January 8

Home / Today in History / January 8

440px-presidentwoodrowwilson

1918 Woodrow Wilson Issues His 14 Points

American President Woodrow Wilson had taken his country into the Great War despite having campaigned on a peace platform. Germany’s attempts to incite a Mexican invasion of the U.S.A., and its policy of unrestricted submarine warfare had made it impossible for the United States to remain aloof. In January 1918 Wilson enunciated the issues which he felt were at stake in the war and which would guide the peace treaties. These were the hopelessly idealistic 14 Points which were ignored by Britain and France at the Treaty of Versailles discussions.

I. Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.

II. Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war, except as the seas may be closed in whole or in part by international action for the enforcement of international covenants.

III. The removal, so far as possible, of all economic barriers and the establishment of an equality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance.

IV. Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest point consistent with domestic safety.

V. A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.

VI. The evacuation of all Russian territory and such a settlement of all questions affecting Russia as will secure the best and freest cooperation of the other nations of the world in obtaining for her an unhampered and unembarrassed opportunity for the independent determination of her own political development and national policy and assure her of a sincere welcome into the society of free nations under institutions of her own choosing; and, more than a welcome, assistance also of every kind that she may need and may herself desire. The treatment accorded Russia by her sister nations in the months to come will be the acid test of their good will, of their comprehension of her needs as distinguished from their own interests, and of their intelligent and unselfish sympathy.

VII. Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored, without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys in common with all other free nations. No other single act will serve as this will serve to restore confidence among the nations in the laws which they have themselves set and determined for the government of their relations with one another. Without this healing act the whole structure and validity of international law is forever impaired.

VIII. All French territory should be freed and the invaded portions restored, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in the matter of Alsace-Lorraine, which has unsettled the peace of the world for nearly fifty years, should be righted, in order that peace may once more be made secure in the interest of all.

IX. A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality.

X. The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity of autonomous development.

XI. Rumania, Serbia, and Montenegro should be evacuated; occupied territories restored; Serbia accorded free and secure access to the sea; and the relations of the several Balkan states to one another determined by friendly counsel along historically established lines of allegiance and nationality; and international guarantees of the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the several Balkan states should be entered into.

XII. The Turkish portions of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under the Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.

XIII. An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations, which should be assured a free and secure access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence and territorial integrity should be guaranteed by international covenant.

XIV. A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike

January 7

mte4mdazndewmjaxnza4mdq2

1536 The death of Katharine of Aragon.

Katharine, born 1485, was the daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain. At the age of three she was betrothed to Prince Arthur, the heir to the English throne whom she married in 1501. His death shortly thereafter left her in an anomalous position as her father-in-law Henry VII refused to return her dowry to her parents. The problem was solved when she was pledged to marry the new heir, Henry, a union which required a papal dispensation and Katharine’s testimony that her marriage to Arthur had not been physically consummated. In 1509, at the age of 23 she married the newly-crowned Henry VIII who had not yet turned 18.

For a decade the marriage seemed to be a happy one, though Katharine, despite six pregnancies, gave birth to only one child who lived, a daughter Mary. This was a dynastic catastrophe for the Tudor throne as it was not clear whether a woman could ascend the English throne (the single precedent of the Empress Maud was not a happy one). By 1520 when it was clear that Katharine could conceive no more, Henry turned to a series of mistresses, one of whom produced an illegitimate son, Henry Fitzroy. Henry sought ways to rid himself of his wife, claiming that his marriage to his brother’s widow was illegal in canon law (normally it was, which was why he had been granted a dispensation by the pope.) His agents sought the opinions of Europe’s legal faculties; his envoy besieged the pope to no avail; he convened an ecclesiastical council; he tried to bully Katharine into retirement in a convent. Finally when his latest mistress Anne Boleyn became pregnant, Henry grew desperate.

In 1533 Thomas Cranmer, the new Archbishop of Canterbury, ruled that Henry and Katharine’s marriage had been irregular and declared it annulled. Katharine was shut away in various castles, denied any royal honours and forbidden contact with her daughter Mary, now considered a bastard. Henry’s marriage to Anne Boleyn scandalized Europe and drove Henry to break with the Roman Catholic Church, naming himself in 1534 the Supreme Head of the Church of England. Katharine’s supporters such as Cardinal Fisher and Sir Thomas More were judicially murdered on the king’s orders.

