Did you know?

[Mercy]

Pink for a girl, blue for a boy ...

... is such a modern idea dating back only to the early 20th century.

Prior to that things were reversed, pink was considered masculine (being a toned down version of the strong/violent red) while blue was considered a gentle and delicate and so more feminine (as well as being strong associated with the Virgin Mary).

[Henry Edward Gray]

I was just talking about this the other evening! It blew my mind when I first learned that!

[James Winchester]

The stuff that really gets me is Spontaneous Generation, which is only just starting to be debunked in our game's time due to the new and rather radical idea that scientific theories should actually be proved (or disproved) experimentally rather than philosophically, which had been the norm for the last 2000 years or so.

I had heard about this before, but found out lots of stuff on it whilst researching maggots in medicine for James.

It was held as truth that if meat was left out in the sun maggots would simply appear. There was no connection made to flies. The experiment that James is doing with the jars was actually done about ten years later to finally disprove this.

Barnacle Geese were held to 'generate' from goose barnacles (found on the bottom of ships) and were therefor a fish and could be eaten on Fridays.

Shellfish were held to generate in mud and sand, and a Roman library was built facing a certain direction to avoid the winds which generated bookworms. Crocodiles formed in the mud of the Nile when the sun shone on it.

Basically it was thought that there was an element of life in all inanimate matter, and that all matter strove towards life.

The theory of Spontaneous Generation also fit in nicely with Genesis in the Bible and the immaculate conception, so the church was quite keen on it.

[Kane Graas]

In mid 17'th century German and Bohemian glasscutters introduced glass cutting to the English, and soon the English were making candelabrum with cut glass.

Also, in 1676 George Ravenscroft (an English glass-blower) developed a formula for making glass using lead.

[Hope]

I dont know if it's actually true, but a show I was just watching gave the man a discounted price for an night at the inn if he left no stools in the po.

*lol*
Now lets see some negotiations down at the Red Lion.

[Darlene Hamilton]

After being posthumously executed they put Cromwell's head on a pole outside of Westminster Hall - it's still there until '85

[Gwendolyn Llywelyn]

Since some pc's will be going to see Marriage a la Mode, I thought it would be fun to share the series of paintings by Hogarth, under the same name, though I think he is considered to be more Rococo and not actually Baroque with his 'line of beauty' and all. Anyways, there are a lot of hidden details and fun things! Definitely worth a peek.

http://www.humanitiesweb.org/human.php?s=g&p=c&a=e&ID=515

[Blackguard]

There were memoirs by the French Count Grammont of the Court of Charles II. I think these are the only memoirs besides Pepys. If you want to read the book, it is available on Google in its entiriety. Maybe you can download it to your Kindle or iPad.

http://books.google.com/books?id=16jP8Qw6kZsC&pg=PA25&lpg=PA25&dq=secrets+court+of+Charles+II+Count+Grammont&source=bl&ots=c4FVHQv-4s&sig=oSr1iqH2eE7xfPO2n7_qXa7jS3k&hl=en&ei=L78KTKXLH4P58Aa_wtmLBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAQ#

[Fluff]

There is also the diary of Evelyn

[Kane Graas]

Just some random trivia on George Ravenscroft and the very prosperous glass industry in England he started.

In 1673 he set up a personal glasshouse on the Strand and in 1674 he also became the official glassmaker to the Worshipful Company of Glass Sellers of London (all your characters glass products come from this charmingly named guild). In 1674 he also acquired a royal 7-year patent for producing 'crystalline' glass.

The crystalline glass was also the best refractor to be found at the time, so perhaps our scientists and doctors and astronomers would be interested in this as well, not only our *ahem* renowned wine-merchants, who are greedily thinking of the benefits this brings about thanks to the lower price on bottles.

In 1676 he discovered lead glass (I enthused more precisely about all that it changed in Trade circle), but what might be more interesting here is that in 1677, the discovery/development gained royal acknowledgement from our Charles Rex and Ravenscroft was allowed to mark all of his glass with the Raven’s Head seal.

