yashbak min Mahdi was appointed dawadar, or executive secretary, and Azbak min Tutkh was named atabak; the two men would remain Qaitbay's closest advisors until the ends of their careers, despite their profound dislike for each other.
In general Qaitbay seems to have pursued a policy of appointing rivals to posts of equal authority, thus preventing any single subordinate from acquiring too much power and maintaining the ability to settle all disputes via his own autocratic authority.
Qaitbay's Early Reign
Qaitbay's first major challenge was the insurrection of Shah Suwar, leader of a small Turkmen dynasty, the Dhu'l-Qadrids, in eastern Anatolia.
A first expedition against the upstart was soundly defeated, and Suwar threatened to invade Syria. A second Mamluk army was sent in 1469 under the leadership of Azbak, but was likewise defeated.
Not until 1471 did a third expedition, this time commanded by Yashbak, succeed in routing Suwar's army. In 1473, Suwar was captured and led back to Cairo, together with his brothers; the prisoners were drawn and quartered and their remains were hung from Bab Zuwayla.
Qaitbay's reign was also marked by trade with other countries. Excavations in the late 1800's and early 1900's at over fourteen sites in the vicinity of Borama in modern-day Somalia unearthed coins derived from Qaitbay. Most of these finds were sent to the British Museum in London.
Consolidation of Power
Following the defeat of Suwar, Qaitbay set about purging his court of opposing factions and installing his own Mamluks in all positions of power. He frequently went on excursions, ostentatiously leaving the Citadel with limited guards to display his trust in his subordinates and the populace.
He traveled throughout his reign, visiting Alexandria, Damascus, and Aleppo, among other cities, and personally inspecting his many building projects.
In 1472 he performed the Hajj to Mecca. He was struck by the poverty of the citizens of Medina, and devoted a substantial portion of his private fortune to the alleviation of their plight. Through such measures Qaitbay gained a reputation for piety, charity, and royal self-confidence.
The Ottoman-Mamluk War
In 1480 Yashbak led an army against the Aq Qoyunlu dynasty in Mesopotamia, but was soundly defeated while attacking Urfa, taken prisoner, and executed. These events foreshadowed a longer military engagement with the far more powerful Ottoman Empire in Anatolia.
In 1485 Ottoman armies began to campaign on the Mamluk frontier, and an expedition was dispatched from Cairo to confront them. These Mamluk troops won a surprising victory in 1486 near Adana.
A temporary truce ensued, but in 1487 the Ottomans reoccupied Adana, only to be defeated once more by a massive Mamluk army. As Turkish expansion in the western Mediterranean represented an increased threat to the Catholic Monarchs of Spain, Ferdinand II of Aragon made a temporary alliance with the Mamluks against the Ottomans from 1488 until 1491, shipping wheat and offering a fleet of 50 caravels to oppose the Ottomans.
In 1491 a final truce was signed that would last through the remaining reigns of Qaitbay and the Ottoman Sultan Bayezid II. Qaitbay's ability to enforce a peace with the greatest military power in the Muslim world further enhanced his prestige at home and abroad.
Qaitbay's Final Years
The end of Qaitbay's reign was marred by increasing unrest among his troops and a decline in his personal health, including a riding accident that left him comatose for days.
Many of his most trusted officials died, and were replaced by far less scrupulous upstarts; a long period of palace intrigue ensued.
In 1492 the plague returned to Cairo, and claimed 200,000 lives. Qaitbay's health became markedly poor in 1494, and his court, now lacking a figure of central authority, was weakened by infighting, factionalism, and purges.
Qaitbay died on the 8th. August 1496 aged 77 - 80, and was interred in the spectacular mausoleum attached to his mosque in Cairo's Northern Cemetery which he had built during his lifetime.
He was succeeded by his son, an-Nasir Muhammad.
Qaitbay's Legacy
Qaitbay's reign was the happy culmination of the Burji Mamluk dynasty. It was a period of political stability, military success, and prosperity, and Qaitbay's contemporaries admired him as a defender of traditional Mamluk values.
At the same time, he could be criticized for his failure to innovate in the face of new challenges.
Following Qaitbay's death, the Mamluk state descended into a prolonged succession crisis lasting for five years until the accession of Al-Ashraf Qansuh al-Ghawri.
Architectural Patronage
Today Qaitbay is best known for his wide-ranging architectural patronage. At least 230 monuments, either surviving or mentioned in contemporary sources, are associated with his reign.
In Egypt, Qaitbay's buildings are found throughout Cairo, as well as in Alexandria and Rosetta; in Syria he sponsored projects in Aleppo and Damascus; in addition, he was responsible for the construction of madrasas and fountains in Jerusalem and Gaza, which still stand – most notably the Fountain of Qayt Bay and al-Ashrafiyya Madrasa.
On the Arabian peninsula, Qaitbay sponsored the restoration of mosques and the construction of madrasas, fountains and hostels in Mecca and Medina.
After a serious fire struck the Mosque of the Prophet in Medina in 1481, the building, including the Tomb of the Prophet, was extensively renewed through Qaitbay's patronage.
One of Qaitbay's largest building projects in Cairo was his funerary complex in the Northern Cemetery, which included his mausoleum, a mosque/madrasa, a maq'ad (reception hall), and various auxiliary structures and functions attached to it. It is considered a masterpiece of late Mamluk architecture, and is featured today on Egypt's 1 pound note.
His other contributions in Cairo include a Wikala at Bab al-Nasr, a Wikala-Sabil-Kuttab near al-Azhar Mosque, a Sabil-Kuttab on Saliba street, a madrasa-mosque at Qal'at al-Kabsh, a mosque on Rhoda Island, and a palace that is now incorporated into the Bayt Al-Razzaz palace.
Other amirs and patrons also built notable projects under his reign, such as the Mosque of Amir Qijmas al-Ishaqi, which feature the same refined architectural style of his time.
In Alexandria he notably built a fortress on the site of the ruined Pharos, now known as the Citadel of Qaitbay.
Justin Morales "On Location"
March 20th, 2016
New York City
© 2016 LEROE24FOTOS.COM
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
THIS MATERIAL MAY NOT BE PUBLISHED,
BROADCAST, REWRITTEN OR REDISTRIBUTED.
Published by Franklin Watts in 1978. Verse by Nanette Newman
First published in Germany in 1907 with these same illustrations - this is the first edition in English.
After working on Time Out for ten issues i finally have one of my shots on the cover.
For this we hired a model and makeup artist and it was thought up by our art director.
My job was easy really. Just the one light needed and shot in our meeting room.
[Published in Academic Emergency Medicine, Volume 13, Number 7 p.739, titled "Fatal GSW Right Chest"]
No... this is not Iraq or Israel...
this is 2 miles west of the Loop In Chicago Illinois USA, the wild Westside, circa 2005.
The sea of humanity that floods most urban EDs across the country, contuses the soul of our collective consciousness... how do we allow the degree of hopelessness among millions of humans fester unchecked, amidst the beautiful rolling fields and glowing towers of American wealth, power and global influence?
The pure spirit of our people must harmonize and evolve... the direction of willful change guided by the anticipated effect our actions leave on our children, five generations from now. Regardless of the religious specifics we cherish with gentle hands, when our lasting creations, anoint the souls of distant infants with peace, love and comfort from suffering, we are eternal... our toil insuring the cycle propagates endlessly. I can think of few greater purposes.
...from my eleven years teaching emergency medicine at an inner-city trauma center.
:::
Statue of WC Wentworth, Department of Lands building, Bridge St, Sydney.
Each facade has 12 niches whose sculpted occupants include explorers and legislators who made a major contribution to the opening up and settlement of the nation. Although 48 men were nominated by the architect, Barnet, as being suitable subjects, most were rejected as being 'hunters or excursionists'. Only 23 statues were commissioned, the last being added in 1901 leaving 25 niches unfilled (Devine, 2011). In Nov 2010 - a new statue of colonial surveyor James Meehan (1774-1826) was created and placed in an empty niche on cnr. Loftus/Bent Streets.
Wentworth, William Charles (1790–1872)
by Michael Persse
This article was published in Australian Dictionary of Biography, Volume 2, (MUP), 1967
William Charles Wentworth (1790-1872), explorer, author, barrister, landowner, and statesman, was the son of Catherine Crowley, who was convicted at the Staffordshire Assizes in July 1788 of feloniously stealing 'wearing apparell', was sentenced to transportation for seven years, reached Sydney in the transport Neptune in June 1790, and in the Surprize arrived at Norfolk Island with the infant William on 7 August. Dr D'Arcy Wentworth, who also sailed in the Neptune and Surprize, acknowledged William as his son. He accompanied his parents to Sydney in 1796 and then to Parramatta, where his mother died in 1800. In 1803 he was sent with his brother D'Arcy to England. Writing home from their first school at Bletchley in 1804, he told of a visit to his father's patron and kinsman: 'We waited, one day, on Lord Fitzwilliam, at his request, he seemed glad to see us, and presented each of us with a guinea … We are going on in our Latin studies &c., to the satisfaction of our Master, and hope that we shall continue to do so, well knowing how essentially necessary a good education is to our future welfare in life'. In the holidays they stayed with their father's agent, Charles Cookney. In 1805 Mrs Cookney wrote of William to Dr Wentworth that 'a Surgeon is a very improper profession for Him as from the Cast in the Eye it leads Him differently to the object he intends'. They went on to the Greenwich school of Dr Alexander Crombie, a liberal scholar whose published works ranged over philology, politics, economics, agriculture, science, and theology.
Failing to win a place in the military academy at Woolwich or in the East India Co., Wentworth returned to Sydney in 1810 somewhat at a loose end. He was soon riding Gig, his father's grey gelding, to victory in the Hyde Park races. In October 1811 Lachlan Macquarie appointed him acting provost-marshal. He was granted 1750 acres (708 ha) on the Nepean, where his estate, Vermont, is still a Wentworth property.
He rapidly became a familiar figure around Sydney, with his tall frame, thick shoulders, Roman head, and auburn hair, his rugged and untidy person. He tended to speak in magniloquent abstractions, his harsh voice resounding with rhetoric and sarcasms and classical allusions; yet he showed a keen eye for detail. He seemed already something of a Gulliver in Lilliput. He knew that his father was slighted by the exclusives, that 'aristocratic body' who, he later wrote, 'would monopolize all situations of power, dignity, and emolument … and raise an eternal barrier of separation between their offspring and the offspring of the unfortunate convict': and the knowledge bred in him a determination to destroy their power.
Yet he was no leveller, no democrat. Men must be free, but free to rise—and his own family especially. Like his father he was a monopolist at heart. His adventurous spirit, drought, and the desire to discover new pastures led him in May 1813, in company with William Lawson, Gregory Blaxland, four servants, four horses, and five dogs, to take part in the first great feat of inland exploration, the crossing of the Blue Mountains. At the end of their twenty-one-day passage, as he later wrote,
The boundless champaign burst upon our sight
Till nearer seen the beauteous landscape grew,
Op'ning like Canaan on rapt Israel's view.