When she lay dying Katharine wrote a last letter to Henry:

My most dear lord, King and husband,

The hour of my death now drawing on, the tender love I owe you forces me, my case being such, to commend myself to you, and to put you in remembrance with a few words of the health and safeguard of your soul which you ought to prefer before all worldly matters, and before the care and pampering of your body, for the which you have cast me into many calamities and yourself into many troubles. For my part, I pardon you everything, and I desire to devoutly pray God that He will pardon you also. For the rest, I commend unto you our daughter Mary, beseeching you to be a good father unto her, as I have heretofore desired. I entreat you also, on behalf of my maids, to give them marriage portions, which is not much, they being but three. For all my other servants I solicit the wages due them, and a year more, lest they be unprovided for. Lastly, I make this vow, that my eyes desire you above all things.

Katharine the Queen.

On the day of Katharine’s funeral, Anne Boleyn suffered a miscarriage. She was never able to produce the male heir that led Henry to put away his first wife; she was executed in 1536.

January 5

Home / Today in History / January 5

440px-bayeux_tapestry_scene1_edward_rex

1066 Death of Edward the Confessor

The second-last Anglo-Saxon king of England, Edward the Confessor was a strange bird. He was the seventh son of the incompetent Aethelred the Unready and was forced to flee to Normandy when his father lost the throne to a Danish invasion. After the death of his father and brothers, and the marriage of his mother to the Danish ruler Cnut, Edward spent decades in exile on the Continent as the leading Saxon claimant to the throne. When Cnut died, his sons Harthacnut and Harold Harefoot quarrelled over the succession with Edward wisely staying out of reach until his rivals died and he was acclaimed king in 1042.

Edward’s rule was marked by the need for the support of the powerful English earls, particularly Godwin of Wessex. Edward despised Godwin who had murdered Edward’s brother but he married the earl’s daughter and gave his brothers-in-law considerable land holdings and positions of power. In foreign affairs Edward was successful in quelling the ambitions of the Welsh and Scots but he gave up trying to curb the acquisitive Godwin clan. When he died childless, he was immediately succeeded by Harold Godwinson. Harold was challenged by a Viking invasion aided by his brother Tostig; this Harold crushed, only to fall shortly thereafter to an invasion by Normans, led by William the Bastard who claimed that the English throne had been promised to him. William became thereby “the Conqueror” and erased Saxon power in England.

Edward’s most lasting contribution was the commissioning of Westminster Abbey. He was canonised as a saint in 1161, the only English king to be granted that status.

January 4

440px-james_ussher_by_sir_peter_lely

1581

Birth of James Ussher, Anglican bishop in Ireland and author of a famous chronology of the world. Ussher became a priest in 1602 and by 1625 was named Archbishop of Armagh, Anglican Primate of Ireland (a country ruled by England and largely Roman Catholic). Ussher opposed making any concessions to the Catholic majority or weakening the hold of the English crown on the island but he was also opposed to the Arminian innovations Archbishop Laud was making in the Church of England. The Civil War meant that Ussher’s last years were spent mostly in scholarship and particularly the quest to date the age of the world. In Ussher’s opinion, the earth was created in 4004 BC, Solomon’s temple was built in 1004 BC and Christ was born in 4 BC. Though we might snicker at such a viewpoint, his scholarship, given the sources he had, was impressive. Ussher died in 1656 and was buried in Westminster Abbey.

1821

Elizabeth Ann Seton, first Catholic saint born in the United States, dies in Maryland. Born into an New York Episcopalian family in 1774, she married at the age of 19 and had five children with her husband William Magee Seton. After his death in 1803 she began to be interested in Roman Catholicism and converted in 1805, but anti-Catholic sentiment in New York caused her to move to Maryland where she opened a school for girls. In 1809 she founded a religious community named the Sisters of Charity, dedicated to the education of poor children. Mother Seton was canonized in 1975.

January 3

Home / Today in History / January 3

600px-satsuma-samurai-during-boshin-war-period

1868 The Meiji Restoration

For centuries the Japanese emperors had been puppet rulers, subject to the oversight of a series of warlords. Since the 1630s these shoguns had been drawn from the Tokugawa dynasty which had followed a policy of isolating Japan from the rest of the world. With the exception of a few Dutch ships allowed to trade at Nagasaki, it was the death penalty for attempting to enter, or leave, the country.