He created bottles, jugs, and goblets, the latter had hollow stems decorated with raspberry prunts

Ravenscroft ended up creating a monopoly with two of his brothers and in 20 years had over 100 glasshouses.

[Kane Graas]

Board of the Green Cloth audited the accounts of the Royal Household and made arrangements for royal travel.
But it also served as a court and had both civil and criminal jurisdiction in the area that extended 200 yds in every direction from the gates of the courtyard and also within 12 metres in every direction around the monarchs.

Originally they were to administer justice between the domestic servants of the sovereign so

"that they might not be drawn into other courts and their service lost."

In 1612 letters patent created, and in 1665 renewed, the jurisdiction over all personal matters arising between parties within 12 miles of Whitehall (the jurisdiction of the Marshalsea court, the City of London, and Westminster Hall being excepted).

So if your PC is planning to get roaring drunk and fly in a angry fit and start trashing the palace, then the 4 main office holders of the Board of the Green Cloth have the right to put you o trial and punish you as they will. Someone go trash a room, would you?

[William Gosling]

Did you know that...
... The Duke/Elector of Hanover was the King's second closest Protestant relative (behind William). However, it so happens the Duke in 1676 was a Catholic. His father was Protestant, as was his heir, but he himself converted. On top of that, it is his heir (the father of George) who would establish the principle of Primogeniture. Currently every time the Monarch dies his realms are divided among his sons, and if he had been invited to rule England the same principles would apply.

Under these circumstances its doubtful that Parliament would invite him to the throne. Which raises the question who Charles' third closest Protestant relative is...

... In order to get to George I, Parliament skipped over more than fifty more closely related Royals because they were all Catholic.

... Scotland is in a Personal Union with England. It is not integrated the way Wales (and I believe Ireland) is. Scottish merchants and trade is restricted and taxed the same way foreign trade is, and legally is the same. The Scots tried to end this but failed until 1704 when Queen Mary would make a deal with the Scots. In exchange for absolute free trade with England the Scots agreed to accept whomever the English Parliament chose as King. Which shows how important they considered changing this state of affairs. When Scotland threatened to not accept George, England threatened to again restrict and tax trade, and Scotland gave in.

A Scottish PC should look into that.

[Douglas FitzJames]

Of course we all know that the Scots are ruling England by stealth. Remember where the Stuarts came from.

Henry FitzRoy, 1st Duke of Richmond and Somerset, 1st Earl of Nottingham (15 June 1519 – 23 July 1536) was the son of King Henry VIII of England and his teenage mistress, Elizabeth Blount, the only illegitimate offspring that Henry acknowledged.

Relative of yours, CB?

[Blackguard]

That Spain was also ruled by Charles II?

Of course, it was Carlos II in Spain. Yet, this Charles was no Merry Monarch. He was severely retarded, born a year after England's Charles II was restored to the throne. It is a sad tale of the complete collapse of Spain in our period. Here's a clip on Spain's Charles II:

Charles II, King of Spain, known among Spanish kings as "The Desired" and "The Bewitched", was the son of Philip IV by his second marriage with Maria, daughter of the emperor Ferdinand III, his niece. He was born on the 11th of November 1661, and was the only surviving son of his father's two marriages -- a child of old age and disease, in whom the constant intermarriages of the Habsburgs had developed the family type to deformity. His birth was greeted with joy by the Spaniards, who feared the dispute as to the succession which must have ensued if Philip IV left no male issue. The boy was so feeble that until the age of five or six he was fed only from the breast of a nurse. For years afterwards it was not thought safe to allow him to walk. That he might not be overtaxed he was left entirely uneducated, and his indolence was indulged to such an extent that he was not even expected to be clean. When his brother, the younger Don John of Austria, a natural son of Philip IV, obtained power by exiling the queen mother from court he insisted that at least the king's hair should be combed. Charles made the malicious remark that nothing was safe from Don John -- not even vermin. The king was then fifteen, and, according to Spanish law, of age. But he never became a man in body or mind. The personages who ruled in his name arranged a marriage for him with Maria Louisa of Orleans. The French princess, a lively young woman of no sense, died in the stifling atmosphere of the Spanish court, and from the attendance of Spanish doctors. Again his advisors arranged a marriage with Maria Ana of Neuberg. The Bavarian wife stood the strain and survived him. Both marriages were merely political -- the first a victory for the French, and the second for the Austrian party. France and Austria were alike preparing for the day when the Spanish succession would have to be fought for. The king was a mere puppet in the hands of each alternately. By natural instinct he hated the French, but there was no room in his nearly imbecile mind for more than childish superstition, insane pride of birth, and an interest in court etiquette. The only touch of manhood was a taste for shooting which he occasionally indulged in the preserves of the Escorial. In his later days he suffered much pain, and was driven wild by the conflict between his wish to transmit his inheritance to "the illustrious house of Austria", his own kin, and the belief instilled into him by the partisans of the French claimant that only the power of Louis XIV could avert the dismemberment of the empire. A silly fantatic made the discovery that the king was bewitched, and his confessor Froilan Diaz supported the belief. The king was exorcised, and the exorcists of the kingdom were called upon to put straight questions to the devils they cast out. The Inquistion interfered, and the dying king was driven mad among them. Very near his end he had the lugubrious curiousity to cause the coffins of his embalmed ancestors to be opened at the Escorial. The sight of the body of his first wife, at whom he also insisted on looking, provoked a passion of tears and despair. Under severe pressure from the cardinal archbishop of Toledo, Portocarrero, he finally made a will in favor of Philip, Duke of Anjou, grandson of Louis XIV, and died on the 1st of November 1700, after a lifetime of senile decay.

[William Gosling]

Did you know that...
... In our time period, England is one of Russia's closest trading partners, if not the closest trading partner Russia has, and has been since Elizabethan times? The Baltic states, the Poles, and other such factions refuse to trade with Russia and forced similar embargoes on much of Germany and Scandinavia. England was unbound by these terms and traded freely with Muscovy and Russia. The Muscovy Company had a monopoly on Russian trade until 1698.

... A goodly number of English Royalists escaped to Russia where they were welcomed by the Czar. For so long as the Commonwealth period persisted, Russia refused to trade with England, and in fact Charles I was called by the previous Czar "That Glorious Martyr". Upon the ascension of Charles II, trade was immediately reopened.

... The current Russian Princess attempting to court Charles II is actually the second attempt by a Czar to marry into English royalty. Ivan the Terrible attempted to make marriage overtures to Queen Elizabeth, however, willfully or not, they were misunderstood. Specifically, when Ivan complained of not having a wife who could bear him children, the English returned with a doctor to examine the Czar and see if anything could be done to correct the problem. The Czar was not amused.

[Kane Graas]

Did you know that...
... In our time period, England is one of Russia's closest trading partners, if not the closest trading partner Russia has, and has been since Elizabethan times? The Baltic states, the Poles, and other such factions refuse to trade with Russia and forced similar embargoes on much of Germany and Scandinavia. England was unbound by these terms and traded freely with Muscovy and Russia. The Muscovy Company had a monopoly on Russian trade until 1698.

Wrong.

It might be that England was one of Russia’s closest trading partner (but was Russia England’s?). But I think you’ve gotten the part about the Baltic States and the trading embargoes a bit wrong.


In that time Estonia belonged to Sweden and Danes and Poles had influence over the other two Baltic states. The Baltic States didn’t even exist as separate countries and the local peasants were pretty much slaves. They couldn’t even influence the decisions made by Germans and Poles and Scandinavians and wouldn’t have had a chance in forcing any embargos. It would have been simply unfathomable. The Baltic States were small and relatiely poor colonies of sort and their main value was in their geopolitically strategic location.