Uncertain that they had really crossed the mountains, he wrote in his journal: 'we have at all events proved that they are traversable, and that, too, by cattle'. The discovery gave impetus to great pastoral expansion in which Wentworth amply shared. He was rewarded with another 1000 acres (405 ha) . On the mountain journey, according to his father, he had developed a severe cough; to recover his health and to help his father secure valuable sandalwood from a Pacific island he joined a schooner as supercargo in 1814. He was nearly killed by natives at Rarotonga while courageously attempting to save a sailor whom they clubbed to death. The captain died, and Wentworth, with knowledge gained on his earlier voyage from England and no mean mathematical skill, brought the ship safely to Sydney.
The Sydney Gazette was then subject to official censorship. The nearest approach to a free press in Governor Macquarie's régime were the anonymous 'pipes', of which the most celebrated was the one directed, in 1816, against Colonel George Molle, the lieutenant-governor, for his hypocrisy towards Macquarie. The furore resulting from it lasted for more than a year, till Dr Wentworth revealed that William, on his way to England, had written from Cape Town admitting authorship. Other 'pipes' are in his hand. Their political importance was greater than their literary merit, though it is not fanciful to see Wentworth as a key figure in early Australian literature. The alliance between literature and politics was close, each needing freedom in which to breathe. He helped to keep satire alive in the time of Macquarie and was later to lead it from darkness into light.
In 1816 Wentworth arrived in London and enlisted Fitzwilliam's aid in persuading his father that the army was no longer a feasible career for him now that the Napoleonic wars were over. In February 1817 he entered the Middle Temple to prepare himself to be 'the instrument of procuring a free constitution for my country'. He wrote to Fitzwilliam of 'the more remote objects' of his ambition: 'It is … by no means my intention in becoming a member of the Law to abandon the Country that gave me birth … In withdrawing myself … for a time from that country I am actuated by a desire of better qualifying myself for the performance of those duties, that my Birth has imposed—and, in selecting the profession of the Law, I calculate upon acquainting myself with all the excellence of the British Constitution, and hope at some future period, to advocate successfully the right of my country to a participation in its advantages'.
This remained the master-plan, but for a time he was characteristically restless. He unsuccessfully petitioned the Colonial Office to allow him to explore Australia from east to west. He spent more than a year in Europe, chiefly in Paris, to the benefit of his French but the annoyance of Fitzwilliam. His health improved but he was very short of funds. He saw much of the Macarthurs. In 1819 he published A Statistical, Historical, and Political Description of the Colony of New South Wales and Its Dependent Settlements in Van Diemen's Land, With a Particular Enumeration of the Advantages Which These Colonies Offer for Emigration and Their Superiority in Many Respects Over Those Possessed by the United States of America. Young John Macarthur had suggested that he write it, and it owed much to conversations with old John, who with little sympathy with Wentworth's constitutional ideas later denounced the book, but whose faith in Australian wool was infectious. Wentworth hoped ardently to marry Elizabeth Macarthur. He envisaged a great Wentworth-Macarthur connexion at the head of the pastoral aristocracy dominating the New South Wales of his dreams, and he seemed about to achieve 'a union' which he described to his father as 'so essential to the happiness of your son and to the accomplishment of those projects for the future respectability and grandeur of our family, with the realisation of which I have no doubt you consider me in a great measure identified'. But his hopes were dashed by a quarrel with her father over a loan of money.
A new blow fell. In 1819 H. G. Bennet declared in his Letter to Lord Sidmouth that D'Arcy Wentworth had been sent to Sydney as a convict. Mortified by this slander, William rushed to his father's defence, ready to spill the last drop of his heart's blood in reparation. His own investigations proved disquieting. They revealed that his father was never a convict but had indeed been tried four times in England for highway robbery, though finally acquitted. Wentworth rebuked Bennet and later Commissioner John Thomas Bigge, who repeated the slander in his report, but his pride had suffered a rude shock, though not a shattering one. The greatness of his family and the glory of his country were the two almost synonymous preoccupations of his mind: and the two now became one as Wentworth, wounded in heart and pride, resolutely identified himself with the interests of the Australian-born.
His book did much to stimulate emigration and was reissued in revised and enlarged editions in 1820 and 1824. The various strands in his education are clearly seen in it: the classical, in its rhetorical style and arguments from ancient history; the mathematical, in its calculations about wool as 'the most profitable channel of investment offered in the world'; the scientific, in descriptions of the natural scene; and the legal, in the reforms proposed for New South Wales. After the 'description', he attacks the existing autocracy and presses for a nominated legislative council and an assembly elected on a small property franchise: ex-convicts are not to be denied either membership or the vote. No taxation should be imposed without parliamentary sanction. There should be trial by jury, a proper process of appeal, and free migration. Such reforms will realize the emancipists' dream: to raise Australasia 'from the abject state of poverty, slavery, and degradation, to which she is so fast sinking, and to present her with a constitution, which may gradually conduct her to freedom, prosperity, and happiness'; its future will then be theirs, and Wentworth's. Yet the book is no tract for democracy. Landed property is 'the only standard' he conceives 'by which the right either of electing, or being elected, can in any country be properly regulated'. The council 'bears many resemblances to the House of Lords': 'It forms that just equipoise between the democratic and supreme powers of the state, which has been found necessary not less to repress the licentiousness of the one, than to curb the tyranny of the other'.
He was called to the Bar in February 1822, and decided then to 'keep a few terms' at Cambridge. Soon after entering Peterhouse, he competed for the chancellor's gold medal for a poem on Australasia. His poem, placed second to W. M. Praed's, was speedily published, with a dedication to Macquarie. Rhetorical and realistic, it ends with a bold prophecy of the day when Britain is vanquished and her spirit rises again in the antipodes:
May all thy glories in another sphere
Relume, and shine more brightly still than here;
May this, thy last born infant, then arise,
To glad thy heart and greet thy parent eyes;
And Australasia float, with flag unfurl'd,
A new Britannia in another world.
He returned to Sydney in 1824, determined 'to hold no situation under government': 'As a mere private person I might lead the colony, but as a servant of the Governor I could only conform to his whims, which would neither suit my tastes nor principles'. In the third edition of the Description he had attacked the report of Commissioner Bigge as 'nauseous trash': it was hostile to Macquarie and it played into the hands of the exclusives. He had some influence on the New South Wales Act of 1823, which instituted a nominated Legislative Council and permitted trial by jury in civil actions only when demanded by both parties. With him came Dr Robert Wardell, a lawyer who had edited the Statesman. Their plan was that each in his sphere, Wardell in journalism and Wentworth at the Bar, should champion the emancipists and smaller free settlers and campaign for a free press, trial by jury, and self-government.
On 14 October 1824 the first issue of the Australian, the plant for which they had brought from London, boldly declared: 'Independent, yet consistent—free, yet not licentious—equally unmoved by favours and by fear—we shall pursue our labours without either a sycophantic approval of, or a systematic opposition to, acts of authority, merely because they emanate from government'. Audacity triumphed. They had not sought permission to publish the paper, but Governor Sir Thomas Brisbane thought it 'most expedient to try the experiment of full latitude of freedom of the Press'; despite Colonial Office objections approval continued well into the reign of his successor. The exclusives bitterly prophesied 'a nation of freebooters and pirates', but they could do nothing while the Australian retained Government House favour.
Meanwhile Wentworth seized every opportunity to attack the exclusives, and awaited a pretext for attacking autocratic government. In October 1825 he arranged a meeting for free inhabitants to consider a farewell address to Brisbane, acknowledging his emancipist sympathies. He called the first draft a 'milk and water production', and in the revised document the 'two fundamental principles of the British constitution' were demanded: trial by jury and representative government. He spoke passionately against the exclusives, the 'yellow snakes of the Colony'.
The wind turned in November 1826 with the death of Private Sudds in circumstances partly arising from the commutation by Governor (Sir) Ralph Darling of the sentence on him and Private Thompson. Wentworth seized on the alleged illegality of Darling's act and with violent invective demanded his recall. The affair rapidly developed into a bitter feud.
At a crowded meeting on Anniversary Day in 1827, which resulted in a petition calling for an elective assembly of at least a hundred members, Wentworth also called for trial by jury and taxation by consent. The newspapers inflamed public opinion against Darling, whose alleged treatment of Sudds Wentworth described as 'murder, or at least a high misdemeanour'. Convinced that Wentworth, a 'vulgar, ill-bred fellow' and a 'demagogue', was 'anxious to become the man of the people' by insulting the government, and that 'nothing short of positive coercion' would curb the licentiousness of the press, Darling submitted to the Legislative Council two bills, to regulate newspapers and to impose a stamp duty. Chief Justice (Sir) Francis Forbes refused to certify the licence clauses of one as 'not repugnant to the laws of England'. Wentworth attacked the other because blanks had been left for rates of duty to be inserted later; when they were filled in Forbes would not certify it and the Act though passed by council was suspended and later disallowed. Darling saw no alternative but to prosecute for seditious libel.
The resulting cases occupied the Supreme Court through 1828 and 1829. Wentworth surrendered his shares in the Australian and acted as defending counsel. He overwhelmed the lamentably weak Crown prosecutors with torrents of invective and brilliant marshalling of his facts. Darling wrote that he and Wardell kept 'the Court and the Bar by their effrontery and talent equally in subjection'. When Wardell was tried, he challenged the jury as nominees of the governor, who could deprive them of their commissions if they failed to convict. Finally in 1829, as a result of Wentworth's insistent demands, civilian juries were allowed in civil cases on the application of both parties and the approval of the Supreme Court.
A draft of 'impeachment' prepared by Wentworth against Darling did little damage to the governor's reputation at the Colonial Office, but it certainly undermined Wentworth's, so intemperate was its language. Darling served his six-year term, and departed in 1831 to the accompaniment of a riotous celebration at Wentworth's estate overlooking the harbour. The Australian reported: 'upward of 4,000 persons assembled at Vaucluse to partake of Mr Wentworth's hospitality and to evince joy at the approaching departure. The scene of the fête was on the lawn in front of Mr Wentworth's villa, which was thrown open for the reception of all respectable visitants, while a marquee filled with piles of loaves and casks of Cooper's gin and Wright's strong beer, was pitched a short way off. On an immense spit a bullock was roasted entire. Twelve sheep were also roasted in succession; and 4,000 loaves completed the enormous banquet. By 7 p.m. two immense bonfires were lighted on the highest hill … Rustic sports, speeches, etc., etc., whiled away the night; and morning dawned before the hospitable mansion was quitted by all its guests'.
By taking up the fight against autocracy and by his imperious courage and oratory in the defence of emancipists at the Bar Wentworth had awakened a political instinct among the smaller people of Sydney and become their hero. He had touched both journalism and the Bar with the fire of his brilliance and given them definition, direction, and the vision of greatness: he may justly be called their prophet in the Australian nation, if not the prophet of that nation itself. The larger fight remained: for the great goal of self-government. But, even as the people of Sydney were flocking out to Vaucluse to join with the popular hero in celebration of the tyrant's departure, changes in Wentworth's own life and activities were beginning to cause disillusion among many who only partially understood his aims. With the swelling tide of immigration into New South Wales, the exclusive-emancipist issue was receding into the background of politics. So fast were events moving that in 1835, when Darling was cleared of Wentworth's charges and knighted, there were few in Sydney who showed concern.
