#18th c. britain

[jeannepompadour]

Mary Harpur, Lady Holte by Isaac Whood, c. 1730-52

[arthistoryanimalia]

For #NationalTeaDay 🫖☕️:

Teapot with Fossil Decoration British, Staffordshire, c. 1760–65 Salt-glazed stoneware with enamel decoration 4 1/4 × 7 1/4 in. (10.8 × 18.4 cm) The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York 37.22.6a,b

“Though it's got a surprisingly modern look, this teapot was made in the 18th-century in Staffordshire—the heart of Britain's pottery industry. The area’s limestone yielded prehistoric fossils, and potters often turned them into whimsical motifs for teapots.”

[probablyasocialecologist]

Had it not been for the steady stream of cheap raw cotton flowing out of the New World (which supplied nearly three-quarters of Britain’s imports of raw cotton), the British cotton industry would have never been able to play such a central role in Britain’s industrialisation. As David Washbrook notes, ‘[c]otton was exceptionally well-placed to lead the move towards mechanization: but favourably placed precisely because its raw material came from abroad’. That the British were able to outsource the production of raw cotton to the Americas – where the costs of production and labour in particular were considerably lower – was central to their industrial takeoff in the 18th century. Through the institution of the slave plantation in the colonies, capitalists were able to significantly reduce the costs of constant capital in the form of raw materials. Without this key input, it is highly unlikely British manufactures could have overcome the formidable competition from Indian cotton textiles, which even in the mid-18th century still held a leading position in world markets. The ‘workshop of the world’ was thus built on the foundations of plantation slavery.

Alexander Anievas and Kerem Nişancıoğlu, How the West Came to Rule: The Geopolitical Origins of Capitalism

[bantarleton]

Trimontium Roman Fort

A departure from the Early Modern period to do a thread about the Roman fort of Trimontium in what is now the Scottish borders. I visited the museum at the weekend, and it was great! 1/14

Trimontium, now called Newstead, was first built about around 80 AD, during the Roman General Agricola’s invasion of Caledonia. It stood for over a century in an area known as Trimontium – between three hills.

The land had been occupied by native tribes since at least the Iron Age, with multiple settlements existing on the slopes surrounding the fort.

It served as a military base in Caledonia, and seems to have primarily been a cavalry depot for long periods – there are lots of horse remains, as well as these helmets and ceremonial faceplates belonging to Roman cavalrymen.

The XX Legion spent time there (as did the VIII, earlier on), as evidenced by the remains of this plaque.

A Roman soldier’s service record!

The fort’s strategic function shifted over time –it was a bulwark existing beyond Hadrian’s Wall, then after the construction of the Antonine Wall further north it became more of a logistical hub, then resumed being a frontier fort after the Antonine Wall’s abandonment.

Small settlements sprung up around the fort’s walls, and it is likely there were regular peaceful contact with the surrounding tribes. However there is also evidence of conflict. Roman forts came under sustained attack across several periods, and it looks as though when the fort was finally abandoned, it was done so in a hurry.

As per soldiers from the Ancient World to modern-day Iraq and Afghanistan, when the troops move out they leave a lot behind – lucky for the archaeologists and historians.

I am amused by how miserable Roman soldiers must have been after getting assigned to northern Britain. The ends of the earth indeed! I also do scoff at the whole “I think about Rome every day” meme, but I can see the allure, and I find it extremely interesting comparing and contrasting what I know about 18th c. militaries with the Roman Army. There were definitely a fair few things that I think the Romans were better at, especially when it comes to organisation, logistics and efficiencies!

[ltwilliammowett]

A little Naval History Beginners Guide

Books I like to recommend because they are really well written, have a high information content and I personally work with them. This is only a small list, there are of course many more, but for a start these are good to begin with.

   B. Lavery, Nelson’s Navy. The Ships, Men and Organisation. 1793-1815 New Edition    (London 2012)    B. Ireland, Naval Warfare in the Age of Sail. War at Sea 1756-1815 ( London 2000)    N. Tracy, Nelson’s Battles. The Art of Victory in the Age of Sail (London 1996)    D.Davies, A brief history of Figthing Ships (London 1996)    A. Lambert, War at Sea in the Age of Sail 1650- 1850 (London 2000)    G. Wells, Naval Customs and traditions (London 1930)    P. Goodwin, HMS Victory, Pocket Manuel 1805 (London 2015)    J. Eastland a. I. Ballantyne, HMS Victory. First Rate 1765 (London 2011)    J. Bennett, Sailing into the Past. Learning from replica Ships (London 2009)    M. P. Smith, Terror at Sea. True Tales of shipwrecks, cannibalism, pirates, fire at sea & otherdire disasters in the 18th& 19th centuries (Maine, 1995)    J. Lowry, Fiddlers and whores. the candid memoirs of a surgeon in Nelson’s fleet, James Lowry, 1798 (London 2006)    B. Lavery, Royal Tars. The lower deck of the royal navy, 875-1850 (London 2010)    R. and L. Adkins, Jack Tar. Life in Nelson’s Navy (London 2008)   A. Bruce, Encyclopedia of Naval History (London 1998)   J. Black, Naval Power: A History of Warfare and the Sea from 1500 (London 2009)   N.A. M Rodger, The Safeguard of the Sea: A Naval History of Britain 660-1649 (London 1997) C. L. Symonds, The U.S. Navy: A Concise History (New York 2015)

https://naval-encyclopedia.com/ C. G. Davis, American Sailing Ships: Their Plans and History (University of Michigan 1984) B. Greenhill, The Evolution of the Wooden Ship (1988) R. Woodman, The History of the Ship: The Comprehensive Story of Seafaring from the Earliest Times to the Present Day (1998)

Admiral W. E. Smith, The Sailor's Word-Book: An Alphabetical Digest of Nautical Terms (England 1867)

[theoutcastrogue]

8 Fancy Pocket Knives

Etched pocket knife from Eskilstuna, Sweden

Silver / mother of pearl Victorian fruit knife, England

Damascene Toledo knife, Spain

Inlaid Toledo knife, Germany

Silver-plated fruit knife, USA

Damascene Toledo knife, Spain

Etched pocket knife from Eskilstuna, Sweden

Mother of pearl pocket knife from Eskilstuna, Sweden

@victoriansword [details after the cut]

1) Swedish pocket knife by EKA (Eskilstuna Kniffabriks AB), c. 1980-2000. Model 6 GS (1967-2010), with main blade, bottle opener/screwdriver, pen blade, and nail file. Tang stamp "EKA / SWEDEN" (from 1967), etched handle, 7 cm closed.

These were very popular in the 2nd half of the 20th century as gift knives or advertising knives. They were manufactured by many cutlers in Eskilstuna, and widely exported. The decorative pattern appears, with variations, on Swedish knives from at least the 19th century, and is inspired by Norse / Viking art, which often features twisted serpents/dragons. The interlacing perhaps also borrows from Celtic knots.

2) English fruit knife by Martin Bros & Co, 1848. Silver blade with 4 hallmarks (for Queen Victoria, the year, sterling silver, and Sheffield) and maker's mark, mother of pearl scales, 9.5 cm closed.