In 1854 an American fleet under Commodore Perry forced Japan to open up to trade with the West. The realization that Europeans and Americans had a vast military and technological advantage over Japan, and the chaotic experience that China was undergoing at the hands of westerners, led elements inside the government to press for an end to the shogunate and a program of modernization.

On this date in 1868 the Meiji Emperor announced that he was resuming power:

The Emperor of Japan announces to the sovereigns of all foreign countries and to their subjects that permission has been granted to the Shogun Tokugawa Yoshinobu to return the governing power in accordance with his own request. We shall henceforward exercise supreme authority in all the internal and external affairs of the country. Consequently the title of Emperor must be substituted for that of Taikun, in which the treaties have been made. Officers are being appointed by us to the conduct of foreign affairs. It is desirable that the representatives of the treaty powers recognize this announcement.

A brief civil war against traditionalists was necessary to achieve the emperor’s victory but Japan was soon on the way to modernization and world power status.

December 31

Home / Today in History / December 31

unknown

1809

The curious case of a cask of wine

A case was tried at the end of December 1809, between the crown and Mr. Constable, lord of the manor of Holdernesse, in Yorkshire. It was a struggle who should obtain a cask of wine, thrown ashore on the coast of that particular manor. The lord’s bailiff, and some custom-house officers, hearing of the circumstance, hastened to the spot, striving which should get there first. The officers laid hold of one end of the cask, saying: ‘This belongs to the king.’ The bailiff laid hold of the other end, and claimed it for the lord of the manor. An argumentative dispute arose. The officers declared that it was smuggled, ‘not having paid the port duty.’ The bailiff retorted that he believed the wine to be Madeira, not port. The officers, smiling, said that they meant port of entry, not port wine—a fact that possibly the bailiff knew already, but chose to ignore. The bailiff replied: ‘It has been in no port, it has come by itself on the beach.’ The officers resolved to go for further instructions to the custom-house. But here arose a dilemma: what to do with the cask of wine in the interim  As the bailiff could not very well drink the wine while they were gone, they proposed to place it in a small hut hard by. They did so; but during their absence, the bailiff removed it to the cellar of the lord of the manor. The officers, when they returned, said: ‘ Oh, ho! now we have you; the wine is the king’s now, under any supposition; for it has been removed without a permit.’ To which the bailiff responded: ‘If I had not removed the wine without a permit, the sea would have done so the next tide.’ The attorney-general afterwards filed an information against the lord of the manor; and the case came on at York—on the question whether the bailiff was right in removing the wine without a custom-house “permit”.

The arguments pro and con were very lengthy and very learned; for although the cask of wine could not possibly be worth so much as the costs of the case, each party attached importance to the decision as a precedent. The decision of the court at York was a special verdict, which transferred the case to the court of Exchequer. The judgment finally announced was in favour of the lord of the manor — on the grounds that no permit is required for the removal of wine unless it has paid duty; that wine to be liable to duty, must be imported; that wine cannot be imported by ‘itself, but requires the agency of some one else to do so; and that therefore wine wrecked, having come on shore by itself, or without human volition or intention, was not ‘imported,’ and was not subject to duty, and did not require a permit for its removal.

The trial virtually admitted the right of the lord of the manor to the wine, as having been thrown ashore on his estate; the only question was whether he had forfeited it by the act of his servant in removing it from the spot without a permit from the custom-house officers; and the decision of the court was in his favour on this point. But it proved to be by far the most costly cask of wine he ever possessed; for by a strange arrangement in these Exchequer matters, even though the verdict be with the defendant, he does not get his costs.

December 30

Home / Today in History / December 30

unknown

1066 Granada Massacre

The occupation of Spain by Muslims during the Middle Ages is said to have produced a brilliant civilization marked by religious tolerance. Though we rightly celebrate the art, architecture and literature of Moorish Andalusia, the story of toleration has definitely been overplayed. The fact is that Jews and Christians under Islamic rule were always considered inferiors and subject to humiliating social and legal disabilities. They were protected, in the public mind, by a pact that reflected this enforced inferiority and when an individual “dhimmi”, or a community of Jews or Christians, seemed to have too much influence there could often be a backlash.