By his father's death in 1827 Wentworth added greatly to his landholdings. In that year he bought Vaucluse, about six miles (9.6 km) from Sydney on the south side of the harbour, and later enlarged it to 500 acres (202 ha) . The cottage there was rebuilt into a stately mansion which, in the years after Wentworth's marriage in 1829, provided the setting for both his family life and his activities as statesman. It was adorned with riches from the old world and became a sign of the new time, spacious and leisured, that was coming to the rich in New South Wales. With his large legal earnings, Vaucluse, his father's estate at Homebush, and one sheep station after another (he acknowledged fifteen at one time) Wentworth more and more felt himself the prototype of a new nobility, a governing class which would adapt to Australian conditions the way of life of the Whig aristocracy of eighteenth-century England. His own way of life became spacious even to the point of lapses from his marriage vows.
With Darling's successor, Governor (Sir) Richard Bourke, a kinsman of Edmund Burke, whose patron Fitzwilliam had been, Wentworth had much in common, though not even Bourke could persuade him to accept nomination to the Legislative Council, in which the governor's own liberal measures were frequently frustrated by the exclusives. In London there was growing support for Wentworth's policies: the Reform Act and events in Canada were fostering a climate of opinion favourable to constitutional change. After the murder of Wardell in 1834, William Bland stepped into his place as Wentworth's chief supporter. At the foundation-day meeting in 1833 another petition for self-government was drafted, which was presented to the Commons by Lytton Bulwer.
In 1835 the Australian Patriotic Association was formed to agitate for an amended constitution. Sir John Jamison was president, Wentworth vice-president, and Charles Buller its agent in London. With Bland's assistance Wentworth drafted two alternative bills for the consideration of the British government: one providing for a nominated council and an elected assembly on the model of Canada; the other for a single house of fifty members, one-fifth nominated and the rest elected on a property franchise similar to that of the 1832 Reform Act in Britain. With support in Sydney from Bourke and his successor, Sir George Gipps, and in London from Buller, Wentworth's second bill was adopted, with modifications, in an Act granting a degree of representative government in 1842. In an enlarged Legislative Council the proportion of nominees became one-third, and the property qualification for electors of the remaining twenty-four members was high enough to exclude two-thirds of the adult male population. Though the governor retained control of colonial revenue, he ceased to preside over the Legislative Council and was replaced by an elected Speaker.
In his book Wentworth had commended simultaneously a wide franchise and a property qualification for electors. The 1827 petition had demanded suffrage for 'the entire of the free population'. Now the eighteenth-century Whig in him was running stronger and he was more apt to equate political capacity with property and poverty with ignorance. He had given up his legal practice and was concentrating on his landed interests. Though he was still far less wealthy than James Macarthur, who had gone to England on behalf of the exclusives to oppose the demands of the Australian Patriotic Association, Wentworth's riches were increasing rapidly, and the onset of middle age, his experience of the crowd, and the shift in the balance of population caused by assisted migration all tended to strengthen his conservatism. The intention of the British government to abolish convict transportation and to raise the price of crown land drew the exclusives and Wentworth into a common opposition to any change in the condition allowing them cheap land and labour.
The leading emancipists now found themselves together with the exclusives on the side of the rich. Wentworth now belonged to the pastoral aristocracy he had envisaged in 1819 and it was faced with stern threats. When he expressed approval of the idea of importing coolie labour from Asia, he alienated many former supporters together with the radicals among the recent immigrants. In January 1842 the Australian summed up the popular feeling: 'Mr Wentworth … was an influential man. His day is gone by. His opinion is worth nothing … Certainly he first taught the natives of this colony what liberty was, but he has betrayed them since and they have withdrawn their confidence from him'.
In 1839 Wentworth was recommended for appointment to the Legislative Council by Gipps, but was soon at enmity with the new governor. In 1840, in direct opposition to declared British policy, humanely conceived, Wentworth and some associates bought from seven Maori chieftains, for a song, nearly a third of New Zealand, urging them, moreover, not to acknowledge Queen Victoria without proper safeguard. Gipps, aghast at such a 'job', blocked the scheme in the Legislative Council. But he misunderstood Wentworth. This bid was no jobbery, but Elizabethan in spirit and characteristically splendid and defiant. It would have made him the greatest landowner on earth; frustrated, he swore 'eternal vengeance'. The enmity between Wentworth and Gipps bedevilled almost every issue until the governor's departure in 1846. It was comparatively easy for Wentworth to lead others against Gipps. As with Darling, he set out to wreck his opponent's policies, but although he was frequently depicted as an unscrupulous politician his powers were bent passionately on ends that seemed to him greater than person or reputation, his own or anybody else's.
Wentworth entered the Legislative Council in 1843 at the head of the poll for Sydney. He wished to be Speaker but was passed over in favour of his enemy, Alexander McLeay. However, with his unrivalled knowledge of parliamentary procedure and colonial affairs, he immediately assumed practical leadership of the council. His achievement was already remarkable. He was an orator of immense power, whether bludgeoning an opponent, or fumbling and growling and calling for his 'extracts', or rising, with harsh and rasping voice, to a broken sublimity of language which moved and enlightened even his enemies. All were affected by the impact of his personality. Robert Lowe, mellifluously, dartingly, could mock what he had said, but the twain never really met, for they were of two different orders of being. Though he could marshal arguments brilliantly Wentworth relied little on subtlety or logic. He created a mood and stormed rather than seduced the mind. Careless and even slovenly in manners and dress (he now wore corduroys with his badly-fitting morning-coat), he had, while knowing his power, an unconscious arrogance and was in all things the observed of all observers.
He led the squatters in their demand for new land regulations and, since imperial control over crown land was an obstacle to their interest, for a surrender of that control to the Legislative Council. The squatters wanted security of tenure so that they could improve their runs without fear of displacement. Through a Pastoralists' Association, a select committee of the Legislative Council, a paid agent in the House of Commons, and in other ways they waged unceasing war against Gipps's policies. They won most of their demands in the Imperial Act of 1846, which gave them security, for varying periods in the 'settled', 'intermediate', and 'unsettled' districts, unless someone would pay £1 an acre for the land they leased, and this they could thwart by purchasing key-points on their runs, such as around the waterholes. In a sense the squatting age was now over. Henceforward the graziers could build spacious homesteads and develop the way of life of a landed, governing class, whatever political power Wentworth and his followers might win for them.
Because pastoral interests were strong in the part-elective Legislative Council Wentworth was able after 1843 to establish again a leadership of the colony as a whole. He was never again popular as he had been in 1831. At times he was distinctly unpopular but the power of his personality continued to sway even the crowd. In the 1848 election, after a public outcry over the renewal of transportation, he again headed the Sydney poll, though Bland was defeated altogether. In 1851, when his unpopularity stood at its height through his insistence on a preponderance of squatter-controlled rural representation over that of Sydney and his opposition to a wide franchise and to the 'spirit of democracy abroad', he came in third, but was still returned.
Though frequently accused of inconsistency, Wentworth followed unswervingly the same ideals throughout his career. He believed profoundly in intellect, and his fury at unintelligent officialdom, military autocracy, and the social pretensions of the unimaginative exclusives (the imaginative, such as John Macarthur, he admired) sprang from the same source as his distrust of mob rule: a hatred of anything which would prevent the human mind and spirit from developing their latent powers. He at no time denied the right of the intelligent poor to aspire to the seats of government, but they must first become 'men of substance', participating in one of the great interests on which the welfare of the community depended. Pre-eminent among these was the landed interest which, because of his realistic appraisal of the Australian economy no less than his inherited or acquired Whiggism, he believed was the one to which, as he told them in 1851, the inhabitants of Sydney 'were indebted for all their greatness, all the comforts, all the luxuries, that they possessed'. He told them, too, with no little courage, that he 'agreed with that ancient and venerable constitution that treated those who had no property as infants, or idiots, unfit to have any voice in the management of the State'. The way out of infancy, or idiocy, was through intellect and property: but essential to these, and to the management of the state, was education — and Wentworth's pioneering of both primary and university education in Australia is among the noblest of his achievements.
He played a leading part with Lowe, his erstwhile opponent, in establishing in 1848-49 the first real system of state primary education in New South Wales. Hitherto primary teaching—and most of the children of the colony had none—had been conducted predominantly by the various religious denominations, with much sectarian bitterness. New South Wales was on the brink of gaining responsible government; but this, he argued, would be workable only through national education. Should they fail to give the youth of the colony 'the education which would furnish them with the knowledge of the responsibilities they undertook, the achievement of responsible government will be not to achieve a blessing, but to achieve the greatest curse it is possible to conceive'. He went on in 1849-50 to lead the movement that resulted in the founding of the first full colonial university in the British empire, the University of Sydney. He saw this as serving two ends: 'to enlighten the mind, to refine the understanding, to elevate the soul of our fellow men'; and to train men to fill 'the high offices of state'. He deplored the religious bigotry which had obstructed education: the university should be 'open to all, though influenced by none'. But he denied vigorously that his university would promote infidelity: he believed that 'the best mode of proving the divinity of the great Christian Code was to advance the intellect of those who trusted and relied upon it … It was not by stinting the intellect that Christianity was to be promoted'. The university would leave religious education to constituent colleges which he envisaged 'in every part of the colony'. Wentworth also helped to endow the university and was a member of its first senate.
In 1844, after a collision between Gipps and the Legislative Council, Wentworth had advocated 'that control of the Ministers and the Administrators of the Colony … which can only exist where the decision of the majority can occasion the choice—as well as the removal—of the functionaries who are entrusted with the chief executive departments'. He lost enthusiasm for this kind of responsible government after Governor Sir Charles FitzRoy eased the friction between executive and legislature, and turned instead to demands for self-government with full control of crown lands and colonial revenue. These demands, expressed in the Remonstrances of 1850 and 1851, remained urgent when gold was discovered, but the pastoral ascendancy seemed likely to be seriously threatened by 'pure democracy'. Although in 1852 the Colonial Office finally agreed that New South Wales should have responsible government, only a limited form of individual responsibility of some members of the executive was provided by the select committee which drafted the constitution in 1853. With Wentworth as chairman it recommended a lower house of fifty members elected on a £10 property franchise, and a nominated upper house consisting of members of a hereditary colonial peerage. The rural bias of the proposed lower house and the idea of a peerage were vociferously opposed in Sydney, by the press and by orators representing nearly every shade of political and social opinion. Wentworth vigorously defended his peerage scheme—which was a logical outgrowth of his basic ideas and assumptions and by no means the ridiculous proposal it has been represented as, then and since—but public opinion was so strongly against it that the bill, as eventually passed, contained in its stead provisions for a legislative council shorn of the hereditary principle altogether. Wentworth, with Edward Deas Thomson, colonial secretary for New South Wales, with whom he had been much associated through the lack of interest shown by Governor FitzRoy in colonial politics, sailed for England in 1854. In July 1855 he had the satisfaction of seeing the new Constitution made law, despite the deletion of his favoured safeguard against rash amendments to it, and the early death of the General Association of the Australian Colonies which he conceived as the forerunner of a 'Federal Assembly with power to legislate on all internal subjects'.