This is the posh version of what used to be an incredibly useful tool, a knife (and sometimes a multi-tool knife and fork) for eating on the road. The fancier ones were also status symbols, and very popular gifts – millions of silver fruit knives were manufactured in Britain from the 18th to the 20th century, mostly in Sheffield, Birmingham, and Edinburgh.

3) Spanish Toledo knife, as it's sometimes called, a damascened penknife of recent manufacture. Two pen blades, tang stamp "TOLEDO", 6.7 cm closed.

Not to be confused with Damascus blades! The handle is damascened – decorated with gold inlaid into oxidized steel (see here for details). Reminder that gold is a highly ductile metal (you can stretch it real thin before it breaks), so that impressive aesthetic result comes from a tiny amount of gold. It's a cheap knife, is what I'm saying, for tourists basically.

4) German pocket knife, confusingly also called Toledo, by Hartkopf. With main blade, pen blade and nail file. Brass handle inlaid with oxidised steel. Tang stamp "Hartkopf&Co / Solingen", 8cm closed.

It's "damascened" in the broad sense of inlaying, hence the name "Toledo": it supposedly emulates the Spanish style, and perhaps pretends to be Spanish, but both the metals and the geometric patterns are different. Knives of this type were popular in Germany all through the 20th century as gifts and advertising knives.

5) American fruit knife by William Rogers Mfg, made in Hartford, Connecticut c.1865-1898. Main blade, seedpick [also called nut-pick or nut-picker *snickers*], silver-plated nickel silver, decorated with flowers and apples. Tang stamp: an anchor logo and "Wm ROGERS & SON AA", 8.2 cm closed.

Sometimes fruit knives like this were bought by fruit shops/groceries (relatively fancy ones, presumably) in bulk, and sold or given to customers as gifts.

6) Spanish Toledo penknife (another one). With pen blade and damascened handle, different pattern, probably a bit older. Tang stamp again "TOLEDO", 6.8 cm closed.

7) Swedish pocket knife by Emil Olsson, c. 1920-1950. Blade, pen blade and corkscrew. Tang stamp "EMIL OLSSON / [star logo] / ESKILSTUNA", 9.2 cm closed.

Another etched serpent pattern on the handle, though by now you have to squint to see it. This knife has seen some shit. Until ~1940, pocket knives were widely sold and used in Sweden because they came with corkscrews, and all the bottles had corks, and everyone needed to open bottles. After the war, bottle caps replaced corks for everything except wine, and the pocket knife's utility plummeted, and cutleries started closing. There used to be hundreds, and by now only EKA's left. So statistically, if it's from before ~1950 it saw a lot of use, and if it's after ~1950 it did not, it was a gift or something.

8) Swedish pocket knife by EKA, c.1935-1965. Model 38 PB, with blade, pen blade, flat screwdriver, and corkscrew. Handle with mother of pearl scales and nickel silver bolsters, tang stamp "E.K.A. / ESKILSTUNA / SWEDEN", 8.3 cm closed.

The corkscrew is a quirky one, known as Gottlieb Hammesfahr patent: it pivots on the pin and opens perpendicular to the handle, not pulled downwards as in most pocket knives.

[transmutationisms]

hello caden, do you know anything about horticulture therapy? i'm taking a class on it and there's a big emphasis on how medieval european medicine taught that working in a garden is good for your health (apparently in medieval Spain hospital patients would do it to pay off their debts and they found they had better health outcomes). there's also stuff about dr benjamin rush. i don't know much about him but i am lightly skeptical of everything i've read so far. i'm curious to hear your take

as in, do i think it works, or do i know of it being a therapeutic practice? on the former, basically no, not the way proponents claim. on the latter, yeah horticultural therapy/gardening was commonly prescribed when there were broader turns toward occupational/work therapies, the ideas generally being that patients needed 1) moral discipline of the variety encouraged by physical labour 2) something to focus their minds on 3) exercises that could strengthen the weakened or injured body 4) exposure to fresh air and nature 5) a way of 'contributing to society'. which of these justification/s were used varied by location and time period: eg, in the us and france, there was a pretty dramatic shift in the latter half of the 18th century toward hospital reform that focussed on improving sanitary conditions, and this led to (among other things) a bigger push for outdoor activities, courtyard access, gardens, airflow, &c; also in these countries in this period, certain trendy empiricist ideas were often invoked to justify claims about the moral benefits of physical work, which obviously was very helpful to people who wanted, eg, standing militaries and large workforces in these countries that were dealing with political instability.

benjamin rush was definitely big on horticultural therapy in philadelphia, specifically in the context of psychiatric therapeutics; he was an advocate of occupational/work therapy in general. in the french context in particular, gardens have also had some other specific valences, owing to lockean and rousseauvian ideas about the moral value of seeing / contemplating nature, as well as a fashion for orderly gardens as demonstrations of imperial management of nature & territory from about the 17th century onward. (british gardens have historically had a similar ideological function, though britain is not my wheelhouse.) gardening also had specific political resonances and uses because university and hospital gardens historically functioned as sources of pharmacists' botanicals, and because acclimatising exotic species has long been a state-funded economic enterprise intended both to introduce profitable plants into the metropole and to examine the conditions under which organisms could be adapted to different climates. this was a question of great interest to, eg, governments that were trying to hold and profit from settler colonies. so, there were a lot of different reasons gardening in particular was historically such a big part of occupational therapy prescriptions.

none of this inherently means that working in a garden has zero therapeutic benefit. and i'm obviously coming at this from a historical angle and not a medical one per se. but, when i run across a therapeutic recommendation that has this type of history of being deeply entwined with moral claims, political uses, and capitalist and colonialist exploitation, i'm generally very hesitant about assuming it 'works' without compelling reason to think that the justification / evidence for recommending it has radically changed in some way. i specifically have some reasons to be really suspicious of the claim that horticultural therapy 'worked' in that medieval spanish case you mention (i will throw some methodological notes under a cut in case you care, along with a couple historical texts that are just interesting).

occupational therapies in general are still heavily moralised, and are blatantly aimed at getting people 'back to work' in service to employers and governments that depend on their labour-power. obviously, participating in activities you enjoy is generally good for your overall well-being, and for some people one such activity very well could be gardening. but the idea that gardening has some specific health-promoting essence reeks of assumptions about the morality of physical labour, the idea that illness or unwellness is caused by laziness, &c. justifying the practice by appealing to medieval european hospital therapeutics is not impressive because again, the actual reasons for this therapy being recommended in those contexts were, as a general rule, highly political & politicised; none of this is operating in some ideal realm of 'objective' medico-scientific evidence. and, just to spell it out: occupational therapies are appealing to a lot of physicians and institutions because they make it easy to place the emphasis on patients' individual responsibility to 'better' themselves through hard work, and because they easily slot psychiatric treatment into capitalist ruling ontologies: there's no challenge here to the underlying political-economic conditions that cause and worsen human misery or sickness.

