tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-73270288854172403122024-03-18T00:07:55.705-07:00Peter G. Shilston's BlogHistory, political ideas, memories,
stories and poemsPeter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.comBlogger581125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-19157306182340654512024-03-05T01:06:00.000-08:002024-03-09T02:29:31.132-08:00England: Old St. Chad's; Shrewsbury<p> This church fell down at the end of the 18th century, leaving only a small side-chapel standing.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjCiXC7fVxtNF6-Dvhj4dDgWOC-ukQpFMxJb7IWrQyY9L3JAFCXv_jUqgVA5FkY17ij3MenwtrokqsN3leVxGdHGDdV7UF2lXje6u0nL5BC6RT9rbauv7E33Ydh_5ntAl4bbRqYQYcSWm26T85v6r_3ieI_InD5eOkmRRSbFfYw_2IR6y8aaBTk9TEHc4YT" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="800" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjCiXC7fVxtNF6-Dvhj4dDgWOC-ukQpFMxJb7IWrQyY9L3JAFCXv_jUqgVA5FkY17ij3MenwtrokqsN3leVxGdHGDdV7UF2lXje6u0nL5BC6RT9rbauv7E33Ydh_5ntAl4bbRqYQYcSWm26T85v6r_3ieI_InD5eOkmRRSbFfYw_2IR6y8aaBTk9TEHc4YT=w400-h300" width="400" /></a></div><br /><span style="text-align: left;"> Repairs to the fabric of this are currently under way, and this week I was able to persuade the workmen to let me in for a brief look round. Here are some phographs I was able to take. The font is ancient and very simple, and the heraldic hatchments are particularly fine, though some are ruined beyond repair.</span></div></div><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjyuqasa8b1oa_2tQ7vN_pSTBtS0kL25_AxIJbyf1UFKSBDtNUfzBd7eR6TB3YZpEnftuxSDVFzgenR7LdhmnxLMyvpQ-SIxsW1zPcOITARn3DqXkvbwJH1wBMmeKlA5reHOhA1cKganw8temrNyvN1AHQRdajEctuulfgpmrr8Y3fJ4xYHvFcce0-6cpYt" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="750" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjyuqasa8b1oa_2tQ7vN_pSTBtS0kL25_AxIJbyf1UFKSBDtNUfzBd7eR6TB3YZpEnftuxSDVFzgenR7LdhmnxLMyvpQ-SIxsW1zPcOITARn3DqXkvbwJH1wBMmeKlA5reHOhA1cKganw8temrNyvN1AHQRdajEctuulfgpmrr8Y3fJ4xYHvFcce0-6cpYt=w300-h400" width="300" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEizVvxLmScXqiwIy9CqawNKFEHX3Wy2Yo1rd-ORuOIQzcah3Zj0G_XfpmzowE4gIxgbl7JCOxBP7vQHDKyDbtLvBQGn46u_h3IGz2OaTW-79o77XwNoaF52ssLmDhAvAjkpNi5yQnPYoIhCHlDzqJY2n7W9fm_Y6RNu2I7GV_xwEr52BRxCwh6Nq70bfCfC" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="1334" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEizVvxLmScXqiwIy9CqawNKFEHX3Wy2Yo1rd-ORuOIQzcah3Zj0G_XfpmzowE4gIxgbl7JCOxBP7vQHDKyDbtLvBQGn46u_h3IGz2OaTW-79o77XwNoaF52ssLmDhAvAjkpNi5yQnPYoIhCHlDzqJY2n7W9fm_Y6RNu2I7GV_xwEr52BRxCwh6Nq70bfCfC=w400-h300" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEieKI5Kcrme8Vmh7x_8FwSd7X9NyJ3dTlXRW8SOg38CQh69PlqP-6CejhQnA48vemvHzF3rzzqPL3UCD3x1qwDSyUGNEMyuZcXJDyx5oCjshHMjJie6TJXw9svRBrhSgF1fxWlUr3NXPPEN1ycRXJJ3z5zXvkvbpmW1yixiXf1dRXwrttfRMGemCO6wbWQX" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="1334" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEieKI5Kcrme8Vmh7x_8FwSd7X9NyJ3dTlXRW8SOg38CQh69PlqP-6CejhQnA48vemvHzF3rzzqPL3UCD3x1qwDSyUGNEMyuZcXJDyx5oCjshHMjJie6TJXw9svRBrhSgF1fxWlUr3NXPPEN1ycRXJJ3z5zXvkvbpmW1yixiXf1dRXwrttfRMGemCO6wbWQX=w400-h300" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgpdjPS1PQIJwg7r3MMm6Gn7c6IB_2w6043PJqbBI6QzKP-G034g0LlXFcZd_8Q7ZzjODAflx4sdj8UKguHd_eT2yDQWOytt7qY_eeH2W0b97wjAcUJhtByGxCexhtYVaDgii9dulEC2RTaBb9nN5wHMmXMDbROqFHOH9yADytT_rPHii6lSJiNpxD3ftoA" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="750" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgpdjPS1PQIJwg7r3MMm6Gn7c6IB_2w6043PJqbBI6QzKP-G034g0LlXFcZd_8Q7ZzjODAflx4sdj8UKguHd_eT2yDQWOytt7qY_eeH2W0b97wjAcUJhtByGxCexhtYVaDgii9dulEC2RTaBb9nN5wHMmXMDbROqFHOH9yADytT_rPHii6lSJiNpxD3ftoA=w300-h400" width="300" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjMBZCqGDDSglTFDRbENS_iYSSU5jGLm4nlYm_Lql9G5vKFnP3FOcsBtlnRNq_PmC7ZpLgZWP5QYcKWwCSphWIHsry3qrQVH-HfuVpw31xgdfZq6YXJKruqDnP0B9_nOKPk4JH4xHU3AWLy4ElR3D6FJ61ChtGqOsoWdQtE-NiwcTcyYamfiE0IAJq9j_oM" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="750" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjMBZCqGDDSglTFDRbENS_iYSSU5jGLm4nlYm_Lql9G5vKFnP3FOcsBtlnRNq_PmC7ZpLgZWP5QYcKWwCSphWIHsry3qrQVH-HfuVpw31xgdfZq6YXJKruqDnP0B9_nOKPk4JH4xHU3AWLy4ElR3D6FJ61ChtGqOsoWdQtE-NiwcTcyYamfiE0IAJq9j_oM=w300-h400" width="300" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgUFVLMPY-PBzzn1HkuzTVUCaytshXuPCJCniJuenRLtW9UMZN69ZALVaddE9IHIJ4RhgTokpzf_Im4onSBs_l7zMV_6aprAyu8leAN3cYfIn3Yz873koodrwt4hQUBDzl6weLRO7bojILQsQAim80hUckHnXOBIjz-aQIgxEbkMZSIZ4y8Yu-4eQKX-HqQ" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="750" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgUFVLMPY-PBzzn1HkuzTVUCaytshXuPCJCniJuenRLtW9UMZN69ZALVaddE9IHIJ4RhgTokpzf_Im4onSBs_l7zMV_6aprAyu8leAN3cYfIn3Yz873koodrwt4hQUBDzl6weLRO7bojILQsQAim80hUckHnXOBIjz-aQIgxEbkMZSIZ4y8Yu-4eQKX-HqQ=w300-h400" width="300" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgWUujtAehKqgAXpdsKsUD-9NgFCI4E3GyyUOg1PDuyvXqTsra0TKRmGG8LjCf6Xjf_zsZ1A8O9AyE8Y7BjZKYu2X_RCm1pCYdFX7fJw-3Kc326Xr0hyGijG-yd8b9mNggtlllqIlszm44fyFCfjKy8kGdsHk9P-kJGuOseVHlWbD3M60_6YXrfnRKaDb0f" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="750" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgWUujtAehKqgAXpdsKsUD-9NgFCI4E3GyyUOg1PDuyvXqTsra0TKRmGG8LjCf6Xjf_zsZ1A8O9AyE8Y7BjZKYu2X_RCm1pCYdFX7fJw-3Kc326Xr0hyGijG-yd8b9mNggtlllqIlszm44fyFCfjKy8kGdsHk9P-kJGuOseVHlWbD3M60_6YXrfnRKaDb0f=w300-h400" width="300" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj8P3Lh3jyzlrkzGwIdwtRz4Msw0NK0ZKiD2XEp2U9Bbly0BVlIlOw_XBACwujAjoRbQOot87kQaRs04Y5BLyXF1__IWFUcTGyJHbJ7yz9quipo1yWA_pg12LDaFd9SsiSs6mRWHuk0VbBx7yx9wTrIhwb5oFVldHJ0L3z6CdXUr8f2cPPpyXXyEgi5p6rG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="750" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj8P3Lh3jyzlrkzGwIdwtRz4Msw0NK0ZKiD2XEp2U9Bbly0BVlIlOw_XBACwujAjoRbQOot87kQaRs04Y5BLyXF1__IWFUcTGyJHbJ7yz9quipo1yWA_pg12LDaFd9SsiSs6mRWHuk0VbBx7yx9wTrIhwb5oFVldHJ0L3z6CdXUr8f2cPPpyXXyEgi5p6rG=w300-h400" width="300" /></a></div><br /><p>Many of these hatchments feature a raven, or crow, which was the coat of arms of the Corbet family, who were powerful in north Shropshire. Since the name for this bird in old English or Scots was a "corbie", this is an example of a "canting" coat of arms, which make a pun on the family's name.</p><p>Fortunately, the finest work at old St Chad's was removed in 1788, before the building collapsed, and installed at the nearby church of St. Mary the Virgin. This is the great mid-14th century Jesse window.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlxiKUVojA_hTsMnB4l7xWZJoq_075U0H7TsxYVYD6WuTNKmaBynd8Y0BA61EqGtT5u_kaIE5sNgTHhBbyT0bcoELXy6tYyylf57pX5XZv73upJk6ItdZec8CbXQuMYseVhCkSM00oro_QsuYMHIF3npqWcmJOzkcrPe4kdscqQiMPOBOrQ_DlqBt34Gje/s3872/GSC_0955.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3872" data-original-width="2592" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlxiKUVojA_hTsMnB4l7xWZJoq_075U0H7TsxYVYD6WuTNKmaBynd8Y0BA61EqGtT5u_kaIE5sNgTHhBbyT0bcoELXy6tYyylf57pX5XZv73upJk6ItdZec8CbXQuMYseVhCkSM00oro_QsuYMHIF3npqWcmJOzkcrPe4kdscqQiMPOBOrQ_DlqBt34Gje/w429-h640/GSC_0955.JPG" width="429" /></a></div><br /><p>The architect George Stewart was commissioned to build a replacement church (see an earlier post)</p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-30909536970874764722024-02-26T01:31:00.000-08:002024-02-26T01:31:17.666-08:00Spring in Clive churchyard<p> </p><p>Spring in Clive churchyard</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgKKa84IKLJfAEuoM80K9UEuYIHVbyQI1JI-oQmqjQPa2wsmbMSjS6jFmPWLPOc7e_Zd-anof4ZUqoXQu93nXD7GTVEZzaYsIGMILfE02HmgCYm_fgpXJmmu_LNRQYMIwcp7Lx9kQmrcoxTfCQ555wYHMWjDMhc3PTHVy0JQNhx5UkFJVC4G-223r-c2SiB" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="1334" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgKKa84IKLJfAEuoM80K9UEuYIHVbyQI1JI-oQmqjQPa2wsmbMSjS6jFmPWLPOc7e_Zd-anof4ZUqoXQu93nXD7GTVEZzaYsIGMILfE02HmgCYm_fgpXJmmu_LNRQYMIwcp7Lx9kQmrcoxTfCQ555wYHMWjDMhc3PTHVy0JQNhx5UkFJVC4G-223r-c2SiB=w400-h300" width="400" /></a></div><br /><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiBfWiI5601K0H4MVotVd8852BDSKKqOHLgVgObbOIwmIfwvaxvLutHUCirQjga9pLVHQUSew8sknJzZbKGQsjQ6rjJxm-SPqOufWH7MbFFXUm23vGLIgvgnHU3M_6N46o_70jlY6WVpCuzed7FuhoYupBe3d4bxxPhz2v98ktWrLxGfmnx4mb692nHpNrc" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="1334" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiBfWiI5601K0H4MVotVd8852BDSKKqOHLgVgObbOIwmIfwvaxvLutHUCirQjga9pLVHQUSew8sknJzZbKGQsjQ6rjJxm-SPqOufWH7MbFFXUm23vGLIgvgnHU3M_6N46o_70jlY6WVpCuzed7FuhoYupBe3d4bxxPhz2v98ktWrLxGfmnx4mb692nHpNrc=w400-h300" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjGEm9DXgvI1TJuok3mfa0lSzjvqXQvFvrnMZQiNJ5ggX2LQ5ItTezHhtKnomD_M-RWTD0xYRWE9-JQrSVHvLiAphUBKdy2-SPhxtewtNBqBPaEAyR-kgF0tqYkSVyTc924-AtGttSseWOzfPA2E0IecG6qUDpDW_wuNB3dy-AN1hOSKeqHfcY5u3-C09fC" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="1334" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjGEm9DXgvI1TJuok3mfa0lSzjvqXQvFvrnMZQiNJ5ggX2LQ5ItTezHhtKnomD_M-RWTD0xYRWE9-JQrSVHvLiAphUBKdy2-SPhxtewtNBqBPaEAyR-kgF0tqYkSVyTc924-AtGttSseWOzfPA2E0IecG6qUDpDW_wuNB3dy-AN1hOSKeqHfcY5u3-C09fC=w400-h300" width="400" /></a></div><br /><br /><p></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-54544954130841723712024-02-07T23:13:00.000-08:002024-02-07T23:15:15.245-08:00Lord Staines fights a duel<p>(This is an episode from my online historical novel, "The memoirs of Charles Huntingdon", set in Britain in the 1760s. The complete novel can be found by following the link to the right, through "view my complete profile"</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One day that spring I was seated at a table in Brown’s club when Staines entered in a state of great agitation. He brandished a paper at me, and asked me whether I had read it. He was in such a fury I had never seen in him before, so that his hands shook as I took it from him.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I found that it contained a scandalous attack on him, or rather on a certain L**d S*****s, who was further described as “the catamite of L**d G****e S*******e”, “the coward of Minden”. Although the names were disguised in this manner, anyone who was acquainted with public affairs could have no doubt as to whom was meant. I remembered what Lord Staines had told me, at our very first meeting, about the unfortunate events at Minden, in consequence of which Lord George Sackville had been publicly disgraced and Staines had resigned his commission. So much had befallen me since that it all seemed a very long time ago.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I asked if he knew who had written it. He told me that it was anonymous, but he was certain that the author was Mr John Wilkes, whose name he pronounced with great anger. “He libels anyone who dares attack Pitt, and he knows I am for a swift conclusion to the war. Scoundrel!” he added.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I knew Wilkes as the silent Member of Parliament for Aylesbury, though everyone had heard rumours that he frequented a notorious assembly known as the Hellfire Club.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I told Lord Staines that such low degraded stuff was beneath his attention, and best ignored; and that I was sure that his father would have given the same advice. But he told me that he had approached Wilkes, demanding an apology for this insult to his honour; and, not having received a satisfactory reply, he had issued a challenge to a duel. Staines requested me to be his second. I was reluctant to accede to this, but nothing I could say deterred him.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Accordingly, soon after sunrise a few days later we took a coach out to Putney Heath. It was a bright morning, but cold. Dew lay heavy on the grass, and glittered on cobwebs on the bushes. There was no-one in sight except our opponent and his second, and another man I did not know. I was told his name was Doctor Blake, who was there in the event of any serious injury.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It was my first sight of Mr Wilkes, who was shortly to become a most celebrated person; loved by some but hated by others. He was well dressed and slender of build, but his face was disfigured by the most violent squint, which caused his eyes to point in clean different directions. I wondered how, with this handicap, he could ever aim a pistol with any accuracy. He talked merrily, and appeared entirely unperturbed by the peril of his situation. His second was a large, burly fellow; and I was astonished to discover that under his cloak he wore a clergyman’s gown. I was informed that this was the Reverend Charles Churchill, the popular poet. Hogarth once depicted him as a bear, clutching a foaming pot of beer and an immense club, which I thought very apt.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Doctor Blake then asked whether the two gentlemen were determined to proceed with the duel. Lord Staines replied, with no little heat, that his honour had been most grossly traduced, and that nothing but the most profuse and abject apology would satisfy him. He kept muttering violent epithets under his breath, whereas Mr Wilkes appeared to make light of the whole matter. He said that Lord Staines had produced no evidence that he, Wilkes, was the author of the offending article, but having read it, his opinion was that it contained more than a grain of truth; and, furthermore, since Lord Staines had seen fit publicly to dub him a liar and a scoundrel, he was the one entitled to an apology. These words angered Lord Staines even more, which was undoubtedly Wilkes’s intention.