His life's work triumphantly achieved, he spent his remaining days in England except for a brief return to Sydney in 1861-62, when he was prevailed on to accept the presidency of the Legislative Council during a crisis, and stood out for the nominative as against the elective principle. He had consolidated his fame more by staying away, and being remembered for his great achievements, than if he had returned and been drawn—as he must have been—into the political fray and tried—as he would have done—to stem the democratic tide. In England he became a member of the Conservative Club, and lived at Merly House, near Wimborne, Dorset. There he died on 20 March 1872, survived by his wife Sarah, second daughter of Francis Cox, an emancipist blacksmith, whom he had married in 1829, and by five of their seven daughters and two of their three sons. His probate was sworn at £96,000 in Sydney and £70,000 in London. As he had wished, his body was brought to Sydney, and after a state funeral on 6 May 1873 was laid to rest in a vault excavated in a rock on his estate at Vaucluse. A chapel erected over his tomb, portraits by Richard Buckner in the chamber of the Legislative Assembly in Sydney and by James Anderson in the Mitchell Library, and a statue in Carrara marble by Tenerani in the Great Hall of the University of Sydney are his tangible memorials.
His intangible, and truer, memorial is much more than can easily be estimated in present-day Australia. With all his apparent contradictions, more than any other man he secured our fundamental liberties and nationhood. He looked backward in many things to the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; yet he built, with the strength that his sense of history gave him, for the future. He was a child both of the English past and of his own time. He was an heir to the Whig tradition, with its faith in aristocratic and classical values and in British political institutions as established, more or less, by the Glorious Revolution and the politicians of the eighteenth century, and at the same time a child of the romantic movement. The chief intellectual influence upon him was Burke's oratory, with all its rhetoric and splendour and its evocation of the greatness of Augustan Rome and England. Emotionally, however, he was more Byronic, a force of nature of the kind which blazed in the sky of his boyhood in the person of Napoleon. He had breathed the air of Liberal Toryism abroad in England in the early 1820s. The subjection of his proud and romantic nature to the classical restraints of law and politics, though sometimes imperfectly achieved, increased rather than diminished his achievement. In his determination to secure in his own country those free institutions which in eighteenth-century England bore an aristocratic form, he may have regretted that their very freedom would allow them to become democratic; but their freedom was more important to him than their form. His love of Australia was, he confessed, the 'master passion' of his life. He felt a natural kinship with the founding fathers of the United States. It is his chief claim to greatness that, more than any other, he secured in Australia, in one lifetime, the fruit of centuries—what he, in common with other men of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, revered as the fundamental liberties of the British Constitution
From:
Published by La Selva, Brazil 1950
A friends of mine collection, but I wanted you to have a chance to view these important editions.
Kollektiivinen piirros (Collective Drawing), Short story in Finnish 2011
2012 No. 3 / Titanik gallery, 2011
Web version available in Finnish:
Duckboard Place adjoins ACDC Lane off Flinders Lane, between Russell and Exhibition Streets in Melbourne.
Three exposure merge.
This photo was published in Geography Alive 9 (Jacaranda), page 107.
All Rights Reserved !!!!!
No parts of this material can be published, copied, downloaded or sold without a permission from me. PLEASE ask me before you post this material in a blog or on your page ! Please respect these rules !!!!
image on right is mine! The original: taken in the Director's Room of the Bauhaus Weimar 2009
www.flickr.com/photos/lizinitaly/3535624519/in/set-721576...
Sustainability in Interior Design (Portfolio Skills) [Paperback] Sian Moxon (Author)
Big Ant TV Media LLC ©
Published Pro Freelance Photographer
PAID SHOOTS ARE 1st PRIORITY
(PORTFOLIO BUILDING” SHOOTS ARE 2ND)
“PLEASE INQUIRE WITHIN”
#fffweek #sbfw #nyfw #stylefw
#fashionphotographer
#canon5DMarkIV
#UrbanModeling
#plussizemodeling
#sportsphotographers
#BigAntTVMedia #editorialphotographers
#NYCPhotographers #BiggsthePhotographer
#lens4fashion #biganttvproductions #m76photo
_________________
Join We're Here and add some zing to your photo projects.
Today's group: 8 questions - an interview with yourself
****************************
Strobist:
Key: speedlight in DIY striplight, CL
Back: two speedlights on the floor
1. If you could go back to any time in your life, what would you photograph?
My grandmother's house deep in the Appalachian mountains of Virginia. It was built by my grandfather in a holler. There are a couple of photos, but I would love to have taken detailed shots.
2. What kind of picture do you find the least interesting?
Corporate headshots.
3. Which picture took you the most courage to take (or publish)?
The first time I did candid street photography.
4. What do you admire most in other people’s photography?
Intention. My favorite photos are those that somehow express some kind of meaning or experience the photographer wanted to communicate. It doesn't have to be high-minded or socially "important" (those often produce eye-rolling in me). It can be simple, silly, or even mundane. But when a photo somehow evokes that sense of intention, it elevates it for me.
5. If you could follow someone around for a day, who would that be?
David Lynch.
6. Which shot would you never post on Flickr?
Any photo of my wife she did not give explicit permission to share publicly.
7. What is unphotographable?
My seven year old son in a calm, cooperative state.
8. If you had to describe yourself in one word, what would it be?
Curious.
This photograph was published in the Illustrated Chronicle on the 10th of December 1915.
During the Great War the Illustrated Chronicle published photographs of soldiers and sailors from Newcastle and the North East of England, which had been in the news. The photographs were sent in by relatives and give us a glimpse into the past.
The physical collection held by Newcastle Libraries comprises bound volumes of the newspaper from 1910 to 1925. We are keen to find out more about the people in the photographs. If you recognise anyone in the images and have any stories and information to add please comment below.
Copies of this photograph may be ordered from us, for more information see: www.newcastle.gov.uk/tlt Please make a note of the image reference number above to help speed up your order."
The chemical dinitrophenol (DNP) had a long history in the dye and munitions industry before a pharmacologist and a clinician at Stanford in 1931 began investigating the effects it had on those who worked with or near the chemical. They found that it elevated both body temperature and metabolic rate. The scientists explored how DNP might be applied therapeutically, and they discovered a single dosage could accelerate metabolism by 50 percent for up to two days. Believing this could have benefits for weight loss, they published their initial results in medical journals in 1933, suggesting that patients could lose 2-3 pounds per week over an extended period, without discomfort. The greatest danger, they reported, was the possibility of indiscriminate dosing due to self-medication. At the time, there was no restriction on selling a product like DNP directly to the public.
Other researchers confirmed their results, but the following year the medical literature also began reporting a number of serious problems associated with the use of the chemical in weight loss products, including several cases of a a deadly blood disorder. And, in 1935 DNP was linked to a growing incidence of rapid and unstoppable cataracts, which blinded some patients.
Though medical investigators abandoned DNP, several manufacturers who used the chemical had already established a foothold in the market for weight loss products. A half dozen different weight loss products had been introduced just weeks after the initial clinical report, and nearly two dozen were available by the fall of 1934.
The manufacturers of these products advertised them heavily and dishonestly. One DNP product, Redusols, had an advertising budget of $4,000 per month (about $78,000 in today’s dollars), and the manufacturer received 100 orders weekly for a treatment that cost patients $3.00 per month (or about $58.00 today). The firm promised that Redusols “would positively have no harmful effects.” The 1906 Food and Drugs Act, which gave the FDA limited oversight of drugs, did not apply because obesity was not considered a medical condition, and thus the treatment could not be deemed a drug
Products containing DNP were included in a 1933 FDA exhibit of dangerous and deceptive products that were sold legally to consumers under the 1906 Act. The FDA took the traveling exhibit, dubbed the Chamber of Horrors by one reporter, to the Chicago World’s Fair, various state fairs and Capitol Hill to publicize the need for a new consumer protection law.
With the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act’s expanded definition of “drug” to include substances affecting the structure or function of the body, DNP and other obesity treatments were no longer outside the scope of the law. And with the new law’s prohibition of drugs dangerous to health when used according to the labeling, DNP’s days were numbered. Within weeks, the FDA published a group of drugs so toxic they could not even be used under a physician’s supervision. Dinitrophenol headed that list.
Note: this photo was published as an illustration in an Aug 2009 Squidoo blog titled "Timing my Life in Songs." It was also published in a May 1, 2010 blog titled "The Memories We Carry." And it was published in a May 28, 2010 blog titled "The Most Important Thing to Do This Weekend: Enjoy Your Holiday." It was also published in a May 31, 2010 blog titled "This Day Has a Purpose."
Moving into 2012, the photo was published in an Aug 8, 2012 blog titled "‘Moving Wall’ Veterans Memorial Coming to Missoula."
************************
The Vietnam Memorial opened to the public on November 11, 1982. I visited not too long after that, though I don't remember exactly when. All I remember was that it was a dark, cold, drizzly Saturday afternoon, and that it was very, very sad.
God knows how many times I've been back to Washington since then, but some 25 years after my initial visit, I thought I should come back and see it again ... when the weather was likely to be better, and when I would likely see a different generation of visitors.
I made two separate visits, and got two different impressions. My second visit was just before dawn, at 5:45 AM. There was a crescent moon, and one star, in the pink-and-purple sky; but there were no people at all. Though the memorial is simply a chronological list of names, one can imagine that the 58,261 dead are sleeping in peace as the night fades away and the sun returns to warm the granite stone once again. I took a few pictures of this early scene; you can decide for yourself if it's peaceful or sad.
My first visit was just before sunset, on a Sunday evening. I heard one of the park guides telling her flock that the summer crowds had been smaller this year than in the past, but there were still plenty of people along the length of the wall. What interested me most about the visitors was their age: I saw a few people who looked old enough to have been adults back in the Vietnam era, though I saw no one in uniform, and no one who looked like he or she had actually been there.
But there were far more people of a younger generation: people in their 30s or 40s, whose father or mother or uncle or aunt might have served in that war. Not surprisingly, I saw people carefully searching out specific names, and resting their finger or hand for long moments on a single name, as if they might somehow be able to communicate with a dead relative after all these years.
And then there were the children -- some as young as one or two, but most looked to be 8 or 10 or 12. They may have been the grandchildren of some fallen soldier, or they may have been entirely unrelated to those 58,261 individuals. But one way or another, you could see that the Wall made an impact on them: they were quiet and reverent, respectful of what they could barely grasp, as the list of names surrounded them and stretched as far as they could see, to the left and to the right.