In addition, the Baltic States have never and will never not trade with Russia. We might not always be very fond of our big neighbour, but in order to survive we need Russia’s trade. And Russia needs us. If you look at the map, Russia is a quite unfortunate country – it’s big, but very closed off as it has virtually no access to the sea. So if Russia wanted to trade with the rest of Europe, it pretty much had to go through the Baltic States.


Now trade wise.

17th century trade in the Baltic Sea basin was largely taken over by foreign merchants – from Germany, Netherlands and England. There was a reason why I have Kane trading with Russia as well. Nearly half of the grain grown locally (most of it was distilled into strong liquour) went to Russia, salt, spices, wine, fruit, fabrics all were exported. And from Russia came shipbuilding materials, timber, furs. Sweden shipped iron to Estonia and England shipped tin here.

Tallinn and Narva flourished in that era thanks to trade with Russia. Sweden even considered shifting their eastern capital here, because of it. Tallinn and Narva are both very well situated – Narva River was a direct trading route to Pskov, Novgorod and Moscow. And Tallinn port is the pearl of the Baltic sea, because Tallinn port practically never freezes, not even during the coldest winters when it gets to -30 degrees by Celsius and below. Heck, it’s such a good trading port that the Chinese are starting to more and more use Tallinn as the port via which they send their goods to the rest of Europe.

Of course, Sweden wanted its cut of the profit so the customs in Tallinn and Narva were high and occasionally the Swedish government directed a shipment or two of grain to Swedish army or to relieve famines rather than export it to Russia, but trade flourished!

The Baltic States didn’t implement any means whatsoever to limit trade with Russia and even if they had wanted to do so they wouldn't have been able to. And if Russia had any limitations on trading via Tallinn and Narva, then Russia agreed to these terms in the peace contract with Sweden after being beaten in a war.


Sorry if the rant is a bit long, but Kane also trades in the Baltic Sea basin for a very simple reason - I know the history of it, because it's my history.

[William Gosling]

The Anglo-Russian trade was not nearly as important for England as it was for Russia, particularly with the New World being able to supply similar goods (furs, wood, etc).

Anyway, the embargo started in the 16th century when there was a confederation of Baltic states. So, yes, the Baltic States did issue an embargo on Russia.

Anyway, I forgot to type in a 'd'. "Refused" not "refuse". What I was talking about was supposed to be about the 16th century (Elizabethan times) when the whole situation started. Since then it's kind of gone on momentum.

PS. "The local peasants were pretty much slaves" As opposed to those happy, singing, peasants over in Lithuania?

[Fluff]

I hope you don't mind me stepping into this debate as the residential historian?

When dealing with history, one should always be careful in using anachronisms, that is labels we are used to today that have a certain connotation, which absolutely didn't exist yet in that period of time.

As an example I will point to our frequent use of the word Germany or Italy. Both nations did not yet exist till the late 19th century and the use of the term to indicate the regions might obscure the finer detail (even the chaos and turmoil) that lies below. For instance in Germany right up to 1648 the states were at war with each other over religious issues (protestant vs catholics as will not surprise you) with many other non-German nations joining sides. So, in 1676 they are still as far away from unity as possible.

Just like there is no Germany, there is no such thing in the 16th or 17th century as the Baltic states. Not in the way we associate with this label today. If you look at the history of the general region around the Baltic Sea where today we find Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia and in that vicinity also Russia, Poland, Finland, Sweden and Germany, then there are many shifting borders, wars, confederations etc. and claiming a nearly successful trade embargo against Russia is therefore too much of a generalization.