as a side note this is all what i think about whenever i see those tumblr posts that are like "cure your depression by having a hobby and doing something with your hands :) get on the alaskan salmon fishing boat :)" but uh that's neither here nor there i guess

regarding the claim about medieval spanish hospital patients:

it's honestly hard to even evaluate this sort of thing directly in the written historical record. medieval european hospital sources tend to be heavily dominated by physicians' records and treatises (depending on time and place, many/most hospital patients may not have even been literate), which means there's not much by way of patient voices in there. there would also be a huge difference between, say, someone who was committed to an institution for the rest of their life and was made to work in the gardens, versus a wealthy patient who may have been encouraged by a physician to do some work in their own gardens, probably even on their own land. also, as the case in question suggests, occupational/work therapies constantly run into the zone of just being blatant economic exploitation of patients, so when we read these archives with critical eyes, any claim to efficacy of such treatments needs to be pretty heavily scrutinised.

you should also keep in mind that european hospitals have historically not always been institutions that patients were expected to leave: i'm not well-read in spanish medical history specifically, but many european hospitals have historically been more of a 'last resort' type of place, where you basically got admitted if you were dying and had no other options, and/or were sent forcibly because you were indigent or perceived to be causing some sort of 'public nuisance'. if you want to talk health outcomes for such institutions, the confounding factors here are going to be so massive i don't know how you could possibly wade through them to say anything conclusive about whether occupational therapies 'worked', especially given that the written medieval record is, yknow, hundreds of years old and sometimes things do get lost (or were never written down in a permanent place at all). also, those patients who did leave hospitals did not generally, afaik, keep in close contact with their physicians, which would make long-term health outcome tracking of this sort difficult—if anyone even attempted to do it!

there are certainly contexts where local/family physicians kept records on specific patients for a long time, but the sorts of long-term large-scale medical 'studies' we would now expect to see in order to back up claims of therapeutic efficacy just didn't really exist prior to the 19th century or so, partly for logistical / bureaucratic reasons and partly because (speaking generally) european medicine in the middle ages tended to emphasise not universal physiological rules but rather the differences between bodies, with the physician's job being to fine-tune the individual's personal biological balance in order to maintain a state of health. the idea of collecting statistics on a huge population to determine a universal biological condition of health/normality doesn't really become professional orthodoxy until the 18th century at the earliest. this is not to say that medieval european medicine had no normalising function or purpose, but it didn't really work in the exact same way that medicine in the era of social sciences and social statistics does. the way that particular claim about spanish hospitals is framed sounds (to me!) a bit too copacetic with current therapeutic evaluative principles not to raise my eyebrows.

if you care about tracking this down i would suggest you follow whatever footnote or reference this claim came from, and see if the author explained their methodology to evaluate their historical sources (if not, big red flag already lol). you would also want to go footnote-jumping until you find the actual historical source, and with luck, possibly consult it online (many archives these days digitise sources, some even on request! everybody say thank you archivists) and make your own evaluations. but ^^ those are just some considerations i would start with and that make me think this claim may lack historical rigour or rely on shoddy evaluation of sources.

a few books off the top of my head that talk about on gardens, gardening, and occupational/nature therapy in general (sorry they're basically all french context):

Sun-Young Park, Ideals of the body: architecture, urbanism, and hygiene in postrevolutionary Paris

Chandra Mukerji, Territorial ambitions and the gardens of Versailles; and "Entrepreneurialism, land management, and cartography during the age of Louis XIV" in Merchants and marvels ed. Paula Findlen & Pamela Smith

Dora Weiner, The citizen-patient in revolutionary Paris

Jessica Riskin, Science in the age of sensibility: the sentimental empiricists of the French Enlightenment

Emma Spary, Utopia's garden: French natural history from Old Regime to Revolution

Sarah Easterby-Smith, Cultivating commerce: cultures of botany in Britain and France, 1760–1815

[victoriansecret]

Vails

I haven't actually talked about it here a lot, partly because I try not to do heavy history stuff here - this blog is meant to be a hobby, after all - and it's something I'm frankly too passionate (obsessed) about, but my main area of historic interest and focus, especially when it comes to my own personal research, is the history of domestic service. It is not an exaggeration to say it is my life's work. Another reason I don't write about it often is I don't really know where to start. My breadth of knowledge on the subject is quite broad, so there's a lot I could say, but I think I'll try to write some small things about specific aspects of it. Vails were, in the 18th (and I believe also 19th) century, basically what we could today call tips, often paid to servants. And when you read things written by the 'master class' of people being served, while they're obviously biased and exaggerating, it does become clear that servants rather enforced them. There wasn't a guild system for servants like there were for trades, but there were informal clubs and groups, and this is one of the ways they seem to have acted together, almost as a form of unionization. There's a letter to a British newspaper where the write says that he estimates many servants are doubling, tripling, or even quadrupling their annual salaries through vails. I could write more but I'll just transcribe some of my favourite passages on this subject from the book Life in the Country House in Georgian Ireland by Patricia McCarthy: I will add too, while this is specifically talking about paid servants in Britain, you do see vails paid to enslaved people in America as well. Probably not as often, but Philip Vickers Fithian, who wrote a diary about his experiences in Virginia in the 1770s, writes about similar things of the enslaved people at the plantation he's staying at expecting their "Christmas boxes" of vails, although they weren't quite as beholden to the actual date of Boxing Day.

... The customary scene in the hall, as their guests waited for their carriages or horses to be brought to the door, embarrassed many. [Marshall, Domestic Servants] Hosts feigned ignorance of their guests' fumbling in their pockets to find shillings and half-crowns to distribute to the servants, who had lined themselves up expectantly. Whether the motive for allowing the practice was to salve the collective conscience of the employers at paying such low wages is not clear. [Bridget Hill, Servants: English Domestics in the 18thc.] It was not confined to great houses, but was also expected in more modest establishments, although the amounts given were less. It was also not only expected on departure from the house of a friend: vails were disbursed by 'house tourists' to whichever servant showed them around - in most cases an upper servant.

...

An army officer described how much his visit to the house of a friend would cost him: 'The moment your departure is known, all the domestics are on the qui vive; the house-maid hopes you have forgotten nothing in packing up, if so, she will take care of it till you come again; this piece of civility costs you three ten-pennies; the footman carries your portmanteau .. to the hall, three more; the butler wishes you a pleasant journey - his greate kindness in so doing of course extracts a crown-piece; the groom brings your horse, assuring you 'tis an ilegant baste, and has fed well' - three more ten-pennies go; the helper runs after you with the curb-chain, which he has 'till this moment carefull secreted - two more; making a total of seventeen, or, in English money, upwards of fourteen shillings. A heavy tax for visiting a friend!' [Benson Earle Hill, Recollections of an Artillery Officervol. 1]

...

Richard Griffith from Bennetsbridge, Co. Kilkenny, complained in c.1760 in a letter to hise wife that 'an heavy and unprofitable Tax still subsists upon the Hospitality of this Neighbourhood .. in short while this Perquisite continues, a Country Gentleman may be considered but as a generous Kind of Inn-holder, who keeps open House, at his own Expence, for the sole Emolument of his Servants .. this Extravagance is not confined, at present, solely to the Country .. ; for a Dinner in Dublin, and all the Towns in Ireland, is even in a Morning, with a Person who keeps his Port, you may levee him fifty Times, without being admitted by his Swiss Porter. So... I shall consider a great Man as a Monster, who may not be seen, 'till you have fee'd his Keppers.' [R. and E. Griffith, A Series of Genuine Letters Between Henry and Frances, vol. 4]

...