Indeed, the very idea of creating a monument that consists of nothing but a long inclined wall containing a list of names is so simple, so ... well, almost primitive ... that you can't imagine it would have any impact, at least not on the typical jaded visitor. But it does have an impact, it really does...
If you haven't seen this memorial, you owe it to yourself to carve out a little time when you next visit Washington. And if, like me, it's been 10 or 20 or 25 years since you last saw it, I think you need to come see it again.
The Postcard
A postally unused carte postale that was published by A. Bourdier of Versailles. The card has a divided back.
The Gardens of Versailles
The Gardens of Versailles are situated to the west of the palace. They cover some 800 hectares (1,977 acres) of land, much of which is landscaped in the classic French formal garden style perfected here by André Le Nôtre.
Beyond the surrounding belt of woodland, the gardens are bordered by the urban areas of Versailles to the east and Le Chesnay to the north-east, by the National Arboretum de Chèvreloup to the north, the Versailles plain (a protected wildlife preserve) to the west, and by the Satory Forest to the south.
In 1979, the gardens along with the château were inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List due to its cultural importance during the 17th. and 18th. centuries.
The gardens are now one of the most visited public sites in France, receiving more than six million visitors a year.
The gardens contain 200,000 trees, 210,000 flowers planted annually, and feature meticulously manicured lawns and parterres, as well as many sculptures.
50 fountains containing 620 water jets, fed by 35 km. of piping, are located throughout the gardens. Dating from the time of Louis XIV and still using much of the same network of hydraulics as was used during the Ancien Régime, the fountains contribute to making the gardens of Versailles unique.
On weekends from late spring to early autumn, there are the Grandes Eaux - spectacles during which all the fountains in the gardens are in full play. Designed by André Le Nôtre, the Grand Canal is the masterpiece of the Gardens of Versailles.
In the Gardens too, the Grand Trianon was built to provide the Sun King with the retreat that he wanted. The Petit Trianon is associated with Marie-Antoinette, who spent time there with her closest relatives and friends.
The Du Bus Plan for the Gardens of Versailles
With Louis XIII's purchase of lands from Jean-François de Gondi in 1632 and his assumption of the seigneurial role of Versailles in the 1630's, formal gardens were laid out west of the château.
Claude Mollet and Hilaire Masson designed the gardens, which remained relatively unchanged until the expansion ordered under Louis XIV in the 1660's. This early layout, which has survived in the so-called Du Bus plan of c.1662, shows an established topography along which lines of the gardens evolved. This is evidenced in the clear definition of the main east–west and north–south axis that anchors the gardens' layout.
Louis XIV
In 1661, after the disgrace of the finance minister Nicolas Fouquet, who was accused by rivals of embezzling crown funds in order to build his luxurious château at Vaux-le-Vicomte, Louis XIV turned his attention to Versailles.
With the aid of Fouquet's architect Louis Le Vau, painter Charles Le Brun, and landscape architect André Le Nôtre, Louis began an embellishment and expansion program at Versailles that would occupy his time and worries for the remainder of his reign.
From this point forward, the expansion of the gardens of Versailles followed the expansions of the château.
(a) The First Building Campaign
In 1662, minor modifications to the château were undertaken; however, greater attention was given to developing the gardens. Existing bosquets (clumps of trees) and parterres were expanded, and new ones created.
Most significant among the creations at this time were the Versailles Orangerie and the "Grotte de Thétys". The Orangery, which was designed by Louis Le Vau, was located south of the château, a situation that took advantage of the natural slope of the hill. It provided a protected area in which orange trees were kept during the winter months.
The "Grotte de Thétys", which was located to the north of the château, formed part of the iconography of the château and of the gardens that aligned Louis XIV with solar imagery. The grotto was completed during the second building campaign.
By 1664, the gardens had evolved to the point that Louis XIV inaugurated the gardens with the fête galante called Les Plaisirs de L'Île Enchantée. The event, was ostensibly to celebrate his mother, Anne d'Autriche, and his consort Marie-Thérèse but in reality celebrated Louise de La Vallière, Louis' mistress.
Guests were regaled with entertainments in the gardens over a period of one week. As a result of this fête - particularly the lack of housing for guests (most of them had to sleep in their carriages), Louis realised the shortcomings of Versailles, and began to expand the château and the gardens once again.
(b) The Second Building Campaign
Between 1664 and 1668, there was a flurry of activity in the gardens - especially with regard to fountains and new bosquets; it was during this time that the imagery of the gardens exploited Apollo and solar imagery as metaphors for Louis XIV.
Le Va's enveloppe of the Louis XIII's château provided a means by which, though the decoration of the garden façade, imagery in the decors of the grands appartements of the king and queen formed a symbiosis with the imagery of the gardens.
With this new phase of construction, the gardens assumed the design vocabulary that remained in force until the 18th. century. Solar and Apollonian themes predominated with projects constructed at this time.
Three additions formed the topological and symbolic nexus of the gardens during this phase of construction: the completion of the "Grotte de Thétys", the "Bassin de Latone", and the "Bassin d'Apollon".
The Grotte de Thétys
Started in 1664 and finished in 1670 with the installation of the statuary, the grotto formed an important symbolic and technical component to the gardens. Symbolically, the "Grotte de Thétys" related to the myth of Apollo - and by association to Louis XIV.
It represented the cave of the sea nymph Thetis, where Apollo rested after driving his chariot to light the sky. The grotto was a freestanding structure located just north of the château.
The interior, which was decorated with shell-work to represent a sea cave, contained the statue group by the Marsy brothers depicting the sun god attended by nereids.
Technically, the "'Grotte de Thétys" played a critical role in the hydraulic system that supplied water to the garden. The roof of the grotto supported a reservoir that stored water pumped from the Clagny pond and which fed the fountains lower in the garden via gravity.
The Bassin de Latone
Located on the east–west axis is the Bassin de Latone. Designed by André Le Nôtre, sculpted by Gaspard and Balthazar Marsy, and constructed between 1668 and 1670, the fountain depicts an episode from Ovid's Metamorphoses.
Altona and her children, Apollo and Diana, being tormented with mud slung by Lycian peasants, who refused to let her and her children drink from their pond, appealed to Jupiter who responded by turning the Lycians into frogs.
This episode from mythology has been seen as a reference to the revolts of the Fronde, which occurred during the minority of Louis XIV. The link between Ovid's story and this episode from French history is emphasised by the reference to "mud slinging" in a political context.
The revolts of the Fronde - the word fronde also means slingshot - have been regarded as the origin of the use of the term "mud slinging" in a political context.
The Bassin d'Apollon
Further along the east–west axis is the Bassin d'Apollon. The Apollo Fountain, which was constructed between 1668 and 1671, depicts the sun god driving his chariot to light the sky. The fountain forms a focal point in the garden, and serves as a transitional element between the gardens of the Petit Parc and the Grand Canal.
The Grand Canal
With a length of 1,500 metres and a width of 62 metres, the Grand Canal, which was built between 1668 and 1671, prolongs the east–west axis to the walls of the Grand Parc. During the Ancien Régime, the Grand Canal served as a venue for boating parties.
In 1674 the king ordered the construction of Petite Venise (Little Venice). Located at the junction of the Grand Canal and the northern transversal branch, Little Venice housed the caravels and yachts that were received from The Netherlands and the gondolas and gondoliers received as gifts from the Doge of Venice.
The Grand Canal also served a practical role. Situated at a low point in the gardens, it collected water that drained from the fountains in the garden above. Water from the Grand Canal was pumped back to the reservoir on the roof of the Grotte de Thétys via a network of windmill- and horse-powered pumps.
The Parterre d'Eau
Situated above the Latona Fountain is the terrace of the château, known as the Parterre d'Eau. Forming a transitional element from the château to the gardens below, the Parterre d'Eau provided a setting in which the symbolism of the grands appartements synthesized with the iconography of the gardens.
In 1664, Louis XIV commissioned a series of statues intended to decorate the water feature of the Parterre d'Eau. The Grande Command, as the commission is known, comprised twenty-four statues of the classic quaternities and four additional statues depicting abductions from the classic past.
Evolution of the Bosquets
One of the distinguishing features of the gardens during the second building campaign was the proliferation of bosquets. Expanding the layout established during the first building campaign, Le Nôtre added or expanded on no fewer that ten bosquets between 1670 and 1678:
-- The Bosquet du Marais
-- The Bosquet du Théâtre d'Eau, Île du Roi
-- The Miroir d'Eau
-- The Salle des Festins (Salle du Conseil)
-- The Bosquet des Trois Fontaines
-- The Labyrinthe
-- The Bosquet de l'Arc de Triomphe
-- The Bosquet de la Renommée (Bosquet des Dômes)
-- The Bosquet de l'Encélade
-- The Bosquet des Sources
In addition to the expansion of existing bosquets and the construction of new ones, there were two additional projects that defined this era, the Bassin des Sapins and the Pièce d'Eau des Suisses.
-- The Bassin des Sapins
In 1676, the Bassin des Sapins, which was located north of the château below the Allée des Marmoset's was designed to form a topological pendant along the north–south axis with the Pièce d'Eau des Suisses located at the base of the Satory hill south of the château.
Later modifications in the gardens transformed this fountain into the Bassin de Neptune.
-- Pièce d'Eau des Suisses
Excavated in 1678, the Pièce d'Eau des Suisses - named after the Swiss Guards who constructed the lake - occupied an area of marshes and ponds, some of which had been used to supply water for the fountains in the garden.
This water feature, with a surface area of more than 15 hectares (37 acres), is the second largest - after the Grand Canal - at Versailles.
(c) The Third Building Campaign
Modifications to the gardens during the third building campaign were distinguished by a stylistic change from the natural aesthetic of André Le Nôtre to the architectonic style of Jules Hardouin Mansart.
The first major modification to the gardens during this phase occurred in 1680 when the Tapis Vert - the expanse of lawn that stretches between the Latona Fountain and the Apollo Fountain - achieved its final size and definition under the direction of André Le Nôtre.
Beginning in 1684, the Parterre d'Eau was remodelled under the direction of Jules Hardouin-Mansart. Statues from the Grande Commande of 1674 were relocated to other parts of the garden; two twin octagonal basins were constructed and decorated with bronze statues representing the four main rivers of France.
In the same year, Le Vau's Orangerie, located to south of the Parterrre d'Eau was demolished to accommodate a larger structure designed by Jules Hardouin-Mansart.
In addition to the Orangerie, the Escaliers des Cent Marches, which facilitated access to the gardens from the south, to the Pièce d'Eau des Suisses, and to the Parterre du Midi were constructed at this time, giving the gardens just south of the château their present configuration and decoration.
Additionally, to accommodate the anticipated construction of the Aile des Nobles - the north wing of the château - the Grotte de Thétys was demolished.
With the construction of the Aile des Nobles (1685–1686), the Parterre du Nord was remodelled to respond to the new architecture of this part of the château.