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A case was produced and opened, containing a brace of very fine silver-mounted pistols. Churchill and I checked that they were properly loaded. I attempted to hold my hands steady: it was the first time I had ever witnessed a duel and I was alarmed; for if someone was killed, might I be held to be an accessory to murder? <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Lord Staines and Mr Wilkes walked twelve paces apart, then turned and presented their pistols. Lord Staines fired first, and grazed his opponent’s coat, but did no further harm. Mr Wilkes then raised his pistol and aimed it steadily at Staines’s breast, for what seemed like an age. Staines looked pale in the face, but did not flinch. Suddenly Wilkes laughed, lowered his pistol and deliberately fired at the ground, so that his bullet skipped across the earth some distance from Lord Staines’s feet. He then advanced towards his opponent with his hand extended.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“Sir,” he said, “You have shown yourself to be a gentleman of courage, as befits an officer of the crown. I regret that you might feel I have offended you, and would be honoured if I might now be considered your friend.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Staines, however, was by no means reconciled. He said this was no kind of apology, refused to take Wilkes’s proffered hand and ordered the pistols to be reloaded for a second firing. Mr Churchill now announced that, in his decided opinion, sufficient satisfaction had been given and that the business had been ended with perfect honour to both parties. I agreed with this, and so did Doctor Blake; but Lord Staines, ignoring Wilkes, departed forthwith, without giving me a glance. While I admired my friend’s courage, I could only be disappointed by his surly conduct afterwards.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Doctor Blake did not stay long, but I remained at the tavern with Wilkes and Churchill for the remainder of the morning. Wilkes, aware of how alarmed I had been, told me that it was rare for duels these days to lead to any bloodshed. I asked him how the challenge to the duel had come about. He told me:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“Lord Staines burst into my room in an agony of passion, brandishing the paper and demanding to know whether or not I was the author. I said that I was a free and independent English gentleman and that I refused to be catechised in this fashion. He then produced a brace of pistols and demanded immediate satisfaction. Finally, he calmed to the extent of agreeing to postpone the duel until three days later, with the result that you know.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He recounted how he had recently fought a duel with Lord Talbot, who, like Staines, had felt that he had been insulted.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“We met at Bagshot. We both fired, but happily there was no shedding of blood, for neither took effect. I walked up immediately to Lord Talbot and said that I regretted that I had offended him. His lordship paid me the highest compliments on my courage, said he would declare everywhere that I was a noble fellow, and desired that we should now be good friends and retire to the inn to drink a bottle of claret together, which we did with great good humour. That is how duels should end. It is a pity that your young friend could not show the same magnanimous spirit.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I found Mr Wilkes the most engaging of companions. For his part, on discovering that I was new to political life, he suggested that I might enjoy reading a certain weekly paper known as the “North Briton”. I promised to look for it, and we shook hands and parted.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 17.12px;"><o:p><span style="font-size: 16pt;"> </span></o:p></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; font-size: 16pt; text-align: center;"><span style="line-height: 22.8267px;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjt0zl3ZOuFUp18Aika2gcw28ZhitmCrcM2lQzDrJZagmpf4pweRpN6TuMV65flVaikDFDdc6P0v41TqY_Eh-PQPqjFZ6tlyrw2tginQhnilsIuBWd_5NbEHdYGApYZ3nfMDMgHh_paEy5p-Lrul-y_Y4hwU4ZMPBcxN-st4TkQM9xnT54i6uzl--ok" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="260" data-original-width="170" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjt0zl3ZOuFUp18Aika2gcw28ZhitmCrcM2lQzDrJZagmpf4pweRpN6TuMV65flVaikDFDdc6P0v41TqY_Eh-PQPqjFZ6tlyrw2tginQhnilsIuBWd_5NbEHdYGApYZ3nfMDMgHh_paEy5p-Lrul-y_Y4hwU4ZMPBcxN-st4TkQM9xnT54i6uzl--ok=w262-h400" width="262" /></a></span></div><span style="line-height: 17.12px;"><span style="font-size: 16pt;"> </span>(John Wilkes, by Hogarth)</span><p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-80365775535433528612024-02-01T01:37:00.000-08:002024-02-01T01:37:29.541-08:00Donald Trump and James Bond <p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 107%;">Wouldn’t
Donald Trump make a splendid James Bond villain, on the lines of Goldfinger or
Blofeld? He not only looks the part, but talks and acts it as well!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 107%;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 107%;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEja1JNvXksqxgJ7n1dZGjG_qG1k6RHA3GxH6xRm9fkSgh7j3kBvrXyrcID9FfdqKhuWx726rpvp-Q9zoCczNFVamese7tMElsu9h5KUBC-I0x1ZZVoAtGmBhquiqU6Ik466GIEoHMWm77OMNG8kUAuYNZZkYe0qj0BPh3e7QvRqjnH8TYyitlunWAixqDz-" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="3426" data-original-width="5000" height="274" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEja1JNvXksqxgJ7n1dZGjG_qG1k6RHA3GxH6xRm9fkSgh7j3kBvrXyrcID9FfdqKhuWx726rpvp-Q9zoCczNFVamese7tMElsu9h5KUBC-I0x1ZZVoAtGmBhquiqU6Ik466GIEoHMWm77OMNG8kUAuYNZZkYe0qj0BPh3e7QvRqjnH8TYyitlunWAixqDz-=w400-h274" width="400" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /><span style="font-size: 16pt;">But why is he going to such lengths to
undermine trust in the American political and judicial systems? Is it merely to
satisfy his personal ambitions? Or is some shadowy organisation, based abroad,
behind it? When James Bond is sent to investigate, he finds himself in the
greatest peril he has yet faced …..</span></span><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><br /><p></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-87715406388501003062024-01-14T23:44:00.000-08:002024-01-30T03:43:13.626-08:00The mystery of the headless skeleton<p><span style="font-size: medium;">There is a strange link between this mid-Victorian window and the 13th- century tomb of Simon de Leybourne, which are both to be found in the Trinity Chapel of the church of St. Mary the Virgin in Shrewsbury.</span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEja5eeqG88riJyC8wlwQ9qlalczgFD01idNXZUcgOBLlGlKLeXevc1fAJYH0jYfGkERPxUUlvkJiPDZN_XzE_J0jW-2mrZ128BjfNQT_XSmZWeLlFh3ZUOP3Y9kEMfL7uiOM7JhbbgsCVIWzN8WrkyxbaNKcgNMWmPZebKwTJIgyHybXAjHFGEQKnGKFSCp/s4032/PXL_20231221_125400848.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><img border="0" data-original-height="4032" data-original-width="3024" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEja5eeqG88riJyC8wlwQ9qlalczgFD01idNXZUcgOBLlGlKLeXevc1fAJYH0jYfGkERPxUUlvkJiPDZN_XzE_J0jW-2mrZ128BjfNQT_XSmZWeLlFh3ZUOP3Y9kEMfL7uiOM7JhbbgsCVIWzN8WrkyxbaNKcgNMWmPZebKwTJIgyHybXAjHFGEQKnGKFSCp/w480-h640/PXL_20231221_125400848.jpg" width="480" /></span></a></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEi3f3MBaruFHPFhDUzYcE-M-ZmftW1G9a5IZjeEbMCIcYmEWhzQEfIIEyBK6XW-n3j4GuYTEr0GdX-VXH5VxwI1LL_k0qwhadO9ccCwCGIVYvVjdIPl_t0YjYf7LcVUP-ZVD2r5PM1i5rZwd20D3RmAZojgzKXb8iRcwAGZupP-epaNJZ9UbkCjxy2PeoUm" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEi3f3MBaruFHPFhDUzYcE-M-ZmftW1G9a5IZjeEbMCIcYmEWhzQEfIIEyBK6XW-n3j4GuYTEr0GdX-VXH5VxwI1LL_k0qwhadO9ccCwCGIVYvVjdIPl_t0YjYf7LcVUP-ZVD2r5PM1i5rZwd20D3RmAZojgzKXb8iRcwAGZupP-epaNJZ9UbkCjxy2PeoUm=w400-h300" width="400" /></a></div><br /><br /></span><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The king depicted on the window is Alfred the Great with his laws, but the shield above him, the blue lion on gold, is the coat of arms of Thomas Percy, Earl of Worcester. Why is it there?</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> Worcester was the uncle of Henry Percy, "Harry Hotspur", who led the rebel army at the battle of Shrewsbury in 1403. Hotspur was killed and afterwards Worcester was beheaded in the centre of Shrewsbury. His head would have been taken to London to be publicly displayed, but what happened to his body? </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> When floor tiles were laid in the chapel in the 19th century, a number of skeletons were found, one of which was wrapped in leather to preserve it, and had no head. Was the headless person the Earl of Worcester? The legend was that, after Worcester's execution, his supporters secretly removed his body and brought it to the church, where they forced open the Leybourne tomb and deposited it there. This story is retold in the historical novel "A bloody field by Shrewsbury" by Edith Pargeter (who is also known as Ellis Peters). I'm not sure which came first: the legend or the discovery of the headless skeleton.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Nowadays it's not generally believed that the Earl of Worcester was buried here, but the window serves to perpetuate the legend.</span></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-22263743750938279902023-12-22T00:25:00.000-08:002023-12-22T00:25:25.951-08:00Christmas: the three kings<p> <span style="font-size: medium;">This mid-19th century window, in the church of St. Mary the Virgin in Shrewsbury, is a copy of a painting by the Spanish artist Murillo, depicting the adoration of the Kings.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHYHha4kVXFRTGuEmVUCWSdsbDqscW6gLXolbF26oglDQb1JMyqxed-vUJsb07uS_hqPZxcEW4b8PBtcoqvDab56SkqkGSw4kIeSmHQnajTtaOB2yM6lvd6I-M3WJ2Xc_lipUJaZ1gvgmo_JxOzGBcGmXLoOJlCLjMklyxe2iyWYdMWDNF8I0UnT6jB_PZ/s4032/PXL_20231206_130740897.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="4032" data-original-width="3024" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHYHha4kVXFRTGuEmVUCWSdsbDqscW6gLXolbF26oglDQb1JMyqxed-vUJsb07uS_hqPZxcEW4b8PBtcoqvDab56SkqkGSw4kIeSmHQnajTtaOB2yM6lvd6I-M3WJ2Xc_lipUJaZ1gvgmo_JxOzGBcGmXLoOJlCLjMklyxe2iyWYdMWDNF8I0UnT6jB_PZ/w300-h400/PXL_20231206_130740897.jpg" width="300" /></a></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p>St. Matthew, who tells the story, only mentions "wise nen from the East", and it is only the fact that that they give three gifts suggests that they were three in number. But over the centuries various traditions grew up: that they were Kings, then they were given names, and then that one was a European, one was a Syrian and one was an African, to symbolise the three continents bowing down before the baby Jesus. Note that the African King, on the right, is dressed every bit of gorgeously as the others! And none of this has any basis in the Bible!</span><p></p><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-68467332189332189462023-12-11T08:45:00.000-08:002023-12-11T08:45:49.243-08:00Photocartoon<p> <span style="font-size: medium;">Margaret Dumont: "I believe Donald Trump was sent by God."</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Groucho Marx: "Why? Had he run out of locusts?"</span></p><p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjObxdWi9AfFL3u1-wrm0sNuLNnvweP4iRiRRw23oXtmhmQlWjQvRre2zZhs-dG4HQ3O_qc6rl_vcvyilWY9v409ENssU8MtAg8Gn-q5tq6rSbGDAqzYgbSB3uWaRRAqq_AZwJdAwxTPlzUeLZRjUyUeoLFDBIWzmE0mZaCnbgi1LRWtdj23Yw7cocrv84g" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="193" data-original-width="262" height="236" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjObxdWi9AfFL3u1-wrm0sNuLNnvweP4iRiRRw23oXtmhmQlWjQvRre2zZhs-dG4HQ3O_qc6rl_vcvyilWY9v409ENssU8MtAg8Gn-q5tq6rSbGDAqzYgbSB3uWaRRAqq_AZwJdAwxTPlzUeLZRjUyUeoLFDBIWzmE0mZaCnbgi1LRWtdj23Yw7cocrv84g" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-56773712086491004922023-12-01T03:01:00.000-08:002024-03-18T00:07:24.505-07:00Musings: Further thoughts on Terrorism<p> (Some thoughts evoked by recent events in Irael and Gaza)</p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: #222222; font-size: medium; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Terrorism/
terrorist is a “hiss-word”: intended less to convey information than to provoke
an audience reaction. A terrorist is, by definition, a bad guy. Conversely, no
good guy can be a terrorist, even though his actions might be considered to be
similar.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: #222222; font-size: medium; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">What is the difference between a terrorist and a
freedom-fighter? The cynical answer is that “it depends where you’re standing”:
one man’s terrorist being another man’s freedom fighter. Nevertheless, it
should be possible to draw some distinction.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: #222222; font-size: medium; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">Terrorism always has some underlying political
motive. Thus, ordinary gangland killings and bombings are not considered
terroristic, but could be if there was some underlying ethnic or religious
conflict<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: #222222; font-size: medium; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">One might have thought that there is always a natural right to defend your home against a foreign invader, but in military law this is not the case. It is a longstanding principle of war that, whereas
enemy uniformed soldiers are entitled to be treated justly, partisans,
guerrilla fighters and civilians in arms can simply be killed out of hand. They
are, in fact, always treated as terrorists. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: #222222; font-size: medium; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">It is straightforward to designate certain actions
as terrorism (for instance, “9-11” in New York in 2001), but more difficult to