Swift gives similar suggestions in Directions to Servants: 'By these, and like Expedients, you may probably be a better Man by Half a Crown before he leaves the House.' He further urges those servants who expect vails 'always to stand Rank and File when a Stranger is taking his Leave; so that he must of Necessity pass between you; and he must have more Confidence or less Money than usual, if any of you let him escape, and according as he behaves himself, remember to treat him the next Time he comes.'

...

Card money was particularly lucrative for butlers and footmen - so much so that, in London at least, such menservants refused service in houses where gaming parties were not held. [Marshall, Domestic Servants - Two footmen at the court of Queen Anne, Fortnum and Mason, used this perquisite as capital to begin their grocery business in London. Country House Lighting 1660-1890, Temple Newsam Country House Series No. 4] But it was vails that finally undermined the authority of the employers, who virtually allowed servants to dictate whom should be received, and then pretended not to notice when the servants extracted money from the departing guests.

...

In the London Chronicle a correspondent wrote in 1762 that 'Masters in England seldom pay their servants but in lieu of wages suffer them prey upon their guests'. George Mathew of Thomastown, Co. Tipperary, a man famous for his hospitality, was one of the first employers to ban the 'inhospitable custom' of giving vails to servants, and to compensate them by increasing their wages. This was apparently as early as the 1730s. His servants were warned that, if they disobeyed, they would be discharged. He also informed his guests that he would 'consider it as the highest affront if any offer of that sort were made'. [Anthologia Hibernica, I - No date given for this account, by 'Grand George' Mathew, who died in 1737, was the man described, who was host to Jonathan Swift at Thomastown in the 1720s, a visit described by Thomas Sheridan in A Life of the Rev. Dr. Jonathan Swift] A crusade against the giving of vails began in 1760 in Scotland, where seventeen counties issued appeals to abolish them. Four years later the movement had spread to London, resulting in riots there by footmen, the servants who stood to lose the most. [Marshall, Domestic Servants] It was probably at about the same time that employers from a number of counties in Ireland agreed among themselves to abolish vails. [Griffith, Series of Letters..., IV, 'An Agreement entered into among the Gentlemen of several Counties in Ireland, not to give Vails to Servants'] Like George Mathew before them, they decided to increase staff wages in an effort to compensate them for loss of earnings. One of them was Lord Kildare: in March 1765 he issued a directive from Carton to members of his household, stating that 'In Consideration of Vails &c, which I will not permit for the future to be received in any of my Houses upon any Account whatsoever from Company lying there or otherwise I shall give in lieu thereof... five pounds per annum each to the housekeeper, Maitre D'Hotel, cook and confectioner; three pounds per annum each to the steward at Carton, the butler, valet de chambre and groom of the chambers, and two pounds to the Gentleman of Horse. ...

And I will conclude with this funny account, about the penalty for being known amongst the staff to be a spendthrift, from the same book: ...

An unfortunate guest in England in 1754 found his punishment [for not giving vails] truly humiliating. 'I am a marked man,' he wrote, 'if I ask for beer I am presented with a piece of bread. If I am bold enough to call for wine, after a delay which would take its relish away were it good, I receive a mixture of the whole sideboard in a greasy glass. If I hold up my plate nobody sees me; so that I am forced to eat mutton with fish sauce, and pickles with my apple pie.' [Quoted in Marshall, Domestic Servants]

feel free to tip here (and yes the irony of this is not lost on me, although it did not occur to me until about halfway through writing this)

[yoga-onion]

Legends and myths about trees

Celtic beliefs in trees (6)

Ogham alphabet and tree calendar

The Ogham alphabet is the most ancient Irish writing script. There, every letter of the alphabet is associated with the name of a tree, and for this reason, ogam is sometimes known as the Celtic tree alphabet.

The ogham script was a secret means of communication for the druids and also a key to the spirit world.

There are roughly 400 surviving orthodox inscriptions on stone monuments throughout Ireland and western Britain, the bulk of which are in southern Munster. The largest number outside Ireland are in Pembrokeshire, Wales.

Details of the Celtic tree calendar are as follows:

B for Beth (Birch) - December 24th - January 20th

L for Luis (Rowan) - January 21st - February 17th

N for Nion (Ash) - February 18th - March 17th

O for Onn (Golden Gorse) - March 21st Spring Equinox

F for Fearn (Alder) - March 18th - April 14th

S for Saille (Willow) - April 15th - May 12th

H for Huath (Hawthorn) - May 13th - June 9th

D for Duir (Royal Oak) - June 10th - July 17th

U for Ura (Heather) - June 21st Summer Solstice

T for Tinne (Holly) - July 18th - August 5th

C for Coll (Hazel) - August 5th - September 1st

Q for Quert (Apple) - September 2nd - September 29th

E for Eadha (Aspen) - September 21st Autumn Equinox

G for Gort (Ivy) - September 30th - October 27th

Ng for Ngetl (Broom) - October 28th - November 24th

Ss for Straif (Blackthorn) - Samhain/Hallowe'en

R for Ruis (Elder) - November 25th - December 21st

I for Idho (Yew) - December 21st Winter Solstice

A for Ailm (Pine) - December 23rd Birth of the Divine child

Ph for Phagos (Beech) - all year around

木にまつわる伝説・神話

ケルト人の樹木の信仰 (6)

オガム文字と木の暦

オガム文字は、最古のアイルランドの表記文字 (アルファベット)。そこでは全てのアルファベットが木の名前と結びついており、このため、オガム文字はケルトの樹木のアルファベットと呼ばれることもある。

オガム文字はドルイドにとって密かな伝達の手段であり、また霊の世界に導く鍵でもあった。

アイルランドとイギリス西部の石碑には、約400の正統派の碑文が現存しているが、その大部分はマンスター南部にある。アイルランド以外で最も数が多いのは、ウェールズのペンブルックシャーである。

ケルトの木の暦の詳細は以下の通り:

B は Beth  (ｼﾗｶﾊﾞ) - 12月24日～1月20日 LはLuis (ﾅﾅｶﾏﾄﾞ) - 1月21日～2月17日 NはNion (ﾄﾘﾈｺ) - 2月18日～3月17日 OはOnn (ﾊﾘｴﾆｼﾀﾞ) - 3月21日・春分の日 FはFearn (ﾊﾝﾉｷ) - 3月18日～4月14日 SはSaille (ﾔﾅｷﾞ) - 4月15日～5月12日 HはHuath (ｻﾝｻﾞｼ) - 5月13日 - 6月9日 DはDuir (ﾛｲﾔﾙ･ｵｰｸ) - 6月10日～7月17日 UはUra (ﾋｰｽ) - 6月21日・夏至 TはTinne (ﾋｲﾗｷﾞ) - 7月18日～8月4日 CはColl (Hazel) -8月5日～9月1日 QはQuert (ﾘﾝｺﾞ) - 9月2日～9月29日 EはEadha (ﾎﾟﾌﾟﾗ) - 9月21日・秋分の日 GはGort (ｷﾂﾞﾀ) - 9月30日～10月27日 NはNgetl (ｴﾆｼﾀﾞ) - 10月28日～11月24日 SはStraif (ﾘﾝﾎﾞｸ) -サムハイン/ハロウイーン RはRuis (ﾆﾜﾄｺ) - 11月25日～12月21日 IはIdho (ｲﾁｲ) - 12月21日 冬至 AはAilm (ﾏﾂ) - 12月23日 神の子の誕生 Ph は Phagos (ﾌﾞﾅ) - 1年中

[myrddin-wylt]

Still on England and Denmark, how do they interact? Is there any resentment? Sexual tension? 👀 It feels like Denmark has inspired England a lot, but England would never admit it.