To compensate for the loss of the reservoir on top of the Grotte de Thétys and to meet the increased demand for water, Jules Hardouin-Mansart designed new and larger reservoirs situated north of the Aile des Nobles.
Construction of the ruinously expensive Canal de l'Eure was inaugurated in 1685; designed by Vauban it was intended to bring waters of the Eure over 80 kilometres, including aqueducts of heroic scale, but the works were abandoned in 1690.
Between 1686 and 1687, the Bassin de Latone, under the direction of Jules Hardouin-Mansart, was rebuilt. It is this final version of the fountain that one sees today at Versailles.
During this phase of construction, three of the garden's major bosquets were modified or created. Beginning with the Galerie des Antiques, this bosquet was constructed in 1680 on the site of the earlier and short-lived Galerie d'Eau. This bosquet was conceived as an open-air gallery in which antique statues and copies acquired by the Académie de France in Rome were displayed.
The following year, construction began on the Salle de Bal. Located in a secluded section of the garden west of the Orangerie, this bosquet was designed as an amphitheater that featured a cascade – the only one surviving in the gardens of Versailles. The Salle de Bal was inaugurated in 1685 with a ball hosted by the Grand Dauphin.
Between 1684 and 1685, Jules Hardouin-Mansart built the Colonnade. Located on the site of Le Nôtre's Bosquet des Sources, this bosquet featured a circular peristyle formed from thirty-two arches with twenty-eight fountains, and was Hardouin-Mansart's most architectural of the bosquets built in the gardens of Versailles.
(d) The Fourth Building Campaign
Due to financial constraints arising from the War of the League of Augsburg and the War of the Spanish Succession, no significant work on the gardens was undertaken until 1704.
Between 1704 and 1709, bosquets were modified, some quite radically, with new names suggesting the new austerity that characterised the latter years of Louis XIV's reign.
Louis XV
With the departure of the king and court from Versailles in 1715 following the death of Louis XIV, the palace and gardens entered an era of uncertainty.
In 1722, Louis XV and the court returned to Versailles. Seeming to heed his great-grandfather's admonition not to engage in costly building campaigns, Louis XV did not undertake the costly rebuilding that Louis XIV had.
During the reign of Louis XV, the only significant addition to the gardens was the completion of the Bassin de Neptune (1738–1741).
Rather than expend resources on modifying the gardens at Versailles, Louis XV - an avid botanist - directed his efforts at Trianon. In the area now occupied by the Hameau de la Reine, Louis XV constructed and maintained les Jardins Botaniques.
In 1761, Louis XV commissioned Ange-Jacques Gabriel to build the Petit Trianon as a residence that would allow him to spend more time near the Jardins Botaniques. It was at the Petit Trianon that Louis XV fell fatally ill with smallpox; he died at Versailles on the 10th. May 1774.
Louis XVI
Upon Louis XVI's ascension to the throne, the gardens of Versailles underwent a transformation that recalled the fourth building campaign of Louis XIV. Engendered by a change in outlook as advocated by Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the Philosophes, the winter of 1774–1775 witnessed a complete replanting of the gardens.
Trees and shrubbery dating from the reign of Louis XIV were felled or uprooted with the intent of transforming the French formal garden of Le Nôtre and Hardouin-Mansart into a version of an English landscape garden.
The attempt to convert Le Nôtre's masterpiece into an English-style garden failed to achieve its desired goal. Owing largely to the topology of the land, the English aesthetic was abandoned and the gardens replanted in the French style.
However, with an eye on economy, Louis XVI ordered the Palisades - the labour-intensive clipped hedging that formed walls in the bosquets - to be replaced with rows of lime trees or chestnut trees. Additionally, a number of the bosquets dating from the time of the Sun King were extensively modified or destroyed.
The most significant contribution to the gardens during the reign of Louis XVI was the Grotte des Bains d'Apollon. The rockwork grotto set in an English style bosquet was the masterpiece of Hubert Robert in which the statues from the Grotte de Thétys were placed.
Revolution
In 1792, under order from the National Convention, some of the trees in the gardens were felled, while parts of the Grand Parc were parcelled and dispersed.
Sensing the potential threat to Versailles, Louis Claude Marie Richard (1754–1821) – director of the Jardins Botaniques and grandson of Claude Richard – lobbied the government to save Versailles. He succeeded in preventing further dispersing of the Grand Parc, and threats to destroy the Petit Parc were abolished by suggesting that the parterres could be used to plant vegetable gardens, and that orchards could occupy the open areas of the garden.
These plans were never put into action; however, the gardens were opened to the public - it was not uncommon to see people washing their laundry in the fountains and spreading it on the shrubbery to dry.
Napoléon I
The Napoleonic era largely ignored Versailles. In the château, a suite of rooms was arranged for the use of the empress Marie-Louise, but the gardens were left unchanged, save for the disastrous felling of trees in the Bosquet de l'Arc de Triomphe and the Bosquet des Trois Fontaines. Massive soil erosion necessitated planting of new trees.
Restoration
With the restoration of the Bourbons in 1814, the gardens of Versailles witnessed the first modifications since the Revolution. In 1817, Louis XVIII ordered the conversion of the Île du Roi and the Miroir d'Eau into an English-style garden - the Jardin du Roi.
The July Monarchy; The Second Empire
While much of the château's interior was irreparably altered to accommodate the Museum of the History of France (inaugurated by Louis-Philippe on the 10th. June 1837), the gardens, by contrast, remained untouched.
With the exception of the state visit of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert in 1855, at which time the gardens were a setting for a gala fête that recalled the fêtes of Louis XIV, Napoléon III ignored the château, preferring instead the château of Compiègne.
Pierre de Nolhac
With the arrival of Pierre de Nolhac as director of the museum in 1892, a new era of historical research began at Versailles. Nolhac, an ardent archivist and scholar, began to piece together the history of Versailles, and subsequently established the criteria for restoration of the château and preservation of the gardens, which are ongoing to this day.
Bosquets of the Gardens
Owing to the many modifications made to the gardens between the 17th. and the 19th. centuries, many of the bosquets have undergone multiple modifications, which were often accompanied by name changes.
Deux Bosquets - Bosquet de la Girondole - Bosquet du Dauphin - Quinconce du Nord - Quinconce du Midi
These two bosquets were first laid out in 1663. They were arranged as a series of paths around four salles de verdure and which converged on a central "room" that contained a fountain.
In 1682, the southern bosquet was remodeled as the Bosquet de la Girondole, thus named due to spoke-like arrangement of the central fountain. The northern bosquet was rebuilt in 1696 as the Bosquet du Dauphin with a fountain that featured a dolphin.
During the replantation of 1774–1775, both the bosquets were destroyed. The areas were replanted with lime trees and were rechristened the Quinconce du Nord and the Quinconce du Midi.
Labyrinthe - Bosquet de la Reine
In 1665, André Le Nôtre planned a hedge maze of unadorned paths in an area south of the Latona Fountain near the Orangerie. In 1669, Charles Perrault - author of the Mother Goose Tales - advised Louis XIV to remodel the Labyrinthe in such a way as to serve the Dauphin's education.
Between 1672 and 1677, Le Nôtre redesigned the Labyrinthe to feature thirty-nine fountains that depicted stories from Aesop's Fables. The sculptors Jean-Baptiste Tuby, Étienne Le Hongre, Pierre Le Gros, and the brothers Gaspard and Balthazard Marsy worked on these thirty-nine fountains, each of which was accompanied by a plaque on which the fable was printed, with verse written by Isaac de Benserade; from these plaques, Louis XIV's son learned to read.
Once completed in 1677, the Labyrinthe contained thirty-nine fountains with 333 painted metal animal sculptures. The water for the elaborate waterworks was conveyed from the Seine by the Machine de Marly.
The Labyrinthe contained fourteen water-wheels driving 253 pumps, some of which worked at a distance of three-quarters of a mile.
Citing repair and maintenance costs, Louis XVI ordered the Labyrinthe demolished in 1778. In its place, an arboretum of exotic trees was planted as an English-styled garden.
Rechristened Bosquet de la Reine, it would be in this part of the garden that an episode of the Affair of the Diamond Necklace, which compromised Marie-Antoinette, transpired in 1785.
Bosquet de la Montagne d'Eau - Bosquet de l'Étoile
Originally designed by André Le Nôtre in 1661 as a salle de verdure, this bosquet contained a path encircling a central pentagonal area. In 1671, the bosquet was enlarged with a more elaborate system of paths that served to enhance the new central water feature, a fountain that resembled a mountain, hence the bosquets new name: Bosquet de la Montagne d'Eau.
The bosquet was completely remodeled in 1704 at which time it was rechristened Bosquet de l'Étoile.
Bosquet du Marais - Bosquet du Chêne Vert - Bosquet des Bains d'Apollon - Grotte des Bains d'Apollon
Created in 1670, this bosquet originally contained a central rectangular pool surrounded by a turf border. Edging the pool were metal reeds that concealed numerous jets for water; a swan that had water jetting from its beak occupied each corner.
The centre of the pool featured an iron tree with painted tin leaves that sprouted water from its branches. Because of this tree, the bosquet was also known as the Bosquet du Chêne Vert.
In 1705, this bosquet was destroyed in order to allow for the creation of the Bosquet des Bains d'Apollon, which was created to house the statues had once stood in the Grotte de Thétys.
During the reign of Louis XVI, Hubert Robert remodeled the bosquet, creating a cave-like setting for the Marsy statues. The bosquet was renamed the Grotte des Bains d'Apollon.
Île du Roi - Miroir d'Eau - Jardin du Roi
Originally designed in 1671 as two separate water features, the larger - Île du Roi - contained an island that formed the focal point of a system of elaborate fountains.
The Île du Roi was separated from the Miroir d'Eau by a causeway that featured twenty-four water jets. In 1684, the island was removed and the total number of water jets in the bosquet was significantly reduced.
The year 1704 witnessed a major renovation of the bosquet, at which time the causeway was remodelled and most of the water jets were removed.
A century later, in 1817, Louis XVIII ordered the Île du Roi and the Miroir d'Eau to be completely remodeled as an English-style garden. At this time, the bosquet was rechristened Jardin du Roi.
Salle des Festins - Salle du Conseil - Bosquet de l'Obélisque
In 1671, André Le Nôtre conceived a bosquet - originally christened Salle des Festins and later called Salle du Conseil - that featured a quatrefoil island surrounded by a channel containing fifty water jets. Access to the island was obtained by two swing bridges.
Beyond the channel and placed at the cardinal points within the bosquet were four additional fountains. Under the direction of Jules Hardouin-Mansart, the bosquet was completely remodeled in 1706. The central island was replaced by a large basin raised on five steps, which was surrounded by a canal. The central fountain contained 230 jets that, when in play, formed an obelisk – hence the new name Bosquet de l'Obélisque.
Bosquet du Théâtre d'Eau - Bosquet du Rond-Vert
The central feature of this bosquet, which was designed by Le Nôtre between 1671 and 1674, was an auditorium/theatre sided by three tiers of turf seating that faced a stage decorated with four fountains alternating with three radiating cascades.