On this date in 1066 mobs of Muslims in Granada, in southern Spain, rose up against their ruler’s Jewish adviser Joseph ibn Naghrela whom they accused of controlling and plotting against their king. They stormed the palace, crucified Joseph on the city’s main gate, and massacred much of the city’s Jewish population. This poem is believed to have inspired the violence and makes clear the resentment felt when one of the inferior races achieves prominence:

Do not consider it a breach of faith to kill them,

the breach of faith would be to let them carry on.

They have violated our covenant with them,

so how can you be held guilty against the violators?

How can they have any pact when we are obscure and they are prominent?

Now we are humble, beside them, as if we were wrong and they were right.

December 29

Home / Today in History / December 29

thomas_robert_malthus_wellcome_l0069037_-crop

1834

The death of Thomas Malthus

Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) was an English clergyman and political scientist whose theories still generate controversy today. The following is a 19th-century reflection on his life:

This celebrated writer, whose theory on population has been the subject of so much unmerited abuse, was the son of a gentleman of independent fortune, who possessed a small estate in the county of Surrey. Young Malthus received his early education mainly from a private tutor, and subsequently entered Jesus’ College, Cambridge, where he studied for the church, and obtained a fellow-ship in 1797. For a time, he held the incumbency of a small parish in Surrey near his native place.

It was not in the church, however, that Mr. Malthus was to become famous. Through life, the bent of his genius seems to have led him in the direction of political economy and statistics; and in pursuit of information on this subject, he made extensive journeys and inquiries through various countries of Europe. The first edition of the work, which has conferred on him such notoriety, appeared in 1798, under the title of An Essay on the Principle of Populationas it affects the Future Improvement of Society, with Remarks on the Speculations of Mr. Godwin, M. Condorcet, and other Writers. In subsequent issues, the title of the work was changed to its present form: An Essay on the Principle of Population; or a View of its Past and Present Effects on Human Happiness, with an Inquiry into our Prospects respecting the Future Removal or Mitigation of the Evils which it occasions.

The leading principle in this work is, that population, when unchecked, doubles itself at the end of every period of twenty-five years, and thus increases, in a geometrical progression, or the ratio of 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32; whilst the means of subsistence increases only, in an arithmetical progression, or the ratio of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. The author discusses the question of the various restrictions, physical and moral, which tend to keep population from increasing, and thus prevent it outstripping the means of subsistence in the race of life. A misapprehension of the writer’s views, combined with his apparent tendency to pessimism in the regarding of misery and suffering as the normal condition of humanity, has contributed, notwithstanding the philosophical soundness of many of his theories, to invest the name of Malthus with much opprobrium.

When the common or vulgar impression regarding Mr. Malthus’s celebrated essay is considered, it is surprising to find that the man was one of the most humane and amiable of mortals. His biographer tells us, it would be difficult to overestimate the beauty of his private life and character. His life was:

‘a perpetual flow of enlightened benevolence, contentment, and peace;’ ‘his temper mild and placid, his allowances for others large and considerate, his desires moderate, and his command over his own passions complete.’ ‘No unkind or uncharitable expression respecting any one, either present or absent, ever fell from his lips All the members of his family loved and honoured him; his servants lived with him till their marriage or settlement in life; and the humble and poor within his influence always found him disposed, not only to assist and improve them, but to treat them with kindness and respect’ ‘To his intimate friends, his loss can rarely, if ever, be supplied; there was in him a union of truth, judgment, and warmth of heart, which at once invited confidence, and set at nought all fear of being ridiculed or betrayed. You were always sure of his sympathy; and wherever the case allowed it, his assistance was as prompt and effective as his advice was sound and good.’

Shortly after his marriage in 1805 to Miss Eckersall, Mr. Malthus was appointed professor of modern history and political economy at the East India College at Haileybury, and held this office till his death. He expired on 29th December 1834, at Bath, at the age of sixty-eight, leaving behind him a son and daughter.

December 26

Home / Uncategorized / December 26

A devoted reader has asked me about the motto of this website: “The past isn’t dead; it isn’t even past.” The phrase comes from William Faulkner’s Requiem for a Nun and refers there to the weight of guilt and experience we carry with us, inescapably, through life.