IT'S BEEN OVER A MONTH SINCE I GOT THIS ASK AAAAAAH

(character guide: Arthur = England; Mathias= Denmark)

But I’m always on England and Denmark lol, though I apologize for how long it’s taken me to get to this ask. And it depends on the era! They have a pretty long history, even if the most direct interaction was during the Viking Era, but they still interacted afterwards as well, too. Of course, their dynamic during the Viking Age and after it is very, very different, especially in the Early Modern Period (c. 1500-1700 AD) as England emerges as a major power in Europe and then the world while Denmark... does the opposite.

History really flips their dynamic on its head: at the start of the Viking Age, the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms were weak and not even unified, and made for easy targets to raid and invade; Arthur, I think, was pretty timid and averse to conflict and would flee instead of fight if he had the chance. Denmark, though it didn’t unify until about the same time as England, centralized power and started colonizing very, very quickly, and the early Danish kings were certainly nothing to fuck with. After all, they did successfully conquer England a few times, even if it didn’t end up sticking for as long as Denmark-Norway.

Imo the Early Modern Period is where things got really flipped upside-down, as Denmark-Norway pretty much lost their shot at becoming a major power when Sweden ran off with a third of Denmark-Norway’s territory in 1658 (I think Himaruya did a comic about this, actually? You know, the ‘March Across the Belts,’ where the Swedes just... walked across the frozen sea and proceeded to fuck shit up for Denmark? That.) Meanwhile, across the North Sea, England - despite more than a century of war with the French, many, many civil wars, a public regicide, and a brief stint as a republic that did not go well - is one of the most important powers in Europe and somehow only getting more and more powerful. And that trend only continues until the Danes lose their empire completely and the Brits establish the largest empire in human history.

So as far as resentment, I think it’s a mixed bag; Arthur is, frankly, way too fucked up in that regard. If anything, he’s grateful because he thinks the Viking Invasions toughened him up and prepared him to handle survival under the Normans. The Viking Invasions and Norman Invasion were very transformative for him, and my headcanon is that they’re the reason Arthur is so Like That - ie is so dedicated to the idea that might makes right, only the strong survive, and all that social Darwinist (in a general sense of the term) stuff. So Arthur thinks he has nothing to resent Mathias for in the first place.

Mathias... does not feel the same way, especially as time goes on. For one thing, there’s a period of time in the Middle Ages where Mathias resents that England never returned to a union with Denmark and Norway to form the North Sea Empire again; fun historical fact, the Danes continued to try to conquer England even after William of Normandy took over in 1066, and the Danes repeatedly revived their claim on England as late as the 1200s. Given that the invasions started in the 800s, that’s nearly four centuries of Mathias trying very hard to unify Denmark and England. I don’t think Mathias aims that resentment at Arthur, per se, but just in general at how events turned out. And by the time he starts getting over that, he starts to resent how powerful Arthur becomes and how he’s basically living out Mathias’s dreams. Maybe that goes away in the 1700s, idk, but it is worth mentioning that Britain and Denmark had several alliances throughout the 18th century, which ultimately ended in 1772 with a (very scandalous) Royal Divorce that really hurt relations between Britain and Denmark for awhile, especially because the Danes were willing to let the whole thing go and the Brits decided that no, actually, they had to make it a big deal and break off the alliance. So that was a sore spot. (Went very poorly for the Brits in the end though lol, since it meant they didn’t have the Danes to back them up when the Americans started the revolution.) And then there was the two separate battles of Copenhagen in 1801 and 1807, the latter of which really ruined Anglo-Danish relations for awhile because not only were both attacks by the Brits unprovoked, but the 1807 battle ended with the Brits confiscating the entire Danish-Norwegian navy. SO THEY WERE MAD ABOUT THAT for awhile. I think Mathias got over it by 1900, but for awhile there was some serious bad blood between them.

As far as sexual tension, well, imo they’re well past that - I actually headcanon them as being each other’s firsts, to line up with the Danelaw and North Sea Empire. They probably get together periodically after that, especially when they have alliances with each other, but I wouldn’t call that sexual tension so much as straightforward booty calls lol. Makes for a few very awkward morning-afters when Alfred is still living with Arthur.

I think Arthur would actually admit pretty freely the impact Mathias and the Danes had on him - after all, Beowulf, the oldest work of English literature and the national pride of England, explicitly takes place in Denmark. And I think Arthur would happily credit Mathias with a lot of inspiration in general - I just don’t think Mathias enjoys being credited with toughening him up. If anything, I think Mathias feels somewhat guilty about the whole thing, even if - especially since Arthur doesn’t hate him for it. Like damn dude, you really fucked him up.

[jeannepompadour]

Hand-painted Chinese silk robe and petticoat, probably English, c. 1760-1765. Tunbridge Wells Museum & Art Gallery.

[souurcitrus]

Earth-18104

Since I started getting more into Marvel I made a bunch of OCs for the media, and with time I created a whole universe to insert them in the stories. So I'm gonna start posting here my personal time-line.

These events include stories from the comics, a bit of the cartoons and the movies. Many events or characters have their backstories changed and I will include my ocs here.

It's just a project I do for fun (and has been taking my mind in the last years help). It's not complete. There's still a lot to work but I got the basics.