define terrorism as such. Are all political assassinations necessarily terroristic? Most of us would agree that the killing of the Nazi leader Heydrich in Prague in 1942 was justifiable and not terroristic: but should it be viewed differently if numbers of civilian bystanders were killed in the operation?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: #222222; font-size: medium; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">Can governments be guilty of terrorism. such as the
mass bombing of cities? Possible examples might be Dresden or Hiroshima in 1945, or indeed Gaza? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: #222222; font-size: medium; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">What should be the best response by a government
whose citizens have suffered a terrorist attack? Might it only serve to make
things worse? In the instances of 9-11 and October’s events in Israel, the
governments concerned understandably felt they had to do SOMETHING: hence the
Afghan war and current events in Gaza. The campaigns in Afghanistan and then Iraq were militarily successful in the short term, but not at all useful in the eventual results.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>By contrast, Mrs Thatcher’s government did NOT
react violently to the I.R.A.’s Brighton bomb in 1984, which almost succeeded in killing the entire Cabinet. Why did
she behave with such caution? Was that in fact the best response, leading eventually to the Northern Ireland peace process?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: #222222; font-size: medium; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">The most spectacular example of an understandable
reaction going horribly wrong is, of course, the response of the Austrian
government to the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by Serbian-backed
terrorists (freedom fighters?) at Sarajevo in 1914! <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: #222222; font-size: medium; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">Postscript: “Situationism”is a term stemming from events in France and elsewhere around
1968. This involves taking actions so violent that the state responds with
extreme violence of its own, which falls mostly upon the local population
rather than the perpetrators. This has the effect of discrediting the
moderates, forcing everyone to take sides, and turning opinion against the
government. Should the Hamas gunmen of October be regarded as
situationists?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></p><p></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-33730492450679604962023-11-03T00:55:00.004-07:002023-11-03T09:49:19.130-07:00My novel<p> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 107%;">My online historical novel has finally been finished, after 37
weekly chapters! It can be read in its entirety at </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 107%;">pgvshil.blogspot.com<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 107%;">or by following the link on the right, through "View my complete profile" to "The Memoirs of Charles Huntingdon"</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Any comments would be welcome!<o:p></o:p></span></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-51172042226677000692023-10-26T12:01:00.000-07:002023-10-26T12:01:02.172-07:00England: The Russell-Cotes museum; Bournemouth<p>Merton Russell-Cotes (1835-1921) was a rich and successful hotelier. In 1876 he and his wife Annie moved to Bournemouth, the seaside resort on the Dorset coast, and developed the Royal Bath Hotel as the most luxurious hotel in the town. As well as their business work and their charitable and political activities (he served as Mayor of Bournemouth in 1894-5, and was knighted in 1909), the couple were indefaticable travellers, voyaging all over the world, collecting wherever they went; being particularly keen on Oriental and Islamic art and artifacts. </p><p> In 1896 Russell-Cotes commissioned a local architect, John Frederick Fogarty, to design them a new house, to be named East Cliff Hall, in a position high above the beach with a garden in front and large windows and balconies opening to a beautiful view westwards to Poole Bay. Special fireplaces, stained glass and light fittings were ordered, but the house was also to have the most up-to-date electricity, plumbing and central heating, plus a telephone. The house was completed in 1901, but in 1916-19 new galleries were added to house the family's burgeoning art collection.</p><p> They had always intended to open their house to public view, and after their deaths it was established in 1922 as the Russell-Cotes Art Gallery and Museum. </p><p> This is the house and its view today.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGz0I3Zocj34IC0vRLin8SQfl7qtNUl088CyJ2FUjoMTJhsPDuZsYm79tyzLg8BAm_ovN3tK7CVyccq2GlEHiyGipdII6xT0fXLGc0Piconic5YhH77L60UCkzS8Sw_n7mpL_E-kRzQ2SQoQFS59Yc5IeVYugXigH942E04oI5OHXu2bAkUHIskBsy00wd/s3872/JSC_0498.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGz0I3Zocj34IC0vRLin8SQfl7qtNUl088CyJ2FUjoMTJhsPDuZsYm79tyzLg8BAm_ovN3tK7CVyccq2GlEHiyGipdII6xT0fXLGc0Piconic5YhH77L60UCkzS8Sw_n7mpL_E-kRzQ2SQoQFS59Yc5IeVYugXigH942E04oI5OHXu2bAkUHIskBsy00wd/w400-h268/JSC_0498.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5QOBcHq1Nj0AE4AuEX5dL7xtDIBQz73iiGCfIRyPO0RvVqQnnMsrt8Ls8H5_QTn7OhvsmyI-osBGuOrSxV2QsYJJnEi-eCFposyOUXMsWkkjuqc6y-AA6uvR6YT2Pu64DWU1L5vfi_p5Lk-QdkXmCaFtnP2Uq5FVjzugCB29CEgAJyVlKRW6AMJu21ysT/s3872/JSC_0506.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5QOBcHq1Nj0AE4AuEX5dL7xtDIBQz73iiGCfIRyPO0RvVqQnnMsrt8Ls8H5_QTn7OhvsmyI-osBGuOrSxV2QsYJJnEi-eCFposyOUXMsWkkjuqc6y-AA6uvR6YT2Pu64DWU1L5vfi_p5Lk-QdkXmCaFtnP2Uq5FVjzugCB29CEgAJyVlKRW6AMJu21ysT/w400-h268/JSC_0506.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br /><p>This can hardly be bettered, but the contents of the house, while undoubtedly splendidly opulent, verge on the surreal, for they embody everything that the next generation of artists and designers were in revolt against. Walls are heavily panelled, every surface and niche is full of objects or pictures,</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWf0tPaFZdHbFW2Xxjz6n05404V6DQkvAGZnBIsNJFTz0JJMfIUv2Cm_LqOW_Sur-teIEvd7Jjm_7Enyz8yWATcONVtcAlGsBGKheeviR5BsPnaMIF9bjeYO87sIOoYYYR5IaWur2sHZkQvqUzB0GPn1hFbeLNMnav3EF_zB2qsdZajm3wK7DV3SJerJEK/s4032/PXL_20230914_093858704.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWf0tPaFZdHbFW2Xxjz6n05404V6DQkvAGZnBIsNJFTz0JJMfIUv2Cm_LqOW_Sur-teIEvd7Jjm_7Enyz8yWATcONVtcAlGsBGKheeviR5BsPnaMIF9bjeYO87sIOoYYYR5IaWur2sHZkQvqUzB0GPn1hFbeLNMnav3EF_zB2qsdZajm3wK7DV3SJerJEK/w400-h300/PXL_20230914_093858704.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhK-WK8WI-5YxmZ7bZfyX-HgY1VGlkDWmVaszNrxe70cTlyNV4d7XsvsGWXeeqXrxO3UR_w10xq3RZgAI8D9O66y8qm-EyvRESbwYtA0m_7k1kvEFpH1lva-KQhuFTDNXCp_97PpAZTbq_h-hi_vwQzHtEABO0ehrplXj7179VDnUARsp-OdwW0Qne0_mHg/s4032/PXL_20230914_093512866.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhK-WK8WI-5YxmZ7bZfyX-HgY1VGlkDWmVaszNrxe70cTlyNV4d7XsvsGWXeeqXrxO3UR_w10xq3RZgAI8D9O66y8qm-EyvRESbwYtA0m_7k1kvEFpH1lva-KQhuFTDNXCp_97PpAZTbq_h-hi_vwQzHtEABO0ehrplXj7179VDnUARsp-OdwW0Qne0_mHg/w400-h300/PXL_20230914_093512866.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br /><p>and what is one to make of the pictures, such as this enormous late-Victorian potrayal of nudes entirely devoid of any erotic appeal, </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhO1UpOOz60eICbjt5qYA2yi4KHyGFm_nmjx_-FJ0uV9EJzouqFcKAXYnITbztVM92-MWRgE77iCqsrdZrtAn4o7TGbnSO0cJP-9vU1JxHB0izdkjJHmxQ7GpkwOedPNb8Yn4vXRp-USCdQnoGDrWF96hpY0SDybX_QdojMkQkRwsMMozLIExTkQ_lo7rKb/s4032/PXL_20230914_092610198.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhO1UpOOz60eICbjt5qYA2yi4KHyGFm_nmjx_-FJ0uV9EJzouqFcKAXYnITbztVM92-MWRgE77iCqsrdZrtAn4o7TGbnSO0cJP-9vU1JxHB0izdkjJHmxQ7GpkwOedPNb8Yn4vXRp-USCdQnoGDrWF96hpY0SDybX_QdojMkQkRwsMMozLIExTkQ_lo7rKb/w400-h300/PXL_20230914_092610198.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br /><p>or of religious scenes, such as this one by Edwin Longsden Lang of the Holy Family arriving in Egypt (approximately 18 feet by 6, in a style that, fifty years later and in another country, would be termed "Socialist realism"?</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjoBn3zc-465plOSccB_mnpmHIfjm_31I0yQ_7Dk_tjTwagHauZX8pwkemwXXM8ZcZls0_oiYBDvLXR3eLVjmtd-kL1skjVx1eMi1MUnK_ujQMSYuzBm39bNGbjwE6yeGp27c_UiNZ5iyCUkLznQmpgr6tJEnh5vY9x1rfflPgcrMsaWPGSMCQwL1PyWgRB/s4032/PXL_20230914_092714665.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjoBn3zc-465plOSccB_mnpmHIfjm_31I0yQ_7Dk_tjTwagHauZX8pwkemwXXM8ZcZls0_oiYBDvLXR3eLVjmtd-kL1skjVx1eMi1MUnK_ujQMSYuzBm39bNGbjwE6yeGp27c_UiNZ5iyCUkLznQmpgr6tJEnh5vY9x1rfflPgcrMsaWPGSMCQwL1PyWgRB/w400-h300/PXL_20230914_092714665.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br /><p> If you are ever in Bournemouth, you must go and see it!</p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-81049733133639182032023-10-19T00:21:00.001-07:002023-10-19T00:21:19.509-07:00Musings: Shakespeare<p> <span style="font-size: medium;">In these violent times, my thoughts have turned to a scene in Shakespeare's early play, "Henry VI, part 3", set in the blodstained turmoil of the Wars of the Roses. The teenage son of the Duke of York has been captured by Lord Clifford: the boy pleads for his life, but Clifford is implacable. "Thy father killed mine, therefore die!" he tells him. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I find these words truly terrifying. An endless cycle of revenge can so easily continue for generation after generation, and differences of religion, ideology or race count for little by comparison. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjIGzLpXLaOV0dmqIe7xAlDjC-QguAu-Ld7RyjaiD-_KQ9juv3jzbUoix16FIdU_WyKpEz5zCgi7r7iZPGqMd11-yZ7QfklwCGSfe9witKS9nNqVaHbZU1ygV_ZOs_IQYFo5DdZY7XEzGiAv5RG75zZ0fPLl7LxF_3oT0Yyd5OTdDlz-e-GJ-q_W3MdRUxo" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="410" data-original-width="584" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjIGzLpXLaOV0dmqIe7xAlDjC-QguAu-Ld7RyjaiD-_KQ9juv3jzbUoix16FIdU_WyKpEz5zCgi7r7iZPGqMd11-yZ7QfklwCGSfe9witKS9nNqVaHbZU1ygV_ZOs_IQYFo5DdZY7XEzGiAv5RG75zZ0fPLl7LxF_3oT0Yyd5OTdDlz-e-GJ-q_W3MdRUxo" width="320" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span><p></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-53055389473841873872023-10-10T23:56:00.002-07:002023-10-22T00:19:07.762-07:00American Gangsters Footnotes: Al Capone's Welsh henchman<p> Bryan Humphreys and his wife Ann Wigley left the village of Carno, near Newtown in Powyss, to seek a new life in America, eventually settling in Chicago. But they did not find properity, for Bryan was a feckless character, too fond of drink and gambling, and the family was reduced to poverty when in 1906 he lost his job through drunkenness. Their son, born in 1899 and christened Llewellyn Morris Humphreys, had to leave school to work as a newsboy. The youth, like many others in his position, became involved in petty crime, and was arrested on many occasions for theft, but was spared any long prison sentence. </p><p> With the coming of Prohibition after the First World War, unbounded new horizons opened up for criminals in the smuggling of bootleg alcohol. In 1922 Humphreys, who by this time had given himself the name of Murray, attempted to muscle in on the racket by hijacking a liquor truck belonging to Al Capone. He was soon caught and brought before the great man himself, but Capone was impressed by his impudent courage, and instead of shooting Humphreys, recruited him for his organisation!</p><p> Murray Humphreys was soon reognised as one of the superior brains of the gang, and his rise up the hierarchy was rapid. He may have had a hand in organising the famous St Valentine's Day massacre of 1929, but he never acquired the reputation of being a man of violence: instead his role was mostly financial. No major gang could hope to survive without paying a substantial proportion of its takings to local police, politicians and officials, and Humphreys seems to played had a key part in this chain of corruption. He became a specialist in the laundering of "dirty money", working with a fellow-Welshman; an accountant called Fred Evans. He also gained the unusual nickname of "The Camel", presumably through the obvious link of "Murray the Hump".</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhz5LPHkr-ecpyHJj998UYrcg1Yn3DWvK7CGKyLbLNSWOOt2VkaFGARnI6r2vTf4i6XbwFmVN0pIHYhDSa3JyUipqKYLq076AEEbMa-5DsXUpYO1Z1JmCbcN1j4B0aDw41NLS8pSLmUsQkBd4MYpFEHq7p_rTJT7JstmLU0LukaTLgMCwWnNTzDbFRlGQ5W" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="202" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhz5LPHkr-ecpyHJj998UYrcg1Yn3DWvK7CGKyLbLNSWOOt2VkaFGARnI6r2vTf4i6XbwFmVN0pIHYhDSa3JyUipqKYLq076AEEbMa-5DsXUpYO1Z1JmCbcN1j4B0aDw41NLS8pSLmUsQkBd4MYpFEHq7p_rTJT7JstmLU0LukaTLgMCwWnNTzDbFRlGQ5W" width="81" /></a></div><br /><p> After Capone was convicted of tax evasion and sentenced to eleven years' imprisonment in Alcatraz, his organisation continued more or less intact. Humphreys himself was officially branded as "Public Enemy No. 1" after his boss's fall, but all that happened to him was that he was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment in 1933 after pleading guilty to income tax evasion, and was released after just 13 months. It was the longest term of imprisonment he would ever suffer. Instead he continued his activities of bribery and corruption, infiltrating trades unions and laundering the profits of crime.