Between 1680 and Louis XIV's death in 1715, there was near-constant rearranging of the statues that decorated the bosquet.
In 1709, the bosquet was rearranged with the addition of the Fontaine de l'Île aux Enfants. As part of the replantation of the gardens ordered by Louis XVI during the winter of 1774–1775, the Bosquet du Théâtre d'Eau was destroyed and replaced with the unadorned Bosquet du Rond-Vert. The Bosquet du Théâtre d'Eau was recreated in 2014, with South Korean businessman and photographer Yoo Byung-eun being the sole patron, donating €1.4 million.
Bosquet des Trois Fontaines - Berceau d'Eau
Situated to the west of the Allée des Marmousets and replacing the short-lived Berceau d'Eau (a long and narrow bosquet created in 1671 that featured a water bower made by numerous jets of water), the enlarged bosquet was transformed by Le Nôtre in 1677 into a series of three linked rooms.
Each room contained a number of fountains that played with special effects. The fountains survived the modifications that Louis XIV ordered for other fountains in the gardens in the early 18th. century and were subsequently spared during the 1774–1775 replantation of the gardens.
In 1830, the bosquet was replanted, at which time the fountains were suppressed. Due to storm damage in the park in 1990 and then again in 1999, the Bosquet des Trois Fontaines was restored and re-inaugurated on the 12th. June 2004.
Bosquet de l'Arc de Triomphe
This bosquet was originally planned in 1672 as a simple pavillon d'eau - a round open expanse with a square fountain in the centre. In 1676, this bosquet was enlarged and redecorated along political lines that alluded to French military victories over Spain and Austria, at which time the triumphal arch was added - hence the name.
As with the Bosquet des Trois Fontaines, this bosquet survived the modifications of the 18th. century, but was replanted in 1830, at which time the fountains were removed.
Bosquet de la Renommée - Bosquet des Dômes
Built in 1675, the Bosquet de la Renommée featured a fountain statue of Fame. With the relocation of the statues from the Grotte de Thétys in 1684, the bosquet was remodelled to accommodate the statues, and the Fame fountain was removed.
At this time the bosquet was rechristened Bosquet des Bains d'Apollon. As part of the reorganisation of the garden that was ordered by Louis XIV in the early part of the 18th. century, the Apollo grouping was moved once again to the site of the Bosquet du Marais - located near the Latona Fountain - which was destroyed and was replaced by the new Bosquet des Bains d'Apollon.
The statues were installed on marble plinths from which water issued; and each statue grouping was protected by an intricately carved and gilded baldachin.
The old Bosquet des Bains d'Apollon was renamed Bosquet des Dômes due to two domed pavilions built in the bosquet.
Bosquet de l'Encélade
Created in 1675 at the same time as the Bosquet de la Renommée, the fountain of this bosquet depicts Enceladus, a fallen Giant who was condemned to live below Mount Etna, being consumed by volcanic lava.
From its conception, this fountain was conceived as an allegory of Louis XIV's victory over the Fronde. In 1678, an octagonal ring of turf and eight rocaille fountains surrounding the central fountain were added. These additions were removed in 1708.
When in play, this fountain has the tallest jet of all the fountains in the gardens of Versailles - 25 metres.
Bosquet des Sources - La Colonnade
Designed as a simple unadorned salle de verdure by Le Nôtre in 1678, the landscape architect enhanced and incorporated an existing stream to create a bosquet that featured rivulets that twisted among nine islets.
In 1684, Jules Hardouin-Mansart completely redesigned the bosquet by constructing a circular arched double peristyle. The Colonnade, as it was renamed, originally featured thirty-two arches and thirty-one fountains – a single jet of water splashed into a basin center under the arch.
In 1704, three additional entrances to the Colonnade were added, which reduced the number of fountains from thirty-one to twenty-eight. The statue that currently occupies the centre of the Colonnade - the Abduction of Persephone - (from the Grande Commande of 1664) was set in place in 1696.
Galerie d'Eau - Galerie des Antiques - Salle des Marronniers
Occupying the site of the Galerie d'Eau (1678), the Galerie des Antiques was designed in 1680 to house the collection of antique statues and copies of antique statues acquired by the Académie de France in Rome.
Surrounding a central area paved with colored stone, a channel was decorated with twenty statues on plinths, each separated by three jets of water.
The Galerie was completely remodeled in 1704 when the statues were transferred to Marly and the bosquet was replanted with horse chestnut trees - hence the current name Salle des Marronniers.
Salle de Bal
This bosquet, which was designed by Le Nôtre and built between 1681 and 1683, features a semi-circular cascade that forms the backdrop for a salle de verdure.
Interspersed with gilt lead torchères, which supported candelabra for illumination, the Salle de Bal was inaugurated in 1683 by Louis XIV's son, the Grand Dauphin, with a dance party.
The Salle de Bal was remodeled in 1707 when the central island was removed and an additional entrance was added.
Replantations of the Gardens
Common to any long-lived garden is replantation, and Versailles is no exception. In their history, the gardens of Versailles have undergone no less than five major replantations, which have been executed for practical and aesthetic reasons.
During the winter of 1774–1775, Louis XVI ordered the replanting of the gardens on the grounds that many of the trees were diseased or overgrown, and needed to be replaced.
Also, as the formality of the 17th.-century garden had fallen out of fashion, this replantation sought to establish a new informality in the gardens - that would also be less expensive to maintain.
This, however, was not achieved, as the topology of the gardens favored the Jardin à la Française over an English-style garden.
Then, in 1860, much of the old growth from Louis XVI's replanting was removed and replaced. In 1870, a violent storm struck the area, damaging and uprooting scores of trees, which necessitated a massive replantation program.
However, owing to the Franco-Prussian War, which toppled Napoléon III, and the Commune de Paris, replantation of the garden did not get underway until 1883.
The most recent replantations of the gardens were precipitated by two storms that battered Versailles in 1990 and then again in 1999. The storm damage at Versailles and Trianon amounted to the loss of thousands of trees - the worst such damage in the history of Versailles.
The replantations have allowed museum and governmental authorities to restore and rebuild some of the bosquets that were abandoned during the reign of Louis XVI, such as the Bosquet des Trois Fontaines, which was restored in 2004.
Catherine Pégard, the head of the public establishment which administers Versailles, has stated that the intention is to return the gardens to their appearance under Louis XIV, specifically as he described them in his 1704 description, Manière de Montrer les Jardins de Versailles.
This involves restoring some of the parterres like the Parterre du Midi to their original formal layout, as they appeared under Le Nôtre. This was achieved in the Parterre de Latone in 2013, when the 19th. century lawns and flower beds were torn up and replaced with boxwood-enclosed turf and gravel paths to create a formal arabesque design.
Pruning is also done to keep trees at between 17 and 23 metres (56 to 75 feet), so as not to spoil the carefully designed perspectives of the gardens.
Owing to the natural cycle of replantations that has occurred at Versailles, it is safe to state that no trees dating from the time of Louis XIV are to be found in the gardens.
Problems With Water
The marvel of the gardens of Versailles - then as now - is the fountains. Yet, the very element that animates the gardens, water, has proven to be the affliction of the gardens since the time of Louis XIV.
The gardens of Louis XIII required water, and local ponds provided an adequate supply. However, once Louis XIV began expanding the gardens with more and more fountains, supplying the gardens with water became a critical challenge.
To meet the needs of the early expansions of the gardens under Louis XIV, water was pumped to the gardens from ponds near the château, with the Clagny pond serving as the principal source.
Water from the pond was pumped to the reservoir on top of the Grotte de Thétys, which fed the fountains in the garden by means of gravitational hydraulics. Other sources included a series of reservoirs located on the Satory Plateau south of the château.
The Grand Canal
By 1664, increased demand for water necessitated additional sources. In that year, Louis Le Vau designed the Pompe, a water tower built north of the château. The Pompe drew water from the Clagny pond using a system of windmills and horsepower to a cistern housed in the Pompe's building. The capacity of the Pompe 600 cubic metres per day - alleviated some of the water shortages in the garden.
With the completion of the Grand Canal in 1671, which served as drainage for the fountains of the garden, water, via a system of windmills, was pumped back to the reservoir on top of the Grotte de Thétys.
While this system solved some of the water supply problems, there was never enough water to keep all of the fountains running in the garden in full-play all of the time.
While it was possible to keep the fountains in view from the château running, those concealed in the bosquets and in the farther reaches of the garden were run on an as-needed basis.
In 1672, Jean-Baptiste Colbert devised a system by which the fountaineers in the gardens would signal each other with whistles upon the approach of the king, indicating that their fountain needed to be turned on. Once the king had passed a fountain in play, it would be turned off and the fountaineer would signal that the next fountain could be turned on.
In 1674, the Pompe was enlarged, and subsequently referred to as the Grande Pompe. Pumping capacity was increased via increased power and the number of pistons used for lifting the water. These improvements increased the water capacity to nearly 3,000 cubic metres of water per day; however, the increased capacity of the Grande Pompe often left the Clagny pond dry.
The increasing demand for water and the stress placed on existing systems of water supply necessitated newer measures to increase the water supplied to Versailles. Between 1668 and 1674, a project was undertaken to divert the water of the Bièvre river to Versailles. By damming the river and with a pumping system of five windmills, water was brought to the reservoirs located on the Satory Plateau. This system brought an additional 72,000 cubic metres water to the gardens on a daily basis.
Despite the water from the Bièvre, the gardens needed still more water, which necessitated more projects. In 1681, one of the most ambitious water projects conceived during the reign of Louis XIV was undertaken.
Owing to the proximity of the Seine to Versailles, a project was proposed to raise the water from the river to be delivered to Versailles. Seizing upon the success of a system devised in 1680 that raised water from the Seine to the gardens of Saint-Germain-en-Laye, construction of the Machine de Marly began the following year.
The Machine de Marly was designed to lift water from the Seine in three stages to the Aqueduc de Louveciennes some 100 metres above the level of the river. A series of huge waterwheels was constructed in the river, which raised the water via a system of 64 pumps to a reservoir 48 metres above the river. From this first reservoir, water was raised an additional 56 metres to a second reservoir by a system of 79 pumps. Finally, 78 additional pumps raised the water to the aqueduct, which carried the water to Versailles and Marly.
In 1685, the Machine de Marly came into full operation. However, owing to leakage in the conduits and breakdowns of the mechanism, the machine was only able to deliver 3,200 cubic metres of water per day - approximately one-half the expected output. The machine was nevertheless a must-see for visitors. Despite the fact that the gardens consumed more water per day than the entire city of Paris, the Machine de Marly remained in operation until 1817.
During Louis XIV's reign, water supply systems represented one-third of the building costs of Versailles. Even with the additional output from the Machine de Marly, fountains in the garden could only be run à l'ordinaire - which is to say at half-pressure.
With this measure of economy, the fountains still consumed 12,800 cubic metres of water per day, far above the capacity of the existing supplies. In the case of the Grandes Eaux - when all the fountains played to their maximum - more than 10,000 cubic metres of water was needed for one afternoon's display.