Time-line

B. C - Events

• Okkara and the Enriched

• Birth of Apocalypse

• The Clan Akkaba

A. C. - Events

• Thanos' birth

• Creation of the Ten Rings

• Fall of Titan

15th / 16th / 17th Century - Events

• Odin brings the Tesseract to Earth

• Rise of Count Dracula

• Apocalypse and the Army of Darkness defeat Dracula

• Fall of Tenochtitlán

• Creation of Talokan and birth of K'uk'ultan

• Selene Essex becomes Lady Sinister

• Trial of Agatha Harkness

• Apocalypse is sealed by his subordinates

18th / 19th Century - Events

• Mystique's birth

• Victor Creed's birth

• Logan's birth

• Victor Creed and Tereza Márquez (OC) meet

• Howlett's Tragedy

• Irene Adler and Raven Darkholme meet

• Fall of Akkaba Clan

• Origins: Wolverine I

20th Century

1900 - 1930 - Events

• Origins: Wolverine II

• Wolrd War I

1940 - Events

• World War II

• Johann Schmist finds the Tesseract

• Steve Rogers becomes Captain America

• Bucky Barnes becomes his partner

• Phineas Horton creates the original Torch

• Sgt. Nick Fury and the Howling Commandos

• Foundation of Weapon X by Dr. Abraham Cornelius Truett

• Captain America dissappears and Bucky Barnes is taken by HYDRA

• Logan marries Itsu. Later she is murdered by the Winter Soldider and his son is taken

• Cain Marko and Charles Xavier become stepbrothers

• Wong starts his training in Kamar-Taj

• Howard Stak works for SHIELD

1950 - Events

• Cain Marko and Charles Xavier fight in the Korean War. Marko dissapears after finding the Temple of Cyttorak

• Max Eisenhardt marries Magda

• The original Torch dissapears / dies

• Logan meets Silverfox

• Magda and their daughter dies, Max Eisenhardt changes his name to Erik Lehnsherr

• 1950 Avengers

1960 - Events

• Charles Xavier meets Moira Mactaggert and Gabrielle Haller

• Sabretooth and Wolverine join Team X

• Adam Brashear becomes Blue Marvel

1970 - Events

• Professor X, Magneto, Mystique and Destiny create the first team of X-Men

1980 - Events

• Captain Marvel

• Ghost Rider

• The Incredible Hulk

• Iron Man

• Ant-Man and Wasp

• Hawkeye and Mockingbird

Age of Heroes - The first famous groups of heroes start to rise, the first conflicts earth went through after FF, the Avengers, the X-Men, the Decenders and the others formed.

1989 - Events

• The Fantastic Four

• Puppet Master

1990 -

• The Avengers

1991 -

• Jessica Drew works for SHIELD as Arachne

• Logan adopts Amiko Kobayashi

• Matt Murdock debuts as Daredevil

1992 -

• The X-Men (Cyclops, Marvel Girl, Angel, Iceman and Beast)

• The Brotherhood of Evil Mutants

• X-Men VS Juggernaut

• Sam Wilson becomes the Falcon

1993 -

• Simon Williams joins the Masters of Evil as Wonder Man

• New Avengers (Black Panther, Hercules, Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, Hawkerye, Falcon)

• Jennifer Walters becomes She-Hulk

1994 -

• Sue Storm and Reed Richards Wending

• The Fantastic Four meets Black Panther

• Dane Withman becomes Black Knigt

• Z'Nox attack

• Wade Wilson becomes Deadpool

• Silver Sufer and Galactus

• Alex Summers becomes an X-Man

• Betsy Braddock becomes Captain Britain

1995 -

• Mesmero attacks Krakoa. Lorna Dane joins the X-Men as Polaris

• Patsy Walker becomes Hellcat

• Peter Parker becomes Spider-Man

• Jessica Jones becomes Jewel

• Heroes for Hire (Luke Cage and Danny Rand)

• Norman Osborn becomes the Green Goblin

• Natasha Romanoff leaves the Red Room and joins SHIELD, working alongside Mockingbird and Hawkeye

• Frankie Raye joins the Fantastic Four as Photon.

• The Avengers battle against Ultron and Vision

• Among us stalk the Sentinels! Ororo Muroe and Sean Cassidy join the X-Men

• Frank Castle becomes the Punisher

• Jean Grey absorbed the power of the Phoenix

1996 -

• Hank McCoy joins the Avengers

• Greer Nelson becomes Tigra

• Secret Empire

• Avengers / Defenders War

• Flint Marko becomes Sandman

• Second Genesis.

• Hulk VS Wolverine

• Cyclops starts a new team of X-Men (Wolverine, Storm, Thunderbird, Colossus, Nightcrawler and Sunfire)

• X-Men VS Erik the Red and D'Ken

• Wanda Maximoff and the Darkhold

• Darren Cross becomes Yellow Jacket

• Wanda uses her magic to create her sons

• Mystique and Destiny start a new Brotherhood of Evil Mutants

• Kitty Pryde and Alison Blaire join Xavier's Institue

• Dark Phoenix and death of Jean Grey. Cyclops leaves the team

• Kree / Skrull War

1997 -

• Days of Future Past. Rachel Summers and Lucas Bishop join the X-Men

• Cyclops meets Madelyne Prior.

• Rogue absorves Carol Danvers powers

• Rhino VS Spider-Man

• The trial of Hank Pym

• X-Men VS the Brood

• She-Hulk joins the Avengers

• Wanda and Vision find out their sons are magic creations of the Darkhold

• Illyana Rasputin is captured and taken to the Limbo

• New Mutants

• The Morlocks

• Rogue joins the X-Men. Logan marries Mariko.

• Beta Ray Bill!

• Venom arrives at Earth

• Hawkeye creates the West Coast Avengers

• Forge joins the X-Men

• Curtis Connors becomes the Lizard

1998 -

• Jean Grey returns

• Nathan Summers is born

• Mutant Massacre

• Madelyne is corrupted by the demon N'Astirh, becoming the Goblin Queen

• Asteroid M

• Fall of the Mutants

• Franklin Richards is born

• The Punisher took over the Assassins' Guild, and later became a substitute teacher while investigating drug trafficking at a school

• Wolverine and Jubilee work together against the Hand

• Gambit joins the X-Men

• Genosha X-Tinction Agenda

• Legacy Virus

1999 -

• Kree/Shi'ar War

• X–Cutioner Song

• Rise of Midnight's Children

• Maximum Carnage

• Fatal Attractions

• Bloodties. Fabian Cortez kidnaps Luna Maximoff

• Sabretooth goes to the X-Men after he starts losing control of his feral side

• Cyclops and Marvel Girl marry

• Generation Next and Phalanx events. Emma Frosts takes the new mutants as her students. Blink dissapears.

• The Hellions die

• Peter Parker meets Olivia Octavius, who later becomes Dr. Octopus

• Sabretooth escapes. Angel loses his wings

• Ozyamndias comes to warn the X-Men about the return of Apocalypse

2000 -

• Jessica Drew joins the Heroes for Hire

• Graydon Creed's assassination

• Apocalypse returns with his Knights

2001 -

• Mantis creates Adam Warlock. Later Gamora is sent to kill them, but decides to betray Thanos. With Drax, Groot and Rocket, they become the Guardians of Galaxy.

• The Thunderbolts

2002 -

• Sepent Crown's arc. Lemuria and Talokan are revealed to the world

2003 -

• Jessica Drew returns as a heroes and joins the Heroes for Hire with Cage and Rand

2004 -

• The start of Infinity Gaulent arc. Earth's heroes lose the battle to Thanos. Half of the Universe dissapears.

• The X-Men split in Team Gold and Team Blue

2005 -

2006 -

• Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson marry

2007 -

2008 -

2009 -

• Mayday Parker is born

2010 -

• The Avengers, X-Men, Fantastic Four, Guardians of Galaxy and Denfenders join forces to fight Thanos once more

• Thor becomes king of Asgard

2011 -

• The Avengers rebuilt their base.