</p><p> New possibilities opened in California, where the gangsters found they could extort money from Hollywood by infiltrating the Scenery Erectors' Union and paralyse the movie industry by threatening to call strikes. Humphreys was involved in this, and also in the bribery of state officials in Nevada to permit the building of the first casinos in Las Vegas. It has been suggested that the character of Tom Hagen in the "Godfather" films is based on Humphreys. </p><p> Like many other senior gangsters, Humphreys experienced difficulties when summoned to testify before the Kefauver Committee on organised crime in the early 1950s. Many of the gangsters, advised by their clever lawyers, attempted to "plead the Fifth Amendment", to avoid answering questions, on the grounds that, in the immortal words of Capone's old business manager, the splendidly-nicknamed Jake "Greasy Thumb" Guzik, "I might discriminate myself". Nevertheless, they were all made to look extremely uncomfortable before the nation's television cameras.</p><p>Humphreys now faced further investigation of his tax affairs but avoided arrest by dying of a heart attack in 1965 while vacuuming his apartment. He was one of the last survivors of the riotous days of the criminal 1920s. This was perhaps the only way the career of a gangster could be held to have ended successfully: to perish of natural causes, never having served a lengthy term in prison. </p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjijTEdKa0xa4R7CuAo6Xla02ig6K82DgBGmevblPp9jmRfrqGdbTZyLYoESZG3eP4H2zJdNimya6-Go3pWwh38ME3RncpdVHZwc3nHf7BzZgSP63cqYNdlyO68cojvR68c9FfXwTQbix5I_w7d8Ycy_HliAhi1fVaB1eVvj02DDOdNbnCyz813y4GmzlRW" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="318" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjijTEdKa0xa4R7CuAo6Xla02ig6K82DgBGmevblPp9jmRfrqGdbTZyLYoESZG3eP4H2zJdNimya6-Go3pWwh38ME3RncpdVHZwc3nHf7BzZgSP63cqYNdlyO68cojvR68c9FfXwTQbix5I_w7d8Ycy_HliAhi1fVaB1eVvj02DDOdNbnCyz813y4GmzlRW" width="191" /></a></div><br /> (Humphreys in 1965)<p></p><p> </p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-91894914357126830182023-09-30T00:01:00.002-07:002023-10-07T00:03:23.624-07:00Political philosophy: Visions of a just society<p> The most famous vision of a just society is that of Plato in "The Republic". Here Socrates proposes a clear divison into classes (not necessarily hereditary of Guardians (who rule), Auxiliaries (who assist them) and everyone else, who undertake all the economic tasks. To secure this, all children,male and female, are to be taken away from their parents at an early age and carefully educated to fulfil their allotted roles. All cultural activity is to be rigidly controlled to preserve them from any dangerous influences. Such a society would need to have only a minimum of contact with the outside world, and of course could never progress; but Plato had no concept of progress</p><p>Plato's vision has haunted political theorists ever since; and it has been to some extent implemented in Nazi and Communist states, and even in the 19th century British public school system. Jonathon Swift attempted to portray a Platonic society in the fourth section of "Gulliver's Travels", where Gulliver visits the land of the H.....; the intelligent horses. Here conformity has become so general that there is no longer any need for a police force: the horses all think and behave in exactly the same way, and have apparently done so for countless generations. Gulliver appears to admire it, but it is for us today a depressingly sterile picture. </p><p><br /></p><p>In past centuries, a well-ordered society was often compared with a human body, where all the different organs had their own particular part to play: the eyes saw, the brain thought, the stomach digested food, and so forth. The body would only function if each part fulfilled its proper role: it was no use the feet hoping to be eyes! The analogy was plain: the different social classes should "know their place" and not aspire to partcipate in government! In fact, society in pre-industrial England did give all classes appropriate roles: the landowners were Justices of the Peace, the farmers and craftsmen took their turns as parish constable or surveyor of highways, and the very poor were called out to labour on the roads. Service was more or less compulsory and unpaid. In emergencies all might be called upon to serve in the militia, as officers or rank-and-file. The system worked passably in the villages, but broke down entirely in the new urban areas. </p><p>The conservative vision of an ideal society therefore consisted of kind masters and loyal, faithful servants. It is well portrayed by Dickens in the relationship between Mr Pickwick and Sam Weller. It is said that King George V got on well with Ramsay MacDonald, the first British Labour Prime Minister, because the King saw MacDonald essentially as a faithful Highland ghillie and MacDonald was happy to play that role.</p><p><br /></p><p>Marx and Engels pointed out that feudalism was natural and inevitable in a society where, because of low agricultural productivity, anything up to 90% of the population were, of necessity, peasant farmers, whereas Liberalism emerged as a philosophy with the growth of capitalism form the end of the Middle Ages. </p><p>Liberalism, in the writings of Locke, Jefferson and others, stresses individual freedom and independence, with minimal state interference. It works best in a society without extremes of wealth and poverty; a society of small farmers, craftsmen and shopkeepers without undue social snobbery, inherited authority or deference; and where the belief was that anyone could succeed through honest hard work and determination. Such a society did indeed exist in the small towns of the northern states of the USA in the latter 19th century: the society of Tom Sawyer and "Little Women", though it never really applied for Blacks and Native Americans. Young people might find the atmosphere stifling, and those who would not conform to the prevailing social norms could find themselves ostracised. </p><p><br /></p><p>In the vast industrial cities, peopled by mass immigration, these ideals had no relevance, and Socialism and Communism emerged in the first half of the 19th century in response to these new pressures. They were always urban-based ideologies and never attempted to have much appeal to the countryside. Marx denounced liberal individualism as a fraud as far as the mass of the working class were concerned, and looked towards a new form of society after the revolution, though he never attempted to describe it in any detail. It was clear that socialism, even without a violent revolution, would involve massive redistribution of property away from individual ownership, and although Marx famously predicted that the state would "wither away", what in fact emerged was a vastly expanded state, with more economic and organisational power than ever before. A future Socialist society is often portrayed by opponents as a vast beehive or anthill, where individuality has been abolished. There seems no doubt that for a socialist society to work we would all have to be less dominated by the desire to benefit ourselves and our families; more driven by commitment to the wellbeing of the entire community, and indeed of the whole world. </p><p><br /></p><p>Fascism is entirely different from liberalism and socialism in that it denies human equality as a fundamental principle. Humans, in this ideology, are not equal, and it is only right that the superior elite should rule: some have the necessary "will to power", and the majority do not. Democracy is not only wrong but, by giving power to the mediocre majority, is also inefficient. Hitler asked why we never see democratically-run armies or companies. He maintained that the most effective governmental structure is a military one: the officers do the planning and give commands, the sergeants enforce discipline and the rank and file do as they are told. He made the valid point that this was essentially how the Communist Party ran the Soviet Union.</p><p><br /></p><p>John Rawls in his "A Theory of Justice" (1971) stressed the need to be governed by the concept of "fairness". Robert Nozick in his "Anarchy, State and Utopia" (1974) argued the need to respect the absolute rights of the individual, which should not be overridden even by the democratic majority.</p><p><br /></p><p>In the 1930s, as country after country in Europe succumbed to dictatorship, the notion that a "managerial society" was more efficient than a democratic one. In the optimistic 1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the "end of history" and the final triumph of western liberal capitalism was proclaimed. The issue appears now to be in doubt. </p><p><br /></p><p> </p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-82547075852309841122023-08-30T08:16:00.002-07:002023-09-07T08:47:29.789-07:00Cricket: Women's Hundred<p><span style="font-size: medium;">My fantasy team from the women's 100 tournament, based on this summer's performances (English players only):-</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Beaumont</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Wyatt</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Bouchier</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Dunkley</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Sciver-Brunt (capt)</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Adams</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Jones (wk)</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Ecclestone</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Cross</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Glenn</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Bell</span></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-17527312651145366712023-07-21T14:16:00.003-07:002023-07-23T13:41:02.724-07:00Politics/Philosophy: The state and the nation<p><span style="font-size: medium;">What do we undestand by the word "state"? It probably involves such notions as: supreme authority within recognised frontiers; a claim on our obedience superior to any other claims (e.g. religion, family loyalty); a bureaucratic structure overseeing such things as defence, international trade, laws and judiciary, and from this does things to control our lives. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">All this is quite a modern concept. It did not exist in mediaeval Europe, where real power was in the hands of the local nobility, and any control by central government depended the personality and competence of the King, without which things soon degenerated into anarchy. The modern concept of the state was developed in the Renaissance by writers such as Machiavelli, based on what they had read of Ancient Rome; and at the same time the development of a central bureacracy and a reduction of the power of the Church and of the feudal nobility made the growth of the modern state possible. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Even then, until the late 19th century the western European state, particularly in Britain, did not do much by today's standards. It did not build roads or railways, provide healthcare or schools, or regulate international trade. Few new laws were passed, and taxation was very low. Marx provided no vision whatsoever of what a state would actually do after the revolution: indeed, in one famous phrase, he predicted that it would "wither away"!</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">What is a "nation"? It is more of a concept than a plain reality; a self-consciousness, based on such things as a common culture, language, tradition and history; even belief in a single race. It helps if the area in question has obvious frontiers on most sides and a central government: e.g. England or France. National self-consciouness first developes towards the end of the Middle Ages, among educated people and intellectuals (e.g. Shakespeare) and only gradually spreads to the mass of the peasant population. It is doubtful whether most people in France were aware of being "French" in any meaningful way until the 19th century, and Russian peasants probably had no "national" feeling unil even later.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The nation-state is often seen as the only valid form of political organisation, as distict from (say) an empire, but it is a fairly recent idea historically. Furthermore, the two words carry different connotations: a little thought will suggest that the term "King of Scotland" is not quite the same as "King of Scots": the former implies rule over a define territory with frontiers, which may well contain people who do not consider themselves Scots: the latter implies a Scottish nation or race. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Problems of state versus nation began to emerge in Europe the 19th century. Italy had clear natural frontiers and a famous history, but there had been no single Italian state since Roman times. It was only unified in the 19th century. At the same time, German intellectuals developed a strong sense of "Germanness", but until unification in 1871 Germany had been just a patchwork of tiny inependent states with no effective central government. By contrast, the Empires of Austria, Russia and Turkey contained a great many different national groups, some of which had a proud historical past as independent states (Greece, Hungary, Poland), and others which did not. In the 19th century, scholars became interested in many of the latter: in their folklore, myths and peasant costumes, and for some of them wrote down their languages for the first time, using inappropriate or Roman or Russian aphabets (e.g. Finnish). This helped to form the first stirrings of national consciousness. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">In central and eastern Europe there are few natural frontiers, and national dividing lines were therefore impossible to draw. German intellectuals were well aware that their concept of "Germanness" overlapped with territories inhabited by Czechs, Poles and others. Their answer was to decide that these cultures were "inferior" and need not be taken into account! </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">19th century Europe thus contained some states which were also nations (e.g. France), but others which were not. In the Ist World War the old Austrian and Turkish empires collapsed, and President Wilson decreed that frontiers should be redrawn in accordance with "self-determination": that is, nation-states. But this proved very difficult to apply, because, particularly when new states were established on the ruins of the old Austrian Empire, the new frontiers never coincided exactly with ethnic groupings, leading to much resentment and hostility. The newly-established nation state of Turkey expelled or killed large numbers of the Greek and Armenian minorities, but there remained a large Kurdish minority in the south-east. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Meanwhile, Lenin and Stalin managed to hold onto most of the old Tsarist Empire in the form of the avowedly multinational Soviet Union; but when this broke up in the 1990s, many new states were created, some of which had no tradition of statehood. The present war in Ukraine derives from the fact that Russia maintains that Ukraine has no national identity separate from Russia (the Ukrainian language being seen as no more than a reasant dialect).</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The disintegration of Yugoslavia led to violence because it contained ethnic groups with a long tradition of mutual hostility (e.g. Serbs and Croats), but which now found themselves states with large ethnic minorities. </span></p><div><span style="font-size: medium;">As the British, French and other Empires came to and end, vast numbers of new states were created, some of which had a history of existence, but others which were entirely new. In Africa, the new states maintained the frontiers established by the colonial powers in the 19th century, though often these bore no relationship to any ethnic groupings! </span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;">A quite opposite argument of state frontiers is contained in the notion of "sacred soil": that, for historical reasons, a state has the right to claim a nearby territory, even if the inhabitants of that territory wish otherwise. Examples: Spain and Gibraltar; Argentina and the Falkland Islands; China and Taiwan; to some extent, Russia and Unkraine.</span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;">Questions:- What about minorities within a supposed nation state? Is there a difference between indigenous minorities (most notably, Palestinians in Israel), and immigrant ones? What if the immgrants form a majority (e.g. USA or Australia)? Is there a duty to preserve indigenous culture? (which supportersof apartheid in South Africa claimed they were doing, whilst denying that black people could ever be part of the South African nation)</span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;">Is there such a thing as a British nation, as distinct from the state? Why has Irish nationalism been so much stronger than Scottish or Welsh? Ulster Protestants do not consider themselves to be part of the irisg nation, so are demands for Irish union just another "sacred soil" argument?</span> </div><div> </div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div> </div>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-12026801796192204712023-07-08T03:01:00.001-07:002023-07-08T03:01:56.943-07:00England: Lady Anne Clifford and her castles<p><span style="font-size: medium;"> Lady Anne Clifford was born in 1590, the only surviving child of George Clifford, third Earl of Cumberland; the scion of a family powerful in the north-west of England since the thirteenth century, and a young girl she was presented at the court of Queen Elizabeth I. She was twice married; first to Richard Sackville, Earl of Dorset, by whom she had two daughters, and later to Philip Herbert, Earl of Pembroke. She does not appeared to have had any great joy in either marriage, and despite living in the great age of the Elizabethan and early Stuart Renaissance, her heart was always in the north of England and her outlook resolutely mediaeval.</span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjlPN0qF07OYiotsvV-PfNSE43wJ_lwDlBPL1LcNtq7uLBJNIgOMc6jwplBTAJci6YkOLxhwMBDn_C8vHrZkC3cgejaeZ5Qw_GRnMwhxFNvrpWgLh15Ky0UH_z42seX8-c05YSN4ePChb3cztv37S3wUuagRAnZN6Pbmp6Hm17WGF9f8re9AiJkB_FWCPju" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="606" data-original-width="1200" height="203" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjlPN0qF07OYiotsvV-PfNSE43wJ_lwDlBPL1LcNtq7uLBJNIgOMc6jwplBTAJci6YkOLxhwMBDn_C8vHrZkC3cgejaeZ5Qw_GRnMwhxFNvrpWgLh15Ky0UH_z42seX8-c05YSN4ePChb3cztv37S3wUuagRAnZN6Pbmp6Hm17WGF9f8re9AiJkB_FWCPju=w400-h203" width="400" /></a></div>(This triptych shows, in the centre, Sir George Clifford and his family, with, on the left, Lady Anne as a child and, on the right, as a mature lady in her fifties) <br /><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> Much to Lady Anne's disgust, her father, when he died in 1605, left his lands and property not to her but to his brother Francis, who became fourth Earl of Cumberland, and it was only when his son, Henry, the fifth Earl, died childless in 1643 that she was able to inherit what she had always seen as her rightful possessions. But at this stage the Civil War intervened, and it was only when the fighting had ceased that she was able to begin the restoration of her castles, where she was to live for the rest of her life. Her contemporaries knew her as a "proud northern lady".</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Lady Anne Clifford's castles today:-</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Brougham, on the river Eamont, near Penrith</span></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtcbYMzIfYMxNKuv81Aa0n43Tg17YvOzV4iZoe67Us3eYK_LZ7ZR2x644CUHdQ2mGNF4WUUclJFGwU5OdAUskOWxnRy41CH72Ucemma2P6u2uabAZKzoLgk0cuAOwhYCZEJqWiOl7bCQJ0D7Y6vNhEXeN1-1ombfMVG4j-Z0nh1N7YatJE6UE_Ewa0QToG/s3872/JSC_0414.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="214" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtcbYMzIfYMxNKuv81Aa0n43Tg17YvOzV4iZoe67Us3eYK_LZ7ZR2x644CUHdQ2mGNF4WUUclJFGwU5OdAUskOWxnRy41CH72Ucemma2P6u2uabAZKzoLgk0cuAOwhYCZEJqWiOl7bCQJ0D7Y6vNhEXeN1-1ombfMVG4j-Z0nh1N7YatJE6UE_Ewa0QToG/s320/JSC_0414.JPG" width="320" /></a></div><br /><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span><p></p><p><span style="font-size: large;">Appleby castle: the only one still in private hands</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhuFwfoYqUZfpagKK1A9VwoEMPW_TyU5TgCJv52_Ct2HGvIB5vf9bZyDWgD_uqxiSUWLEfv0hpdVIK4_dFaT_walEX13o24Mht_fpN93TvZj6awv2ERs4EGynAtllUzAqm2UqNbyFjKykEQuzIVRCX3CFmXEnzd2UNNvCvpD5R7_UauYrk1wswY_WmHtveC" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1707" data-original-width="2560" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhuFwfoYqUZfpagKK1A9VwoEMPW_TyU5TgCJv52_Ct2HGvIB5vf9bZyDWgD_uqxiSUWLEfv0hpdVIK4_dFaT_walEX13o24Mht_fpN93TvZj6awv2ERs4EGynAtllUzAqm2UqNbyFjKykEQuzIVRCX3CFmXEnzd2UNNvCvpD5R7_UauYrk1wswY_WmHtveC" width="320" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /><br /></span><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Brough castle: situated on the A66 road several miles south-east from Penrith</span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEha7VNbSZ8lAYoht1ILmnYwmlHqWEBSUfhsNoTMffTq32eAeoXTqTQkUXX03Nv6JVhprKsV3bEmEA76bdb40y4bBP_XS2HxVyjypZucanHjetHnViVxHgn2Z1Zt9ePLS2nDiVOVYdWTt38XYDt7hRLLw1wIitQObBiHwK0AG5SzWBCzdpZvl7hCQXf2FN-y" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="146" data-original-width="345" height="135" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEha7VNbSZ8lAYoht1ILmnYwmlHqWEBSUfhsNoTMffTq32eAeoXTqTQkUXX03Nv6JVhprKsV3bEmEA76bdb40y4bBP_XS2HxVyjypZucanHjetHnViVxHgn2Z1Zt9ePLS2nDiVOVYdWTt38XYDt7hRLLw1wIitQObBiHwK0AG5SzWBCzdpZvl7hCQXf2FN-y" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The Countess's Pillar: a short distance from Brougham on the road to Appleby. She erected it in memory of her mother, and arranged for charity to distributed from this site every April to the poor of the parish.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgWK5P6PVekL9saBhXxSiyXaE8wECuiBPl3Fj58mcNA-P_b7hVwfWgj3rkaQawCkncHBifQhutIflmyRu8TFcSY3e746xAyBrc2TCwlyIwzkCekhSQ6dteAVTp8tSSNbngpYmVGQ0Dl0dbPtFWz-GEYLrccTiT7bgdiSK1ebyc4dtvtTqqNamsOvHcJmoul" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="640" data-original-width="480" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgWK5P6PVekL9saBhXxSiyXaE8wECuiBPl3Fj58mcNA-P_b7hVwfWgj3rkaQawCkncHBifQhutIflmyRu8TFcSY3e746xAyBrc2TCwlyIwzkCekhSQ6dteAVTp8tSSNbngpYmVGQ0Dl0dbPtFWz-GEYLrccTiT7bgdiSK1ebyc4dtvtTqqNamsOvHcJmoul" width="180" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /><br /></span><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The coat of arms of Sir George Clifford, Earl of Cumberland: Lady Anne Clifford's father</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiFvXbEp9D53RMwljpj-8NaIp_nShNYZBXXpXzS0984_hzB5X56Ha3-qxBRNzY6gWXGMhPE4aIv6zfh4lgIW1s3d8tRCsDc-OwpbsVAuywmD0aAQ6zolFiUrom1dSN3qjzF2_M7WX1pRj4WGRRSAvEZV5Wp3e6TFvPk5Vv7JMoyspFeImJ1tII9dzQU6K3X" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="225" data-original-width="225" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiFvXbEp9D53RMwljpj-8NaIp_nShNYZBXXpXzS0984_hzB5X56Ha3-qxBRNzY6gWXGMhPE4aIv6zfh4lgIW1s3d8tRCsDc-OwpbsVAuywmD0aAQ6zolFiUrom1dSN3qjzF2_M7WX1pRj4WGRRSAvEZV5Wp3e6TFvPk5Vv7JMoyspFeImJ1tII9dzQU6K3X" width="240" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br />Lady Anne Clifford died at Brougham in 1676. In 1714 her son-in-law, John Tufton, Earl of Thanet, sold Brougham and Brough castles, which were then stripped of everything valuable and allowed to fall into ruin. They are now both under the administration of English Heritage. </span><p></p><p><br /></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-85322033148540093362023-06-22T13:55:00.006-07:002023-06-24T01:13:20.343-07:00Musings: Boris Johnson and Fascism<p> <span style="font-size: medium;">Enemies of Boris Johnson routinely used social media to accuse him of being a "fascist": a word nowadays employed so loosely as to be practically devoid of any meaning except dislike. Nevertheless, I consider that there are interesting parallels between him and Mussolini, the leader of the Fascist Party in Italy and the inspiration for copycat movements throught the interwar period.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> Mussolini, like Johnson, was by instinct a tabloid journalist, and his principal aim was to dominate the next day's headlines. As a rising politician, he produced no specific policies, and was never really in control of the dark forces of street violence that he had unleased and encouraged. He delivered speeches full of rousing phrases but devoid of any ideological content. His really solid achivements were few: he was a lazy administrator and allowed vast levels of corruption to flourish under his government. When the great recession came after 1929, he had no more clue of how to deal with the economic problems facing his country than did any other western European leaders. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> Boris Johnson as Prime Minister was noted for his rousing speeches and for his publicity stunts: dressing up as a soldier, a doctor or whatever, for the benefit of the T.V. cameras. He too was lazy and famously could never be bothered to master the details of policies.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> In the 1920s Mussolini was accepted as a serious statesman by the other leaders of Europe, and his Fascism was widely imitated, not least by Hitler in Germany. When the two dictators first met, Mussolini was profoundly unimpressed, and commented that Hitler was "wrong in the head". But Germany is a far stronger power than Italy, and in the end Mussolini could not bear Hitler grabbing all the headlines and felt he would have to lash out internationally himself, with disastrous consequences for Italy and for himself. The only parallel here, though not a very exact one, is with Boris Johnson and Donald Trump.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;">Postscript</span><span style="font-size: large;">: Boris Johnson has reverted to his old job and is now writing articles for the "Daily Mail</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjo2OkyAEU_p115P5EAh3jqPwtNYzSdIIB7jdDFIvvoepBVglkXPPrcL5T2KZNeEapmeLFGaX6_GmLLxKgk0Uwo5bWbyDmXWg7lDIjL4q9jn_g_x7EYfLbO0UJI93MqtWECrKgot6q_qeEiZn9L8ApjpiQQw1rfC13wZC4BVtGpqUGvCOhAMcieOO8E4Iku" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1263" data-original-width="976" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjo2OkyAEU_p115P5EAh3jqPwtNYzSdIIB7jdDFIvvoepBVglkXPPrcL5T2KZNeEapmeLFGaX6_GmLLxKgk0Uwo5bWbyDmXWg7lDIjL4q9jn_g_x7EYfLbO0UJI93MqtWECrKgot6q_qeEiZn9L8ApjpiQQw1rfC13wZC4BVtGpqUGvCOhAMcieOO8E4Iku=w308-h400" width="308" /></a></span></div><p><span style="font-size: medium;">It is a sobering thought that he can earn far more for churning out this kind of rubbish than he did as Prime Minister; but personally I do not begrudge him a single penny. I would far rather he was harmlessly enployed producing what Orwell called "prolefeed" than pretending to run the country.</span></p><p></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-84609316187050252002023-06-06T03:16:00.000-07:002023-06-06T03:16:07.346-07:00Political Philosophy: Justice<p><span><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span><span style="font-size: medium;"> Early in Plato's</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span> book, "The Republic", Socrates asks the question "What is justice?". Thrasymachus answers scornfully that justice is merely the will of the strongest imposed on everyone else, and all other talk is nonsense. Socrates rejects this, though he does not really refute it, and also rejects a later suggestion that justice is determined by a consensus agreement. Instead, Socrates defines justice as "everything in the right place". </span></span><span>Later, Aristotle defined justice as "Treating equals equally". It can be seen that both these require further investigation!