Accordingly, the Grandes Eaux were reserved for special occasions such as the Siamese Embassy visit of 1685–1686.
The Canal de l'Eure
One final attempt to solve water shortage problems was undertaken in 1685. In this year it was proposed to divert the water of the Eure river, located 160 km. south of Versailles and at a level 26 m above the garden reservoirs.
The project called not only for digging a canal and for the construction of an aqueduct, it also necessitated the construction of shipping channels and locks to supply the workers on the main canal.
Between 9,000 to 10,000 troops were pressed into service in 1685; the next year, more than 20,000 soldiers were engaged in construction. Between 1686 and 1689, when the Nine Years' War began, one-tenth of France's military was at work on the Canal de l'Eure project.
However with the outbreak of the war, the project was abandoned, never to be completed. Had the aqueduct been completed, some 50,000 cubic metres of water would have been sent to Versailles - more than enough to solve the water problem of the gardens.
Today, the museum of Versailles is still faced with water problems. During the Grandes Eaux, water is circulated by means of modern pumps from the Grand Canal to the reservoirs. Replenishment of the water lost due to evaporation comes from rainwater, which is collected in cisterns that are located throughout the gardens and diverted to the reservoirs and the Grand Canal.
Assiduous husbanding of this resource by museum officials prevents the need to tap into the supply of potable water of the city of Versailles.
The Versailles Gardens In Popular Culture
The creation of the gardens of Versailles is the context for the film 'A Little Chaos', directed by Alan Rickman and released in 2015, in which Kate Winslet plays a fictional landscape gardener and Rickman plays King Louis XIV.
The Postcard
A Phototype Series postcard that was published by Valentine & Sons Ltd. of Dundee and London. The card was posted in Southport using a 2½d. stamp on Friday the 19th. September 1952.
It was sent to:
Mrs. David,
95, Cathedral Road,
Cardiff.
The message on the divided back of the card was as follows:
"Southport, Friday,
Boots Cafe.
Thank you so much for
your letter & the ticket.
I shall do that tomorrow.
I have a case for E. Lewis
today.
Have a Liverpool job tonight
if I'm early enough, and two
Manchester ones yesterday -
another tomorrow.
Burton-on-Trent on Monday!
I do hope you had a good
day yesterday.
Much love to all.
E."
Southport
Southport is a large seaside town in Merseyside, England. At the 2001 census, it had a population of 90,336, making it the eleventh most populous settlement in North West England.
Southport lies on the Irish Sea coast and is fringed to the north by the Ribble estuary. The town is 16.7 miles (26.9 km) north of Liverpool and 14.8 miles (23.8 km) southwest of Preston.
The town was founded in 1792 when William Sutton, an innkeeper, built a bathing house at what is now the south end of Lord Street. At that time, the area, was sparsely populated and dominated by sand dunes.
At the turn of the 19th century, the area became popular with tourists due to the easy access from the nearby Leeds and Liverpool Canal. The rapid growth of Southport largely coincided with the Industrial Revolution and the Victorian era.
Town attractions include Southport Pier with its Southport Pier Tramway, the second longest seaside pleasure pier in the British Isles, and Lord Street, an elegant tree-lined shopping street, once home of Napoleon III of France.
Extensive sand dunes stretch for several miles from Woodvale to Birkdale, the south of the town. Local fauna include the Natterjack toad and the Sand lizard.
The town contains examples of Victorian architecture and town planning, on Lord Street and elsewhere. A particular feature of the town is the extensive tree planting. This was one of the conditions required by the Hesketh family when they made land available for development in the 19th century. Hesketh Park at the northern end of the town is named after them, having been built on land donated by Rev. Charles Hesketh. For interesting information about the park, please search for the tag 36HES75
Southport today is still one of the most popular seaside resorts in the UK. It hosts various events, including an annual air show on and over the beach, the largest independent flower show in the UK (in Victoria Park) and the British Musical Fireworks Championship. The town is at the centre of England's Golf Coast and has hosted the Open Championship at the Royal Birkdale Golf Club.
Southport Bathing Pool
A railway poster in 1932 suggested that travellers visit Southport – the ‘Paris of the North’ – in preference to any other European destination, for one reason only: its open-air swimming pool.
Set in Prince’s Park, next to the Marine Lake and close to the pier, this huge, oval-shaped pool also had a café with a glass-domed roof, where an orchestra would play every afternoon.
Crowds were entertained by swimming competitions and beauty contests.
As the railway poster declared:
"'Swimming Pool' is far too prosaic a name to describe
the magnificent temple that Southport has built to the
goddess of air and water and sunshine. Here the youth
and beauty of the town disport themselves in the most
elegant surroundings and men and maidens meet in
pleasant cafes surrounding the pool to talk about the
concert that is over, or the dance that is to come."
At the grand opening on the 17th. May 1928, Lord Derby cut the ribbon, and was presented with roses by local girls dressed in his racing colours of black and white.
A group of children then swam the length of the pool, followed by a parade of ladies wearing costumes made of silk and taffeta from a local store. Finally St Hilda’s Band entertained the crowd with a selection of popular songs.
A local paper commented:
"One was reminded forcibly of the Lido."
This was one of the first known uses of the term lido (after the shore in Venice) to describe a British open air pool.
The pool closed in 1989, and was demolished in 1993. The site made way for the Ocean Plaza development, a mammoth retail park.
Paul Webster
So what else happened on the day that the card was posted?
Well, the 19th. September 1952 marked the birth of Paul Webster. Paul is a British film producer.
Webster has worked both as an independent, and with several production companies. He worked with Working Title Films for five years, setting up their Los Angeles office. Between 1995 and 1997 he was Head of Production for Miramax Films.
In 1998 he joined Channel 4 to create Film Four. In 2004 he joined Kudos Film and Television, heading their film unit, Kudos Pictures.
Webster was executive producer, along with Robert Redford and Rebecca Yeldham, of the 2004 film The Motorcycle Diaries, directed by Walter Salles, based on Che Guevara's book of the same name.
Webster was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Picture for the 2007 film Atonement, for which he was also nominated for a BAFTA in the category of "Best British Film" and won a BAFTA for "Best Film".
He was previously nominated for a BAFTA and a Genie Award for Best Motion Picture for his work on the 2007 film Eastern Promises.
Webster produced the Disneynature documentary on flamingos, The Crimson Wing: Mystery of the Flamingos, released internationally in 2009.
The 1952 Farnborough Airshow Crash
13 days previously, on the 6th. September 1952, there was a major crash at the Farnborough Airshow in Hampshire following the in-flight breakup of a prototype de Havilland 110 jet fighter due to structural failure.
Both men on board the aircraft died, along with 29 spectators. 63 spectators were injured.
The jet disintegrated in mid-air during an aerobatic manoeuvre, causing the death of pilot John Derry and onboard flight test observer Anthony Richards. Debris from the aircraft fell onto a crowd of spectators.
The cause of the break-up was later determined to be structural failure due to a design flaw in the wing's leading edge. All DH 110's were initially grounded, but after design modification, the type entered service with the Royal Navy as the Sea Vixen.
Stricter safety procedures were subsequently enacted for UK air shows, and there were no further spectator fatalities until the 2015 Shoreham Airshow crash in which 11 people died.
-- The Crash
The planned demonstration of the DH 110 on that day was nearly cancelled when the aircraft at Farnborough, WG 240, an all-black night fighter prototype, became unserviceable.
It was de Havilland's second DH 110 prototype, and had been taken supersonic over the show on the opening day. Derry and Richards therefore collected WG 236, the first DH 110 prototype, from de Havilland's factory in Hatfield, Hertfordshire, and flew it to Farnborough, starting their display at around 3:45 p.m.
Following a supersonic dive and flypast from 40,000 feet (12,000 m) and during a left bank at about 830 km/h (520 mph) toward the air show's 120,000 spectators, the pilot pulled up into a climb.
In less than a second, the aircraft disintegrated: the outer sections of the wing, both engines and the cockpit separated from the airframe. The cockpit, with the two crew members still inside, fell right in front of the spectators nearest the runway, injuring several people.
The engines travelled much further on a ballistic trajectory; one engine crashed harmlessly, but the second one ploughed into Observation Hill, causing most of the fatalities.
The rest of the airframe fluttered down and crashed on the opposite side of the runway.
One eyewitness was Richard Gardner, then five years old. He recalled in adulthood:
"I'll never forget, it looked like confetti, looked like silver confetti. The remaining airframe floated down right in front of us. It just came down like a leaf.
And then the two engines, like two missiles, shot out of the airframe and hurtled in the direction of the airshow.
There was a sort of silence, then people, one or two people screamed but mostly it was just a sort of shock. You could hear some people sort of whimpering which was quite shocking."
Sixty-three years later, speaking on the BBC Today radio programme in the wake of the 2015 Shoreham Airshow crash, author Moyra Bremner recalled her own traumatic experience.
"A huge bang silenced the crowd and
was followed by "My God, look out,"
from the commentator."
Bremner, standing on the roof of her parents' car, realised that an engine was heading straight towards her. It passed a few feet over her head, a "massive shining cylinder", and then plunged into the crowd on the hill behind.
Following the accident, the air display programme continued once the debris was cleared from the runway, with Neville Duke exhibiting the prototype Hawker Hunter and taking it supersonic over the show later that day.
-- Commemoration
It took 69 years for the civilian casualties to be commemorated - a memorial consisting of 32 bricks inscribed with the name of the airshow and its 31 casualties was unveiled at the Farnborough Air Sciences Museum on the 6th. September 2021.
-- Aftermath of the Crash
Elizabeth II and Duncan Sandys, the Minister of Supply, both sent messages of condolence.
At the coroner's court, Group Captain Sidney Weetman Rochford Hughes, the commandant of the Experimental Flying Department, gave expert testimony, saying:
"From previous experience of Mr Derry's flying
demonstrations here on the four days of the
display, from the messages received from him
on the radio-telephone, and from investigation
of the wreckage, I am convinced that the pilot
had no warning whatsoever of the impending
failure of his aircraft."
The coroner's jury recorded that:
"Derry and Richards died accidentally
in the normal course of their duty.
The deaths of the spectators were
accidental.
No blame is attached to Mr. John
Derry".
-- Investigation Into the Crash
Author Brian Rivas, who co-wrote the 1982 book 'John Derry, The Story of Britain's First Supersonic Pilot' suggested that as Derry straightened up the aircraft and pulled into a climb, the outer part of the starboard wing failed and broke off, followed by the same section of the port wing.
The subsequent sudden change to the centre of gravity made the aircraft "rear up", tearing off the cockpit section, the two engines and the tailplane.
According to Rivas, subsequent investigations showed that the wing failed because it had only 64% of its intended strength.
More stringent airshow safety measures were subsequently introduced: jets were obliged to keep at least 230 m (750 ft) from crowds if flying straight and 450 m (1,480 ft) when performing manoeuvres, and always at an altitude of at least 150 m (490 ft).