• Scott Lang joins the team as the new Ant-Man.

• Emma Frost and Scott Summers re-open the Academy X

2012 -

• E is for Extinction

• Runaways!

• Jean Grey dies fighting Xorn

• Gitfted / The Mutant Cure

• Ana Corazon becomes Spider-Girl

• Logan meets Laura Kinney

• The Winter Soldier Returns

2013 -

• M Day happens

• Vulcan takes the throne from Lilandra

• Peter Quill joins the Guardians of Galaxy

2014 -

• The Young Avengers!

° Iron Lad (16), Kate Bishop (17/18), Wiccan, Speed (16), Patriot (16), Hulking (16), Sting (14), Jonas (??)

• The New X-Men

° Armor, Loa, Prodigy, Cuckoos, (15), Rockslide, Pixie Hellion, Flubber, Gentle, Wind Dancer, Surge, Wallflower, Onyxx, Quill, Network, Wither (14),

° Mercury, Indra, Dust, Ink, Laura, Elixir, Kidogo, Trance, Dryad, Icarus, Tag, Preview, DJ (13), Wing, Wolf Cub, Rubber Maid, Bling!, Anole, Match, Specter (12)

• Stryker attacks Xavier's Institue

2015 -

• World War Hulk

• Birth of the Mutant Messiah

• The Avengers and other heroes fight Kang. Sam becomes Captain America

2016 -

• Skrull Invansion

• Dark Reign

• The X-Men move to Utopia

• The Inner Circle attacks Genosha

• Hope returns as the Messiah

• Hank Pym opens the Avengers Academy

2017 -

• Children's crusade

• Hope and the Lights

• Apocalypse Solution. Warren Worthington III becomes heir of Apocalypse

• Fear Itself

• The Schism between the X-Men happens

2018 -

• Miles Morales (13) becomes Spider-Man

• Logan opens the Jean Grey School For Higher Learning

• Jean Foster is diagnosed with cancer

2019 -

• The Phoenix returns

• Rage of Ultron. Hank Pym dies

• Khamala Khan (16) becomes Ms. Marvel

2020 -

• Ms. Marvel, Nova and Spider-Man create the new Champions

2021 -

2022 -

2023 -

• The Mutants create Krakoaland

[lyledebeast]

Fathers, Sons, and Imperialism in Turn and The Patriot

It’s interesting that between these two narratives about the American Revolution there are three British characters from three different social classes, with three different problems that all, somehow, have the same solution: military service. And in each case, the British Army provides for the character in a way his father could or would not. William Tavington joined the army because his father “squandered” the wealth he was meant to inherit.  Edmund Hewlett joined because the trade embargo the Continental Congress enacted in 1775 nearly bankrupted his father.  Ensign Baker never knew his sailor father, grew up in an orphanage, and joined up because the Army needed healthy young men even if no one else wanted them. That military service is treated as a catch-all solution goes to show how imbued with imperialism 18th C society was at every level.

Of course, it turns out to be a very poor solution for all three characters. Tavington and Baker are both dead by the ends of their stories, and Hewlett comes near death many times, often at British hands, and is forced into one morally untenable situation after another, which nearly breaks him.  Their similarities end here, though, because while Baker and Hewlett are presented as sympathetic men who are doing their best to do what they see as right, Tavington is presented as the ultimate evil.  For a movie that is just under three hours, it has an extremely brief resolution.  Benjamin Martin stabs Tavington to death, delivers a voice-over monologue that fast forwards to the end of the war when he and his new bride/old sister in law find the house Tavington burned being rebuilt.  Martin’s job is much easier than Turn protagonist Abe Woodhull’s.  While Martin only has to kill one man and fix what can be fixed of the problems he caused, Woodhull has to uproot the effects of imperialism, including in his own father’s beliefs and values.

Of course, Turn has more room for nuance in four seasons than The Patriot has in three hours, but there is a deeper difference at work here.  The reason Turn can afford sympathetic British characters is that it presents imperialism itself as the ultimate evil.  Part of the reason Richard Woodhull clings so stubbornly to the British empire is that he recalls a time when it did defend his community from the Dutch and the Iroquois.  Abraham has no success in convincing his father until the community, and Abraham himself specifically, come under British attack in the form of Captain Simcoe.  

The major antagonist of the series, Simcoe is also the character who most effectively represents the evils of imperialism: While Tavington and (presumably) Baker are from England and Hewlett is from Scotland, Simcoe has never been to Great Britain. He is the son of a British surgeon who suffocated in the infamous Black Hole of Calcutta. By far the most enthusiastic soldier in the series, he sees it as his personal mission to “remind” colonials throughout the empire that their homes “belong to our king,” in Ghana and the Caribbean before he was stationed in Long Island.  As much as he is an advocate of imperialism, though, Simcoe is its victim as much as Hewlett and Baker.  In Simcoe’s final scene in the series, General Clinton offers him an appointment in upper Canada, citing the effects of the wound Simcoe received in his last encounter with Woodhull as preventing the wartime appointment he wants. Violence has been such a staple of his life that he is deeply bewildered by the thought of operating in a British colony where the only enemy to be subdued is the weather.

Regardless of narrative length, presenting Simcoe as an agent of imperialism, the true evil, makes more sense than presenting Tavington as the main enemy to be defeated, not least because no one man could possibly have all the power The Patriot attributes to him. The movie’s original tagline invites the audience to see Martin as having no choice but to take up arms against the British in response to Tavington’s actions, and the movie’s producer describes General Cornwallis as “a victim” of Tavington’s seduction.  The idea that only Tavington has any volition in this story is ridiculous.  Cornwallis has the ability to restrain him and does retrain him for the entire middle of the movie.  Martin has the ability to take his grievances against Tavington to Cornwallis before he massacres the British soldiers in the woods, and even after that he has a militia full of trackers and “excellent marksmen” who could eliminate Tavington.  They choose to not do these things. There are numerous Watsonian and Doylist explanation for this, but the one I’m most interested in here is that the story needs a villain, and that villain cannot be imperialism because the movie’s protagonists have spent too much time enforcing and benefitting from it themselves.

While Turn is a story about children pushing back against the patriarchy of imperialism--both figurative and, in Abe’s case, literal--The Patriot is a story about fathers.  A number of the fathers in The Patriot are also veterans of the French and Indian War, known as the Seven Years War in Europe, a global conflict between the British and French Empires.  While Abe’s freedoms are palpably restricted--he can’t even have an extramarital affair in his own home without the British walking in!--The Patriot’s fathers chafe against what they see as ingratitude for their service in preserving Britain’s empire.  “I lost a leg fighting for King George, and now he cuts off my other leg with his taxes!” Mr. Howard complains near the start of the movie.  Of course, he has more to complain about when Tavington arrives and visits the same brutal treatment on him and his family that colonial forces under Benjamin Martin had visited on the Cherokees during the last war.  Well, not quite the same.  Tavington does not use pieces of his victims as bargaining chips or incentivize murder with a scalp bounty. 