</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> The mediaeval writers, particularly Thomas Aquinas, depicted an underlying code of right and wrong which we all know in our hearts, and which to some extent can be discovered by reason alone. There is no moral obligation to obey the laws enacted by government ("Positive law") which go against natural law: abstract justice should always have priority over human laws. (The concept of natural law was revived at the Nuremberg trials).</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> Hobbes rejected any concept of natural law and reached a Thrasymachus position: the state's positive law defines what is just and unjust, and therefore no law can be unjust. (However, because there is no effective international sovereignty, there can be no right or wrong in dealings between states).</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Locke revived the concept of natural law under the category of natural rights (to life, liberty, property) and any state which infringes these is acting unjustly and may legitimately be resisted.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">From the 17th century, rationalist philosophers attempted to construct codes of absolute justice based on reason rather than divine command. The bottom line of these usually a concept of equality and fairness; and laws which discriminate or are applied in an inequitable fashion may be condemned as unjust. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>Supp</span><span>orters of absolute standards of justice, whether derived from religious doc</span><span>trine or from reason, would argue that unjust laws should be resisted; implying that individual conscipriority over any obligation to obey positive law. Hobbes argued that giving priority to individual conscience is effecively allowing anyone to do whatever they want. </span>A counter-argument would be that individual happiness, or even the happiness of society as a whole, is not the same as "goodness", and that we always have a duty to promote the latter, regardless of all other considerations. How far therefore should my individual conscience take precedence over the "general good" (e.g. conscientious objection in wartime)? Should my individual judgement of right and wrong be guided by a superior authority (the church or the government)? </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><u>Positi</u></span><u>ve law.</u> To be just, it should be widely known and accepted, easy to understand, promote a clear and obvious social good, and not discriminate unfairly for or against any groups in society. The administration of justice should be unbiased and open to all. Punishments should be proportionate and should ideally be aimed at reforming the offender. These are all utilitarian arguments. But what if some law or regulation appears irrational or cruel, but is nonetheless accepted by the mass of society: e.g. the monarchy (Edmund Burke's argument)?</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><u>Political justice</u>. Nowadays it is believed that "one person, one vote" is the only just form of political structure. But why? Is it because this is the form most likely to achieve the general good (utilitarianism)? and if so, has that always been the case, or is it only applicable to modern society? Surely it is only a means to an end (better government), not a universal entitlement? What about minority groups and the danger of "tyranny of the majority" (Mill). What rights do I have to oppose a policy supported by the majority but which I believe to be disastrous?</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><u>Social Justice.</u> The rights and wrongs underlying the social order. Discussion often turns on the conflict between commutative and distributive justice:-</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><u>Commutative justice</u> = "Merit should be rewarded" (e.g. skill, hard work, academic attainment: more difficult to assess if "value to society is a criterion); not to do so would be unjust.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><u>Distributive justice</u> = "Rewards should be distributed according to needs" (e.g. number of children to be supported). This may involve compulsory redistribution of property; presumably by the state.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Commutative justice is preferred by economic liberals and by conservatives on the grounds of ecomonic efficiency, and flat-rate equality ("levelling") attacked as in itself unjust. On the other hand, religious teaching often seems to favour distributive justice. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Some modern arguments:</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The utilitarian tradition: "The greatest happiness of the greatest number" is still the most common approach to evaluating justice. But utilitarianism has nothing to say about abolute standards of right and wrong (Bentham and Mill were both rationalists and non-believers). Also, why should I, as an individual, care about the wellbeing of society as a whole?</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">John Rawls ("A Theory of Justice"): There is always an individual claim to justice in the pursuit of "social primary goods" (liberty, wealth, opportunities, self-respect, etc); and fairness dictates that all should be distributed equally unless there is a valid reason why not (e.g. some people may work harder or more usefully, and therefore deserve greater wealth). Slavery for a minority might be of advantage to the majority of the population, but is surely unjust?</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Robert Nozick ("Anarchy, State, and Utopia"): Revives claims to natural rights, especially against an obtrusive state. In utilitarian theory, individual rights must be sacrificed to a higher goal of "the general good". A democratically elected government has no more right to seize your property than does a dictator! </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>Marxists argue that the interests of the different classes are so contrary that no "general good" is possible: every action must benefit one class and disadvantage another. Utilitarianism is therefore fraudulent until the communist revolution: up to that point; good = what furthers the revolution</span>: bad = what hinders it. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Marx's famous summary of justice in a communist society was, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs". But in Stalin's Russia this was changed to "to each according to his work": a change from distributive to commutative justice!</span></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-61182738682868543722023-05-27T02:03:00.001-07:002023-05-27T02:03:59.621-07:00England: Oteley gardens<p><span style="font-size: medium;">Oteley gardens, Ellesmere, open to the public for one day earlier this month under the National Gardens Scheme: rhododendrons, ancient trees and a fine view over the mere.</span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhto2hh0ken-ZBt5SJBmwDAShM-C4gxB0JNAZ-334NG5ea1W3mnX1mZGiqJgfvKYC09r-6Sfrq00aEZCnhruT78ddo1axLFKZJo1ViRGVtfdpI4g3EGZmhZXYr8nQ37F9Kew6GPFQF4na8_UikDxJj3tci-f_3izNj4hBVBqkKYEwPNCrwFtsheCA_Ag/s3872/JSC_0226.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhto2hh0ken-ZBt5SJBmwDAShM-C4gxB0JNAZ-334NG5ea1W3mnX1mZGiqJgfvKYC09r-6Sfrq00aEZCnhruT78ddo1axLFKZJo1ViRGVtfdpI4g3EGZmhZXYr8nQ37F9Kew6GPFQF4na8_UikDxJj3tci-f_3izNj4hBVBqkKYEwPNCrwFtsheCA_Ag/w400-h268/JSC_0226.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipeiP9SCw1q_dcCcfVcrvSRWDC4EBnLe4brsranaPvuAX8XnvrQ_BnfLUMw2TZjyHVF-7ewgFVdSNzR0R5PgkwvAmGslXPu60FTi8Mr3CSVTTmI5EFz0x_topujX2wb7AV4PvedElnVlOJWMzns0yv0o9ZzIw9wShsEzlJQYGAXHRTyfdZei1ftHv0Yg/s3872/JSC_0230.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipeiP9SCw1q_dcCcfVcrvSRWDC4EBnLe4brsranaPvuAX8XnvrQ_BnfLUMw2TZjyHVF-7ewgFVdSNzR0R5PgkwvAmGslXPu60FTi8Mr3CSVTTmI5EFz0x_topujX2wb7AV4PvedElnVlOJWMzns0yv0o9ZzIw9wShsEzlJQYGAXHRTyfdZei1ftHv0Yg/w400-h268/JSC_0230.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6LYV062L4f62fZkNUdiw_HpUUec9NJKzTs96fHIpY_mjbRQRWZo4L_MGlmJZOzVc6Z6lKLG1d4KyP3EsKtnOTLNEP0IoHufepUtZc8yLhM_qYgnCyjCtdDXfnd1QipQpXlvRWl7jCZM-Mp2qqpPgbMO0Vk2y22X7OXHVxLrtmFFHXr9Tutaxi4XS8AA/s3872/JSC_0229.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6LYV062L4f62fZkNUdiw_HpUUec9NJKzTs96fHIpY_mjbRQRWZo4L_MGlmJZOzVc6Z6lKLG1d4KyP3EsKtnOTLNEP0IoHufepUtZc8yLhM_qYgnCyjCtdDXfnd1QipQpXlvRWl7jCZM-Mp2qqpPgbMO0Vk2y22X7OXHVxLrtmFFHXr9Tutaxi4XS8AA/w400-h268/JSC_0229.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEja-T4NzEfmkCoNhe_k7HMoo1JaAcrNh8ZphmN_I8JBvCTU_Ogr0oBfsX2tXrX5vRrDw4gTMtNoWWlrfDn6oUpj--s8fU9tWkxnZuqpNc74_Nitj_DrTTQI6K9DohXr5ac7eV-ydiCxkRZ5mAVuysguldsQzSoW_EyQ4hglt3sA0c7-qXCwNcuS_JPsTw/s3872/JSC_0232.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3872" data-original-width="2592" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEja-T4NzEfmkCoNhe_k7HMoo1JaAcrNh8ZphmN_I8JBvCTU_Ogr0oBfsX2tXrX5vRrDw4gTMtNoWWlrfDn6oUpj--s8fU9tWkxnZuqpNc74_Nitj_DrTTQI6K9DohXr5ac7eV-ydiCxkRZ5mAVuysguldsQzSoW_EyQ4hglt3sA0c7-qXCwNcuS_JPsTw/w268-h400/JSC_0232.JPG" width="268" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjE0MssPZ5oZaurO-ztK6Wqs1HYe7NuMtcbr-Z78UvocSlR99V0B2hcail0lmC8dOYqAnvs_IIS_Ttb_ZgHSAZkBeNd1-LJZjD8nuEC_7QKU5gk3_SiGZ3HBOYJbAqBWv8tzPNnr4waeKV4rLR_HpdOEEslzqHJT6z3eWq-i9IAmJU4HwhtSQShIcdWuQ/s3872/JSC_0236.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjE0MssPZ5oZaurO-ztK6Wqs1HYe7NuMtcbr-Z78UvocSlR99V0B2hcail0lmC8dOYqAnvs_IIS_Ttb_ZgHSAZkBeNd1-LJZjD8nuEC_7QKU5gk3_SiGZ3HBOYJbAqBWv8tzPNnr4waeKV4rLR_HpdOEEslzqHJT6z3eWq-i9IAmJU4HwhtSQShIcdWuQ/w400-h268/JSC_0236.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br /><p><br /></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-18730252614109812432023-05-07T22:59:00.000-07:002023-05-07T22:59:25.201-07:00Cinderella: an attempt at a pantomime script<p> <u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Cast in order of appearance:</span></u></p><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Lord Chamberlain<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Cinderella<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Baron Hardup<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Gertrude (first ugly sister)<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Marguerita (second ugly sister)<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Page<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">……………………………………………………………………….<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">(Sound of bell ringing. Door opening)<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Lord Chamberlain</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">: Is your master in, child?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Cinderella</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">: Yes, sir: I’ll fetch him (she exits)<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">: <u>(aside)</u> If she’d wash the dirt off her face, she’d be quite a pretty little thing<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">(Footsteps)<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Cind:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Here’s a visitor, father. (Cinderella exits)<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Baron Hardup</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">: What can I do for you, my man? You haven’t come with a bill, have you? Because I’ve explained: I will pay everything in full; it’s just that right now …..<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Do you have any daughters living in the house, Baron? It’s them I need to see.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Bar:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> They haven’t been ordering more dresses and jewellery, have they? It really is too bad! I’ve told them again and again that I won’t be responsible for their debts, and they simply take no notice! Can’t you tell them? They might listen to you!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb: Baron, I am not a debt collector. I am Lord Chamberlain to His Majesty the King. What I have to say to your daughters could be greatly to their advantage, and yours. Just call them, please.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Bar: Oh, your grace! However could I have made such a stupid mistake! (Claps hands) Gertrude! Marguerita! You’ve got a very important visitor!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> <u>(aside)</u> Idiot!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Gertrude and Marguerita</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> (enter, chattering): What’s happening? Who’s this?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">: <u>(aside)</u> Good grief, what a hideous pair! Still, orders are orders. <u>(aloud)</u> Young ladies, I come on a mission of the highest importance. At the ball last night, His Royal Highness Prince Charming danced with a mysterious young princess, who then unaccountably vanished, leaving only a single slipper. His Royal Highness was so taken with the beauty of the said princess that he has vowed to wed her as soon as she may be found. To this end, I am commanded to ask every young lady in the city to try on the aforementioned slipper until the true wearer can be identified. Let us therefore proceed. Page: the slipper!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Page</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">: Here, sir.