I am not an expert on this region, but when I looked at the material I found two things

1) Hanseatic League of cities or Hanse for short
The Hanse was still operational in the 17th century but its power was declining, with their previous monopoly on Russian/Baltic goods being broken. Sweden tried to claim the Baltic trade for itself, see below, however the Dutch and Denmark both broke those attempts and kept trading directly with cities, ignoring the Hanse as well. The Dutch provided the Hanse with stiff competition regarding trade and shipbuilding which can for instance still be seen in architecture of Danzig in Poland (causing the Hanse to side with the English during the three Anglo-Dutch wars). Some German states developed an overland trade route that circumvented the Baltic route. None of these entities ever imposed a trade embargo on Russia and were in fact very eager for its products. Rather, each tried to gain control of the route, including Russia itself.

2) the Livonian Confederation
Run primarily by the Teutonic Knights this confederation started out as the result of the conquest of the East, and in practise the division between the foreign knights and their local serfs remained. The confederation had trade agreements with the Hanse. This covered part but not all of Estonia and Lithuania and not Latvia. In the late 16th century the Livonian war erupted between the confederation, Russia, Poland and Sweden for control of the Baltic Sea. The Confederation was soundly defeated and disbanded and Sweden took control of the northern part of it, while other states continued on independently. I have no doubt that in 1676 the ambitions of Sweden for the region have not altered , they are a great power in the Baltic and they may try to stop Russia, but it was not in full control of the trade route. Nor was Russia though it was frantic for more access.

This does not change the fact that indeed, Russia gladly traded with England through the Hanse (and with the Dutch, and the many German states) and at this stage are starting to grow as a nation and civilization after having thrown off the Mongol Empir and starting military conquests with their Cossacks. However not till 1682, when Peter the Great takes the throne as Tsar, will Russia start modernizing.

[Will Whitaker]

http://www.shmoop.com/colonial-virginia/religion.html

This actually backs up even further Will's life. If the Church wasn't that much of a driving force, the only way he could really be a man of God was to lead by example, and that meant learning how to defend others from trouble as a man should.

Though there was a slight fudge I made previously, stating that Will's first time to England was last year. He would have had to go to England in order to be ordained.

[Will Whitaker]

Will was a member of a wealthy, wealthy family!

http://www.sunnetworks.net/~ggarman/princip.html

You missed Church, you owed the parson Tobacco! One pound for one missed day, and fifty pounds for a missed month. His family was insanely powerful back home even if people didn't take religion all that seriously! If he didn't have seven sisters, he'd have more money than most nobles! Granted that you had to go all the way to England to get ordained so not a lot of people actually did it, once you had a congregation, you were a rich... RICH punk.

[William Gosling]

Did you know that...
...This fact is only here to cover up an error I made?

...There was a separate precedence inside and outside Parliament. The King set the one outside, but Parliament itself set the one inside and could not be influenced by the King. They two were, in any case, similar.

[Blackguard]

In 1664 a Russian ambassador presented a pair of pelicans to the king to be kept in St. James Park. Pelicans are still offered to the park by foreign ambassadors and remain one of the most popular sights in the park to this day.

[Douglas FitzJames]

The modern military salute is not in use in our time period. It is instead propper for a soldier to remove his hat in the presence of an officer.

The earliest documentation of a military salute comes from the Coldstream Guards Regimental Order of 1745 which reads: ‘The men are ordered not to pull off their hats when the when they pass an officer, or to speak to them, but only to clap up their hands to their hats and bow as they pass them’.

An extract from the Royal Scots Standing Orders of 1762 states: ‘as nothing disfigures the hats or dirties the lace worn more than taking off the hats, the men for the future are only to raise the back of their hands to them (hats) with a brisk motion when they pass an officer’.

Amongst civilians it is polite for a gentleman to tip his hat to a lady or to a gentleman of higher social standing. For those not wearing hats a tug on the forelog or a touch to the forhead simulates this.

[Hope]

An interesting programme kicking off with the killing of Charles I. Interesting to get an gist of pre-restoration England.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc7S4Chk_-A&NR=1

[Fluff]

I like this chapter about the invasion of Britain by the Dutch.. and yes Schama calls it that!! Ha, I love being right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pstf4VlT ... re=related