The narrative seeks to balance Martin’s past actions with his current feelings about what he has done, but those feelings do not diminish the concrete rewards he continues to enjoy owing to the exact same set of actions. Gabriel Martin tells us that all his life, men have bought his father drinks because of Fort Wilderness; he does not mention his father refusing to drink them. Men choose to fight for Benjamin Martin because of Fort Wilderness. His house is being rebuilt for him on land he took from the Cherokees by committing atrocities at Fort Wilderness.  The wages of imperialist violence have served him well.

It seems worth noting that while Martin’s arc ends with him killing a British soldier, in some respects, Abe Woodhull’s begins in the same way.  He makes several attempts to resist or give up spying in season one, but Baker’s death is the action from which there is no going back.  When his wife Mary asks him if Baker’s death meant nothing, he replies, “It meant everything!” He ends his explanation to her by declaring “I will not stop until every king’s man goes back to England.” His choice of words is interesting here.  He took no pleasure in killing Baker and he does not want to kill British soldiers in the future; he just wants them out of his home.  Obviously, his views evolve a great deal over the next three seasons, but ultimately he does not lose sight of what the real enemy is.  Whether it is Baker’s untimely sense of honor or the best chance he ever gets to kill Simcoe, Abe is not going to let one British soldier stop him from doing what he believes is right.

There is a degree of understanding for British soldiers as people in the young patriots of Turn that is completely foreign to the fathers of The Patriot.  One pervasive example is that the preferred moniker for such soldiers in Turn is “bloodyback.” Having lived in British-occupied Long Island, the young patriots are all too aware of how that term originated, and as the audience we see several floggings of British soldiers administered by British officers.  Imperialism harms its enforcers, not just those whom it subjugates.  Meanwhile, the moniker used in The Patriot is “redcoat:” ironic given how many characters have donned “red coats” themselves in the not so distant past.  

The fathers in both stories are afflicted not so much by poor memories as by short-sightedness.  Like Benjamin Martin, Richard Woodhull is a supporter of imperialism until it threatens the life of his son, but he catches a lot more criticism for his choices throughout the series than Martin ever does.  “You’re a businessman, and you think the British are a safe bet,” Mary chides him before encouraging him to prioritize his family over his politics, as she has done.  He only takes her advice when Abe has a rope around his neck, having clung so tightly to the benefits of imperialism that he very nearly loses his only son.  In this story, it is the children of independence who guide their imperialist fathers, showing them that change is possible.  Meanwhile, the valorization of Martin’s gains through imperialist violence in The Patriot assures the audience that no change was necessary to win the fight for independence.  Small wonder that movie came to enjoy such popularity during the second Bush administration.

[ltwilliammowett]

Christmas Punch

Some point to the ancient Hindustani word "paanstch", which means five: a great drink prepared from five key elements - sweet, sour, alcohol (arrak), water and spices. Some, however, attribute it to English merchant sailors who, though they did not invent the punch, very much drank it. Men working on British East India Company ships used it as a beer alternative in the 17th century. The sailors were known to consume large quantities of beer on their voyages, but when the ships reached the warmer waters of the Indian Ocean, the beer in the cargo bays became rancid and stale. Once the ships reached the coast, the sailors created new drinks from ingredients native to their destination: Arrack, citrus fruits and spices. Back at sea or at home, rum or brandy or other wines were more likely to be used.

Naval Officers and a Bowl of Punch by Thomas Rowlandson c.1790 (x)

The sailors brought punch back with them to Britain. With its exotic flavours and expensive ingredients, it became a fixture in the elite homes of 17th-century England and then a staple. Some parties, however, tended to get out of hand. Like the celebration of Edward Russel, captain-general and commander in chief in the Mediterranean. On 25 October 1694 he had a garden party for 6000 guests in his villa, and had his marble fountain filled with punch. For this, 4 hogsheads (c. 960l) of brandy, 8 hogsheads of water, 25000 lemons 75l of lime juice. 560kg of sugar, 3kg of nutmeg, 300 toasted biscuits and a pipe of dry mountain Malaga. The punch was served by a ship's boy who rowed through the fountain in a small boat.

Sailors sharing both punch and wenches. Taken from “Grog on Board” by Thomas Rowlandson, 1789 (x)

Punch entered the middle class as ingredients became more affordable during the 18th century. Punch was ubiquitous in the British Atlantic world and spread to the American colonies. So why is it considered more of a Christmas drink. It was because many of the merchants stayed at home during the winter months and made punch for the family on Christmas Day with the spices they had bought for themselves locally. This made it something special and is therefore often associated with the Christmas season, even though it was served all year round, especially when the spices became affordable for many.

And if you want to make now your own punch here is a nice recipe.

Bombay Presidency Punch in Bombay Government, August 13, 1694

Servings: 2 Prep Time: 5 minutes

2 Tbsp sugar 2 Tbsp  lime or lemon juice 1/2 cup rum 3/4 cups water nutmeg

In a non-reactive bowl or pitcher, mix together the sugar and the juice and stir until dissolved.  (Please use a glass, pottery, or stainless steel bowl or pitcher. Copper, cast iron, and aluminum will react with the acid in the lemon juice.)

Remove any seeds that may have made their way into the bowl.  Blend in the rum, and then the water.

Add ice.  Then grate nutmeg over the top.

Enjoy your tipple!

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Serendipity or Grace?

On a trip to England age 20 I visited the Tate Britain gallery near Westminster Cathedral. I was awestruck by the magnificent oil paintings of Dante Gabriel Rossetti. Without knowing anything of Rossetti, they were the images I had chosen to hang in my room in my late teens.

But where were the Rossettis? I saw them when I was 20. I found them again yesterday, at the OLD Tate Britain, still housed in the same building on the Thames. There just happened to be a special show of the life and work of the Rossetti’s of 18th C London! Dante Gabriel Rossetti and his sisters were all artists and poets of that era.

Finding them again featured in a show felt like serendipity just for me! The pensive look of these mythological characters suited the angst of my late teens. The wistful poetry too of Christine Rossetti resonates.

The women were professional models painted by Rossetti as famous women from mythology: Proserpine, Veronica Veronese, Lilith...

[Jocelyn Olivier]

[calamity-bean]

Four eps into GO s2 so far, and while there are certainly aspects and sequences and episodes that I've enjoyed, my main critique is simply that it’s a little…. lacking in urgency?

I mean, I just rewatched s1, and that one manages to move along at a good clip while also including plenty of breathing room and scenes devoted entirely to character rather than plot. Both s1 and the book also involve a lot of moving parts — a lot of subplots led by different characters that only fully collide near the end. In comparison, season 2 feels, overall, less intricate, slower, and lower stakes.

Basically, I’m just posting this thought now because I’m starting episode 5 and thinking to myself: Only two episodes left? But so little has happened. I guess we’ll see what these last two have in store, though! And then I'll be able to more fully evaluate the pacing of the season as a whole.

(I did PARTICULARLY enjoy the resurrectionist interlude, though. Medical body-snatching in 18th and 19th c. Britain is an old favorite subject area of mine, and likewise the history of surgery/anatomy as a discipline. I’ve researched those topics a lot in the past, and I was pleased by all the little details included in that ep!)