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Gert. and Marg</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">. (<u>together):</u> Me first! Stop pushing! Out of the way! Ow!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Gert:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Give it here, you moron! (Grunts and groans as she tries on slipper)<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">: It’s clearly far too small for you. <u>(aside)</u> That’s a relief!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Gert:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> It’s my feet! I danced so much last night they’ve swollen! It would fit normally.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Marg</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">: My turn now! (Grunts and groans) <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb: It doesn’t fit you either<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Marg: I think I’ve developed a bunion<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb: <u>(aside)</u> I can’t imagine the Prince would be disappointed to hear that. <u>(aloud)</u> Well, Baron, I’m afraid these two don’t qualify. Are there any more young ladies in your household? What about the girl who answered the door?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><u>Gert:</u> Oh, she’s nobody<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Marg:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Just a servant. Besides, she wasn’t at the ball: she was here, working in the kitchen.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> But, Baron, didn’t I hear her addressing you as father?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Bar:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Well, yes, there is another daughter. Her name’s Cinderella. But she doesn’t get out much. Too shy, you know.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Gert:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> You’d be wasting your time.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Nevertheless, Baron, His Royal Highness has commanded me to try the slipper with every young girl in the city. So would you be good enough to call Cinderella in here? <u>(aside)</u> It’s no more than a very long shot, but I’m going to do it anyway, if only to annoy these two revolting hussies and their ridiculous father!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Bar:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Cinderella! (claps hands)<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">(Cinderella enters)<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Bar:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Cinderella, the gentleman here wants you to try on a slipper<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Cind:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Yes, father<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Gert:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Look who’ll be getting a swelled head!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Marg:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> She’ll be insufferable after this!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">(Short pause)<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Page:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Oh look sir! The slipper fits her perfectly!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Gert and Marg:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Oh!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> So it does! Well, well! Cinderella, you must answer me truthfully: were you at the ball last night?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Cind:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Yes I was, sir, and I danced with the Prince; but at midnight I had to run away, and I was in such a hurry that this slipper came off my foot and I didn’t have time to pick it up.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Gert. and</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Marg: (together) But she can’t have been! It’s not possible!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Chamb:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> <u>(aside) </u>Hmm. With a decent hairdresser and dressmaker she could be made to look quite presentable. The Prince could do a lot worse. The next step must be to get her away from her appalling family. <u>(aloud)</u> Now, Cinderella, your whole life is about to change. You must come with me to the palace. No need to pick anything up; we’re leaving immediately!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;">Bar:</span></u><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"> Just a moment, your grace. If you’re taking my beloved little girl to meet the Prince, I don’t suppose you could find your way to lend her poor old father the odd fiver, could you?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div><span style="font-size: 16pt; line-height: 22.8267px;"><br /></span></div>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-81879242348691266252023-04-09T13:45:00.000-07:002023-04-09T13:45:29.424-07:00England: A day in Liverpool: Beatles and others<p>I hadn't visited Liverpool for a great many years. I found the tourist trail still very Beatles-themed, despite it now being more than fifty years since the group split up. I don't know whether Paul and Ringo ever revisit, but they would find their home city transformed by massive injections of money. The whole dockland area has been cleaned up, and surrounded by a cluster of glittering new glass-and-steel apatment and office blocks and towers. </p><p> This is looking north across the Albert Dock, with the tTate Modern art galley on the left. At the end, the low white building is the new Museum of Liverpool, with next to it the dome of the Port of Liverpool building, and in the distance a glimpse of the Royal Liver building, with the famous "Liver birds" on top.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBGbt4Pz2a0gg7dwDFwhRe7jPvbDSWH6OsCizjbnAq1nEMvBM1BVKnQLXBBsH5SjJ-pkAt3OtZqnViDbMkhkROCEr5O2KqXslNV3weikXd3bAOX_vhiOoW1mGKcNOeMwLyLtVTjib_I8MFV2a3rn1ukII_wnCef0zM-6yHFfUznbfv-lwsmG6KGOCpgw/s3872/JSC_0106.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBGbt4Pz2a0gg7dwDFwhRe7jPvbDSWH6OsCizjbnAq1nEMvBM1BVKnQLXBBsH5SjJ-pkAt3OtZqnViDbMkhkROCEr5O2KqXslNV3weikXd3bAOX_vhiOoW1mGKcNOeMwLyLtVTjib_I8MFV2a3rn1ukII_wnCef0zM-6yHFfUznbfv-lwsmG6KGOCpgw/w400-h268/JSC_0106.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><p>I walked inland half a mile to Matthew Street, a scruffy little alleyway that was once the site of the famous Cavern Club, where the Beatles and other famous groups performed at the start of their careers. The street was full of tourists taking pictures of the statue of JohnLennon and other commemorative Beatles material.</p><p> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXaKikHkGpWyUBLbt3txaqEi19NnkfPoTS4IYwK5Zxz8m32PrjXQAOVT30dnsvc3k0gNXHuqUtNvCbD4a4nV9iSsr7ss3jXeUwzfk3JqBJ8ld4qyxXuFDy62R-KooK9WmbS6NajkYDx_G2PEJ_Y9mDo4ZMt1sZDZItCC7y0BNNQyAVRY2LfPxUq2Kxmw/s3872/JSC_0111.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXaKikHkGpWyUBLbt3txaqEi19NnkfPoTS4IYwK5Zxz8m32PrjXQAOVT30dnsvc3k0gNXHuqUtNvCbD4a4nV9iSsr7ss3jXeUwzfk3JqBJ8ld4qyxXuFDy62R-KooK9WmbS6NajkYDx_G2PEJ_Y9mDo4ZMt1sZDZItCC7y0BNNQyAVRY2LfPxUq2Kxmw/w400-h268/JSC_0111.JPG" width="400" /></a></p><br /> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjV4yVXeYRd230aYa4MNTmAAm2R5JUuWMMVAmgCJWWVRptIQ-XomEjhoGjC1L09Fpti_v7ASI8aLPG8wlzGq4CVymDe1-cgCybOGxrNpqemsfBU3lk75G64VaXxbCoE82OWt85K9ZzRACAXYZ4N-QSi8oBuu7uLc9KgbYJ5zr2sUK2CB8vKIzctXEAuZQ/s3872/JSC_0114.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3872" data-original-width="2592" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjV4yVXeYRd230aYa4MNTmAAm2R5JUuWMMVAmgCJWWVRptIQ-XomEjhoGjC1L09Fpti_v7ASI8aLPG8wlzGq4CVymDe1-cgCybOGxrNpqemsfBU3lk75G64VaXxbCoE82OWt85K9ZzRACAXYZ4N-QSi8oBuu7uLc9KgbYJ5zr2sUK2CB8vKIzctXEAuZQ/w268-h400/JSC_0114.JPG" width="268" /></a><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOUnxw8TGjGOworWp82kqp6opLYppPIoXABlY-NLMtyNp59zjwHEKxGWxTKuu_Err7QaS-kFRQEi7FXfZJGNJ3OKh8sHG_3mXeGNpRuZX72eWbsYzWijYCONIrj2dtKVqnL8nCACdBXwxEAQCy45YyMnzQjsTFxrPcU2BnrhvnjlJD8ntabb2w_xl-eQ/s3872/JSC_0113.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="214" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOUnxw8TGjGOworWp82kqp6opLYppPIoXABlY-NLMtyNp59zjwHEKxGWxTKuu_Err7QaS-kFRQEi7FXfZJGNJ3OKh8sHG_3mXeGNpRuZX72eWbsYzWijYCONIrj2dtKVqnL8nCACdBXwxEAQCy45YyMnzQjsTFxrPcU2BnrhvnjlJD8ntabb2w_xl-eQ/s320/JSC_0113.JPG" width="320" /></a></div><p>The real Cavern Club was demolished many years ago, but had been "reconstructed" in the "Beatles Story" museum at the Albert Dock. It must have been a tiny, cramped and airless place. Once sgain, it remains popular with tourists.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGiMBsZ8mIyb8xFhgJlAZHq79Didsmwlt8__b4ZrVuDmY6NY_knveVZHXjtsm1jwSjSKG49ui1NbnWu3PDvV0-2zkv_RqhqO8VgKy0bE9larF4_wX0ulmR6eB_RAqkw-mgXwyTgcEqu8aZ8nH83AWh2iiBRTqtck_R071-6FyddfbdmDWVarmaCJTG2w/s3872/JSC_0152.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGiMBsZ8mIyb8xFhgJlAZHq79Didsmwlt8__b4ZrVuDmY6NY_knveVZHXjtsm1jwSjSKG49ui1NbnWu3PDvV0-2zkv_RqhqO8VgKy0bE9larF4_wX0ulmR6eB_RAqkw-mgXwyTgcEqu8aZ8nH83AWh2iiBRTqtck_R071-6FyddfbdmDWVarmaCJTG2w/w400-h268/JSC_0152.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhr4R_vPkJSzR88l4AIjFpz5fbjLEEc1g2ZHyXnPYwueThpbo7dkDNK4Zq_S-6KEgo5Pf3Iw0KGUuJc3qKcwwobeeahRvZsMVJbHLZG2LyE64PbMxAWGSDdKg_-t6XeRgQHaCrws9G3f0AslkUHfAyiZk0KnA6iAon4uErHUZOVYg7rgGbhfOo8p1YRgA/s3872/JSC_0151.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhr4R_vPkJSzR88l4AIjFpz5fbjLEEc1g2ZHyXnPYwueThpbo7dkDNK4Zq_S-6KEgo5Pf3Iw0KGUuJc3qKcwwobeeahRvZsMVJbHLZG2LyE64PbMxAWGSDdKg_-t6XeRgQHaCrws9G3f0AslkUHfAyiZk0KnA6iAon4uErHUZOVYg7rgGbhfOo8p1YRgA/w400-h268/JSC_0151.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><p>The young Beatles must have been aware of the magnificent 19th century municipal buildings of Liverpool, such as St George's Hall</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqpi484rC0maxjwZdVlHt3oJLiRyICaEKPxjkrvHd_1zMItW2yJjfzcDqjwnj1SVi-JMq4HMVVQvKHKIozFdRGzA69Mq3Mt9__RV_n7fim5gqyvybc-GNRND0ag0-v6zWo0p_9fzlLnAdf1FwP0DsCvb461fDH1TUqo7eUntGgzSfU2lzEL2wQ2BQjNQ/s3872/JSC_0124.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqpi484rC0maxjwZdVlHt3oJLiRyICaEKPxjkrvHd_1zMItW2yJjfzcDqjwnj1SVi-JMq4HMVVQvKHKIozFdRGzA69Mq3Mt9__RV_n7fim5gqyvybc-GNRND0ag0-v6zWo0p_9fzlLnAdf1FwP0DsCvb461fDH1TUqo7eUntGgzSfU2lzEL2wQ2BQjNQ/w400-h268/JSC_0124.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><p>and close by, the famous Walker Art Gallery</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhs2XItUooDorSz9lrqepZ_ualMs8kEuhx9PgV7vZIvpB-VRtBtXf-VvXoa6gvu-EssuYW-h8_SzdBjSnq_Cq8YgqboDPIgbHljsszm6zcJGI4pQw8xW8Om8-w93nNDKt3HHMzUJEnx9GPtzazybl6riLllLeYNQZqdMc8sBKSCw59tgbrlx8BmdZmUnQ/s3872/JSC_0117.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhs2XItUooDorSz9lrqepZ_ualMs8kEuhx9PgV7vZIvpB-VRtBtXf-VvXoa6gvu-EssuYW-h8_SzdBjSnq_Cq8YgqboDPIgbHljsszm6zcJGI4pQw8xW8Om8-w93nNDKt3HHMzUJEnx9GPtzazybl6riLllLeYNQZqdMc8sBKSCw59tgbrlx8BmdZmUnQ/w400-h268/JSC_0117.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><p>but one particularly splendid and unusual building not yet completed was the Roman Catholic Cathedral, otherwise known as the "Mersey Funnel" or "Paddy's Wigwam"</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYpq5HXCKR1OWSh8s96Tlb4UTethZGfcr43l1gOKQcCdC6HCfeAnnla0ypc8HhTAtVOa-MVZhRorvFL-EdUwHPqEULcI4mvj-XKYIbUsTByIgagTmuu9WODFgO7aP0TEYCx980vRf2V7wzTlpaZYmvYzwZubSkLdZa6DZ-SBrfAw9AV8R--T2-pYeJwg/s3872/JSC_0127.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYpq5HXCKR1OWSh8s96Tlb4UTethZGfcr43l1gOKQcCdC6HCfeAnnla0ypc8HhTAtVOa-MVZhRorvFL-EdUwHPqEULcI4mvj-XKYIbUsTByIgagTmuu9WODFgO7aP0TEYCx980vRf2V7wzTlpaZYmvYzwZubSkLdZa6DZ-SBrfAw9AV8R--T2-pYeJwg/w400-h268/JSC_0127.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><p>The interior is quite awe-inspiring</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiI_68BVK8IWaLtYO0hvwPYW4MG9k5OSBy2b7HP-ghbgtmvqVeipsn8LmVxe3WbAFWgeC_v8y1RnuiHRfS2DkRY4nF2Y0tX-GX8nHx1SIJipf0A5MwC-qmFiUBmYFBc7Gg-9Ai2G5VpIA-GGrByrm3EiLtgR8X0pOLk0W9YNCsiF5TWEHyL0UCrpteYQg/s3872/JSC_0134.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiI_68BVK8IWaLtYO0hvwPYW4MG9k5OSBy2b7HP-ghbgtmvqVeipsn8LmVxe3WbAFWgeC_v8y1RnuiHRfS2DkRY4nF2Y0tX-GX8nHx1SIJipf0A5MwC-qmFiUBmYFBc7Gg-9Ai2G5VpIA-GGrByrm3EiLtgR8X0pOLk0W9YNCsiF5TWEHyL0UCrpteYQg/w400-h268/JSC_0134.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIWUEAu7DfNOkYRMvYTR0AC1ZqxoiAF9MohUAcILvsP8dtOgglq2JH7tlUpU82JZeIqIl27ZgbIBYMsX_Iz_oAK6MdWVObCwDVGyg_oAt6Ztj8HwfRd2oVJdAH62YPIHh47DaO3WWACPS-6HAlMRsqwrvlIIgHBWNFzMlZmKnRh0-RCjoP5x176b4NjQ/s3872/JSC_0133.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3872" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIWUEAu7DfNOkYRMvYTR0AC1ZqxoiAF9MohUAcILvsP8dtOgglq2JH7tlUpU82JZeIqIl27ZgbIBYMsX_Iz_oAK6MdWVObCwDVGyg_oAt6Ztj8HwfRd2oVJdAH62YPIHh47DaO3WWACPS-6HAlMRsqwrvlIIgHBWNFzMlZmKnRh0-RCjoP5x176b4NjQ/w400-h268/JSC_0133.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><p>As John Lennon once said, for once understating it, "There is a lot to see in Liverpool!" </p><p><br /></p><p>.</p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-39211862394780504212023-03-21T00:37:00.000-07:002023-03-21T00:37:10.506-07:00Elijah Fenton<p> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 107%;">My first teaching job, many years, was at Newcastle-under-Lyme school in Staffordshire. There hung above the door in the Memorial Hall a portrait </span><span style="font-size: 14pt;">of the 18</span><sup>th</sup><span style="font-size: 14pt;">
century poet Elijah Fenton, which hangs above the door of the Memorial Hall,
and on many occasions I wondered who Fenton was and why he appeared there.