For historians, particularly those interested in the history of culture and ideas, it takes on a slightly different meaning because we know how closely we are linked to events, artefacts, symbols, styles, stories, practices, and technologies of the past. They are all around us in our everyday lives though they are seldom noticed.

When I taught the history of Western Civilization I always played the following clip from Life of Brian in which the revolutionary Reg, leader of the People’s Front for Judea, learns that his culture owes a lot to the Romans. And so do we. As we have debts to the Greeks. And the Anglo-Saxons. And the Normans. And the Chinese. Even that murderous scabby crew, the Vikings influence us today. 

A lesson for students of history.

Our architecture, language, literature, art, music, religions, dress, etc., etc., etc., are saturated in the past. We plunder the stories told by our predecessors for our entertainments: Norse sagas, Greek myths, Germanic epics, Regency novels, Egyptian religion fill our screens. Our technologies are built on thousands of inventions and insights of our ancestors – Indian mathematicians, Polish astronomers, Cistercian monks, Franciscan scientists, Muslim physicians. The foods we eat come to us from around the world, first cultivated in the Andes, Persian orchards, Indonesian islands, Mexican jungles, or the Ganges delta. 

In our political systems, why do we speak of republics? Why is the American upper house called a Senate? Why did Charlemagne (a Germanic king originally named Karl) and Napoleon dress like a Roman emperor? Why did Hitler and Mussolini adopt Roman symbols? Why did the Turkish sultan call himself the Kayser-i-Rum, the Roman Emperor? Why was the Canadian Parliament built to resemble a medieval cathedral? Why were our banks, libraries and public buildings built to resemble Greek temples?

Because the past matters. We breathe it in every day; we wear it, eat it, read it, watch it, work in it, and hang it on our walls. That’s why being a historian is so much fun.

December 25

Home / Christmas / December 25

Merry Christmas, everyone. Or as they say in some Celtic parts of the British Isles: Blythe Yule!

I thought I might include a few curious Christmas facts to enlighten your journey through this sacred and festive season.

Let’s begin with The Pooper, or the “caganer” as he is known in northeastern Spain.  In the Catalonian region it has long been the custom to place in every nativity scene a caganer, the figure of a red-capped peasant who has dropped his drawers and is in the act of defecating. This has been the case since at least the sixteenth century and is probably some sort of fertility symbol, though now retailers have got into the act and will happily sell you a figurine of a pooping pope, politician, soccer star or actress. In 2005 the administration of Barcelona committed an outrage on public decency by failing to include a caganer in the city’s official nativity scene. Many saw this an affront to Catalan customs and thus a not-so-subtle attack on demands for greater political autonomy in Catalonia. The government said this was not the case at all but that the city had just passed ordinances banning public urination and defecation which made the caganer a bad example for urban hygiene. A “Save the Caganer” campaign was launched with wide media support and the next year the official pooper was back on the scene.

As well as being the Feast of the Nativity, December 25 is also sacred to the memory of St. Anastasia. She was a Christian martyr, legendarily a noblewoman noted for her kindness to the poor and martyred on December 25 in Diocletian’s persecutions of the late third century. By the fifth century her cult was well-established in Rome with devotions centred on the Church of St Anastasia (which may have been named after the Greek word for resurrection). Though her popularity diminished in the Middle Ages, she is commemorated in the second of the three Christmas masses celebrated by the pope every Christmas morning in the church of St Anastasia.

You might wonder if Santa Claus really has a wife. As a bishop Saint Nicholas was, of course, celibate but his spiritual descendant Santa Claus has at various times and places been blessed with a spouse. Katherine Lee Bates, author of “America the Beautiful”, spoke of her in the 1889 story “Goody Santa Claus on a Sleigh Ride”. There she asks

Santa, must I tease in vain, dear? Let me go and hold the reindeer,/ While you clamber down the chimneys. Don’t look savage as a Turk!/ Why should you have all the glory of the joyous Christmas story,/ And poor little Goody Santa Claus have nothing but the work?

In Finland she is known as Mother Christmas; in Austria she is the Nikolofrau and has the reputation of being a bit shrewish. In Switzerland she goes by the name of Lucy while in the Netherlands she has been known to answer to Molly Grietja.