It was only recently that sought enlightenment from “The Lives of the English Poets”, by the great
Doctor Samuel Johnson, who was himself a Lichfield man and proud of his
Staffordshire origins.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Elijah Fenton was born at Shelton in 1683,
the eleventh child of a local landowner, and attended Cambridge University. He published
a collection of poems and a verse drama, “Mariamne”, which was staged
successfully. He also attracted the support of Alexander Pope, England’s
greatest poet of the time, and assisted in the latter’s translation of Homer’s
“Odyssey”, so he must have been a reputable scholar. But Johnson, though
devoting six pages of his book to Fenton, only quotes two lines of his poetry,
and even these he admits are not very good.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgwjlhrSkA0WArI3sKu4_j6cQJ0GYglC_ooAcIPithybH5EMy_cyFLZ71ajALZvW4CU4N31ufhwK7ecLETkc80MB6gELlVGwCgGz0N14kVnF52yttuAyLDbSOVHvW4QEAXFpiRa3kDapzLd1UkI2cR5ukmBNMLvPWe7RrAQpcBxbdmlkcaVXXHEru16fg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="244" data-original-width="187" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgwjlhrSkA0WArI3sKu4_j6cQJ0GYglC_ooAcIPithybH5EMy_cyFLZ71ajALZvW4CU4N31ufhwK7ecLETkc80MB6gELlVGwCgGz0N14kVnF52yttuAyLDbSOVHvW4QEAXFpiRa3kDapzLd1UkI2cR5ukmBNMLvPWe7RrAQpcBxbdmlkcaVXXHEru16fg=w307-h400" width="307" /></a></div><br /><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Fenton was a Jacobite, which means that he
did not accept George of Hanover, who became King George I in 1714, to be the
legitimate King of England: instead he gave his support to the exiled James
Edward Stuart (“the Old Pretender”) and his son Charles (“Bonnie Prince
Charlie”) who led the great risings of 1715 and 1745. Because of this,
Fenton could never aspire to any official position, for that would involve an
oath of loyalty to the Crown, and any patronage could only come his way from
fellow Jacobites. Jacobitism was very strong in Staffordshire: Johnson himself
never made any attempt to conceal his own Jacobite sympathies. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Fenton left Staffordshire early in his
career and moved south. He became a schoolmaster and tutor, and was briefly secretary
to the Earl of Orrery, but Johnson admitted he found it impossible to trace
Fenton’s career exactly. He was described as being amiable and well-liked, but
also physically very lazy, lying in bed until late in the morning and seldom
taking any exercise, which resulted in him being very corpulent. This possibly
hastened his early death in 1730: Pope indeed said that he “died of indolence”!
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One difficulty remains. Investigating portraits of Fenton via Google, I found that none of them
looked anything like the picture in the school Memorial Hall. I wondered who identified
the portrait. And since Fenton died more than a century before the school was founded, precisely why his portrait should be hanging there, I had no more idea
than when I started! <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-83476366314666259932023-03-01T23:52:00.001-08:002023-03-10T02:52:59.271-08:00Political Philosophy: Human Rights<p> <span style="font-size: medium;">Rights<span> are
“advantages that may be legitimately claimed” (Mill). They can be considered
under different headings.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> </span><span style="line-height: 107%;">Human Rights; earlier known as "natural rights" were first postulated as “Life, liberty and the possession of property” (Locke) and “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (Jefferson),
and listed by the French Revolutionary leaders as “The imprescriptible rights
of man”. They exist independently of positive law, and are common to all
humanity: it is wrong for the state and any other power to deprive us of them
without due process of law, and if they are infringed unjustly, we are,
according to Locke and Jefferson, entitled to rebel. The concept is fundamental
to liberal thought and the desire for a limited, non-interventionist state. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;"> The
concept of human rights was unknown to the ancient Greeks or the mediaeval
writers. The idea of the “Rights of man” was denounced by the conservative
thinker Edmund Burke, and dismissed by Bentham as “Nonsense on stilts”. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;"> A common argument is that even if “human rights” are an imaginary concept and cannot be proved to exist, most people
think they ought to, and that the idea provides a good basis for moral conduct
and a useful restraint on the power of the state, and that it is useful to
treat them as if they had a real existence.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;">Hobbes,
Locke and Rousseau agreed that under the Social Contract we rely on the power
of the state to safeguard our rights. But what right do we have to oppose the
state? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;">Punishment,
by definition, involves the removal of some natural rights. The question of how
far the state is justified in infringing them (e.g. by conscription in wartime)
has been endlessly debated! <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;">Civil Rights
are what we hold as citizens of a state, and are guaranteed (at least in
theory!) by positive law. Examples would include the right to vote, to hold an
official position, etc. Women did not hold such civil rights until they were
given the vote. Children and lunatics do not have the same civil rights as sane
adults, though their human rights may be the same. Criminals may forfeit civil
rights. In some states (e.g. the USA) civil rights may be precisely stated in
constitutional law. There is obviously an overlap between human and civil
rights, but an example of the difference would be “the right to a fair trial”
(which is surely a fundamental human right), and “the right to a jury trial” which
is a civil right determined by law.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> </span><span>Nowadays,
“democratic rights” such as freedom of speech and writing, freedom to mount
political campaigns and to criticise the government, are seen as essential
aspects of a democratic society. Are these natural rights or civil rights?</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;">All sorts of
other rights have been postulated, which are more properly “Claims”; e.g. the
right to education, a living wage, decent housing, medical care, etc. These are
different from natural rights, in that they will probably involve intervention
by the state to bring them about (unless the hope is that they can be provided
by the workings of the free market), and therefore seem to be at odds with the
old liberal ideal of a non-interventionist state. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;">Some have
argued for a “hierarchy of rights”, to establish that some are more important
than others: for instance, if a starving man steals food to survive, how does
his “right to life” weigh against someone else’s “right to property”? What about the competing rights
(the right of the foetus to life as against the mother's right of control over her own body) in the debate over abortion? And what rights are there in
suicide? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;">Recent
discussion of rights has postulated a number of specific issues: gay rights,
trans rights etc. What are these? What specifically might women’s rights be? (Animal rights are different again, and have been discussed in an earlier post)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;">The Marxists
did not disagree with most of the above rights and claims, but argued that, as
long as there were massive inequalities of property ownership, they were
meaningless for the vast majority of the population. They also argued for
giving priority to the fulfilment of the claims over absolute property rights,
and also over the “democratic rights” claimed in the West. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;">Privileges
are benefits or advantages that may be claimed by particular individuals or
groups, but are not available to everyone (e.g. British nobles having a seat in
the House of Lords, or Privy Councillors having access to state secrets). They
may be defined by law and be liable to be withdrawn. Should all legal rights
perhaps be regarded as privileges?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;">Justice is
often seen as being based on respect for the rights of others: unwarranted
infringement of someone’s rights being by definition unjust.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;">Obligations
would seem to result from rights: if I have a right to liberty, it would follow
that other people (and the state) have an obligation to respect it.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium; line-height: 107%;">When and </span><span style="font-size: large;">how far, if at all, do we have any right to break the law of the state we live in? Thomas Aquinas makes it clear that we should not obey any human law that clearly goes against God's commands (e.g. to worship pagan idols), and Locke argues that we have the right to resist a law that threatens our natural rights. Hobbes strongly disagrees that we have any right to follow our consciences where they conflict with the state's laws, arguing that this effectively means that we can all disobey any law we choose. </span><span style="font-size: large;">Of course, there is a major difference between a passive refusal to obey the law and open active revolt! </span></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-52120141564972383882023-02-02T23:10:00.001-08:002023-11-22T23:19:19.890-08:00Cricket: The Chinese Test Cricketer<p><span style="font-size: large;">A back-of the hand delivery by a left-arm spin bowler, which turns from off to leg for a right-handed batsman, used to be called a "chinaman". That term appears to have been discarded, presumably for its racist implications, though in fact it was coined for the man who first practised this kind of delivery: the only man of Chinese descent ever to pay test cricket.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;">Ellis Edgar Achong (1904-86) was born in Trinidad and played half-a-dozen test matches for the West Indies in the 1930s, including a tour of England in 1933. He then married and settled in Manchester, and over the next few years he took more than a thousand wickets whilst playing for various Lancashire League clubs. After the war he returned to Trinidad, where he coached cricket and stood as umpire in a test match in 1954.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgxv-w8zUa7hKBtnhm9xB4Z50sHgwQUTrlwSMTS3g3otOAW51CGkn7uW8zfUgolvZosKY8bLuSMvpZTXu0QH_-HiOPZS9OZcU2LUmJySvv3G2JydrUL5WJm8uoqhfaNEwB9yDXD-s3V7-oj5opEbUDOXhVNoccuhnRuqvwTPiz_mcAXLog4IPTWeaEZFA" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="197" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgxv-w8zUa7hKBtnhm9xB4Z50sHgwQUTrlwSMTS3g3otOAW51CGkn7uW8zfUgolvZosKY8bLuSMvpZTXu0QH_-HiOPZS9OZcU2LUmJySvv3G2JydrUL5WJm8uoqhfaNEwB9yDXD-s3V7-oj5opEbUDOXhVNoccuhnRuqvwTPiz_mcAXLog4IPTWeaEZFA=w292-h400" width="292" /></a></span></div><p><span style="font-size: large;">The story goes that his stock delivery was given its name when in 1933 he dismissed the England player Walter Robins, who exclaimed in disgust, "Fancy being done by a bloody Chinaman!", to which Learie Constantine of the West Indies replied, "Do you mean the man or the ball?" </span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"> The "chinaman" delivery was used successfully later in the 1930s by the Australian bowler Fleetwood-Smith, and more recently by Paul Adams of South Africa. They have also bowled the left-armer's googly, which turns from leg to off. </span></p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7327028885417240312.post-23278021121959522852023-01-24T23:56:00.002-08:002023-01-24T23:56:54.712-08:00Political Philosophy: Power and Authority<p> (Related
topics are <i><u>Sovereignty</u></i>: the supreme authority withing a certain
field: <i><u>Obligation:</u></i> the duty to obey: the <i><u>Social Contract:</u></i>
an agreement to obey; and <i><u>Democracy:</u></i> nowadays seem as the sole
source of political authority)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> Power and Authority are two
related but different concepts in political thought; exemplified in the
difference between “CAN I do this?” and “MAY I do this?”: in other words, am I
capable of performing a certain action, as against, is it legitimate for me to
do it. Political power generally
involves getting people to do something which, initially, they might consider
to be not in their best interests. This might be achieved by the use or threat
of violence, or by some non-violent method of persuasion. Power is a <i><u>“de
facto”</u></i> concept: either I possess it or I don’t. Thus, Mao said, “Power
comes out of the barrel of a gun”, and Lenin said that the only question that
mattered in politics was “Who – whom”: “who is pointing the gun at whom? and
how do I ensure that I’m on the right end of the gun?" Both of these leaders
believed that all power is ultimately based on the threat of violence.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> Authority is different. Suppose we were
meeting in a public room, and I asked, “Can I remove this chair?” Yes: I can
easily carry it. “Can I take this table?” No: it’s too heavy for me to carry on
my own, and I would need the help of others. They might well ask whether I had
the authority to take it. I might get them to help, either by threats, or
bribery, or by persuading them that someone higher up had given me permission
to take it. We could deduce from this that authority is delegated downwards.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> But what is authority? Unlike power, it is a
<i><u>“de jure”</u></i> concept: it is based on the notion that it exists in
law. Does it really exist, or is this merely propaganda by those in power, to
persuade subjects that they ought to obey? This interpretation might be argued
by Hobbes, Machiavelli and the Marxists, and the Utilitarians refuse to discuss
the question. And if it exists, what is its source? The Emperor Frederick II in
the 13<sup>th</sup> century said his authority stemmed from “God, the Pope and
the People”; three sources being better than just one!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">Max Weber
(1864-1920) famously defined Authority into three categories:-<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">1. Traditional:
based on custom (e.g. a tribal chief or priest; presumably deriving ultimately
from God(s)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">2. Charismatic:
based on force of personality (e.g. a gang leader; ultimately deriving from the
democratic support of followers, and liable to be withdrawn if the leader
proves unsatisfactory)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">3. Rational/legal:
in a more stable and bureaucratic society; authority granted by accepted
constitutional methods.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">(King Charles’s
authority would appear to be based on a mixture of 1 and 3, and if he is to
establish himself in the hearts of his subjects, he needs to display a measure
of 2 as well!)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">Authority is
always delegated <i><u>downwards</u></i> from a sovereign authority to
subordinate authorities, and can only be overruled by a superior. But what is
the chain of this delegation?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">1. God
direct to King (Divine Right of Kings)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">2. God to
Church to King (The vision of the mediaeval Popes)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">3. The
People to Government (democratic theory)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">In the USA
the People elect the President and the Congress, but the supreme authority is
the Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court; which can override even
an Act of Congress.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">In Britain,
the supreme authority is “The King in Parliament”, which can pass or amend any
laws at will. The King, the hereditary Head of State, has the sole authority to
appoint government ministers, but in practice the choice is limited by the need
for a government majority in the House of Commons, which is elected by the
People. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">Possible limitations
on the authority of a government:-<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">1.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;"> 1. </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">Constitutional law – but who
interprets this?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">2.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;"> 2. </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">God’s commands – perhaps speaking through an
organised church?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">3.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;"> 3. </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">Individual conscience – are all
citizens entitled to make their own judgements?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">4.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;"> 4. </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">The will of the people – when and how
should this operate? (it will almost always mean the will of the majority of
the people)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> Hobbes would reject all of these, and Rousseau would
reject the first 3 but support 4. Aquinas would support 2. Mill had doubts
about 4, fearing “tyranny of the majority”. Locke and the American Founding
Fathers argued for 1, basing it on 4. In Britain, the Brexit referendum was
taken as a clear example of 4 by MPs and peers, a majority of whom presumably
voted Remain.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal">Historical
note-</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> In the Middle Ages, there was always a
dichotomy between two different themes:-<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">1.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">From Constantinople: a quasi-divine
monarch, surrounded by elaborate ritual and answerable to God alone;<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">2.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="line-height: 107%;">From the Germanic tradition: a King
chosen by the tribal chiefs, who then took oaths to obey him, but with royal
authority ultimately charismatic and thus
always capable of being withdrawn <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">This was
further confused by ambitious Popes who attempted to force Kings to be
subordinate to them!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;">All
mediaeval Kings were effectively elected by the nobles (and in Poland and the
German Empire remained so right through to the 18<sup>th</sup> century!). In
England, unsatisfactory Kings (e.g. Edward II, Richard II and Henry VI) were
overthrown and murdered by the great nobles acting in the name of “the People”.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p>Claims to
Divine Right monarchy were only effective when governments had become more
bureaucratic and had brought the Church under control. The great constitutional
conflicts of 17<sup>th</sup> century England turned upon how far the King could
govern without the consent of Parliament (as representing the People) and how
far the King’s authority was limited and restricted by “law” – in other words,
by what we would call a Constitution.</p>Peter G. Shilstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14738298407725174339noreply@blogger.com0