text:
DELANEY, PATRICK, teacher; b. 1829 in County Armagh, Ireland; d. 18 Sept. 1874 at Montreal, Que.
We know nothing about Patrick Delaney's life before 1857, the date at which he was appointed schoolmaster at the model school for boys [see Jean-Baptiste Meilleur], as well as assistant master and usher at the École Normale Jacques-Cartier, at Montreal. This French normal school was primarily intended to train teachers for the Roman Catholic population of the districts of Montreal, the Ottawa valley, and Saint-François, and of the town of Trois-Rivières and the part of the district of Trois-Rivières to the west of the town.
Since 1826 the organizers of the normal schools, conscious of the two ethnic groups in Lower Canada, had maintained as an essential part of the curriculum the teaching of the mother tongue and of the second language, English or French, as the case might be. To make clear the seriousness of such a decision, Pierre-Joseph-Olivier Chauveau*, the superintendent of public instruction, and Abbé Hospice-Anthelme Verreau*, the principal of the École Normale Jacques-Cartier, decided that "English literature, and elocution and declamation in that language, shall be entrusted to Mr. Delaney, who has studied in the national schools of Ireland." It was considered desirable, therefore, that future teachers should know French, their native language, but also English, the second language, of which the French-speaking milieu of Montreal realized the full importance.
On 16 June 1857, at the time of the first prize-giving at the École Normale Jacques-Cartier, Delaney made a speech in English, stressing "the difficulties that had to be surmounted last spring to organize the school and, taking into account each one's level of instruction, to place the young pupils of the model school, who came for the most part from the different schools of the town."
In November 1860, the principal, Verreau, solemnized the marriage of Patrick Delaney and Mary Ann Kennedy at Montreal. From 1857 on, Delaney had been a member of the Association des Instituteurs for the École Normale Jacques-Cartier district. He does not seem to have attended the meetings of this association with much regularity, since his name is mentioned only twice in the minutes.
On 23 July 1867, Delaney was appointed English language secretary to the minister of public instruction and assistant editor of the Journal of Education, in place of James Julien Theodore Phelan, a lawyer, who had been called on to undertake other duties.
Delaney died seven years later, and was buried in the cemetery at Côte-des-Neiges.
AJM, Registre d'état civil. JIP, 1857–1874 (Procès-verbaux de l'Association des instituteurs de la circonscription de l'école normale Jacques-Cartier de Montréal); mars 1857, 31; juin 1857. Adélard Desrosiers, Les écoles normales primaires de la province de Québec et leurs œuvres complémentaires, 1857–1907 (Montréal, 1909).
© 1972–2023 University of Toronto/Université Laval
Cite This Article
Louis-Philippe Audet, "DELANEY, PATRICK," in Dictionary of Canadian Biography, vol. 10, University of Toronto/Université Laval, 2003–, accessed September 26, 2023, http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/delaney_patrick_10E.html.
The citation above shows the format for footnotes and endnotes according to the Chicago manual of style (16th edition). Information to be used in other citation formats:
|Author of Article:
|Louis-Philippe Audet
|Title of Article:
|Publication Name:
|Dictionary of Canadian Biography, vol. 10
|University of Toronto/Université Laval
|Year of publication:
|Year of revision:
|Access Date:
|September 26, 2023


text:
The US educational system is very decentralized and schools vary greatly from state to state. There are three levels of subsidizing of education: federal, state and local. They subsidize 3-5 per cent on a federal level, around 20 per cent on a state level and 70-80 per cent on a local level.
There are 15,000 school districts which are different in size. A school district is governed by the Board of Education/School Board/School Council which is elected every two years by the residents of the school district. Members of school boards perform their responsibilities on a volunteer basis, that means they do not get any salaries. They are to define the policies for the administration of the school district. Teachers, in turn, decide about the program and approaches of teaching. Every resident pays a school tax to the school district he/she lives in, no matter he/she has school children or not.
School education in the United States is free and parents are free to choose a school for their children. But if parents send their child to a school of another school district they have to pay the sum equivalent to the school tax directly to the school the child goes to. There are also a lot of private schools, mainly religious, and parents have to pay for them. The cost is $ 5,000 - $ 10,000 a year.
There is no home education in the United States. Each invalid is supposed to attend school. School provides all the necessary conditions for them to study.
The school system structure in the United States looks like this. Children start going to school at the age of five. First they go to eight-year elementary school and then to high school or if they go to five- or six-year elementary school, they then attend three- or four-year middle school, and then high school.
Teenagers study at high school four years and graduate from it at the age of eighteen. Members of each grade in high school have special names: a ninth grader is called a Freshman, a tenth grader - a Sophomore, an eleventh grader - a Junior, a twelfth grader - a Senior.
The completion of high school is called graduation. In order to graduate, students must accumulate a certain amount of credits during their four years at school. Credits are points given for every subject that is passed successfully. In addition to that, students must successfully complete specific subjects required by the state or local educational authorities, such as US history, English, mathematics and physical education. This may vary from state to state. Over 60% of school graduates continue their education in two- or four-year colleges or universities. At least 10% of high school students are allowed to finish school at the age of 16.
A school year starts at the beginning of September or at the end of August and ends in late June or early July, just before the Independence Day, and is divided into three terms/trimesters or four quarters. School children have winter and spring breaks for two or three weeks and summer vacation for six up to eight weeks.
There is a great variety of Saturday, Sunday, vacational and other schools. The most popular one is summer school. It is for students who want to get a deeper knowledge in a particular subject, or to skip a year, or just fail their examinations. It lasts six weeks and parents have to pay for it.
Students go to school five days a week. They get to and from school by a school bus. A typical school day in America starts at 7.30 AM with the Pledge of Allegiance in which the US flag and the whole nation is glorified. Then follows the homeroom period during which a homeroom teacher calls the roll and the principal makes his/her announcements over the intercom.
Every day students usually have seven periods which last 50-55, sometimes 45 minutes. In some schools there are four periods lasting 90 minutes. There are 2-5 minute passings between periods and a break of 30 minutes for lunch.
American schools today house a large number of students but making friends can be difficult, as the same group of students does not attend all the classes. In order to encourage meeting and knowing a broader population at school, special emphasis is placed on so-called extracurricular activities where interests, rather than academic ability, bring students together. Extracurricular activities are the many club meetings, music or drama rehearsals, and sport practice sessions that take place in American high school in the afternoon after classes. These meetings are a very important part of high school life, since they are a link between different groups of students who are placed in various academic programs. Students who usually would not meet in the classroom get to know each other in areas of common interest. They give students the opportunity to further their specific interests in various fields and to spend their free time together.
Even though they are not mandatory, many students get involved in different extracurricular activities. Since students spend a lot of time participating in various activities, school becomes the center of social life for students. They not only go to school to study the material presented in class, but they also meet together to socialize and to pursue their interests.
Other important activities in American high school are sports teams. Most schools offer a variety of teams for both boys and girls. American football, basketball and baseball are played in the majority of schools. In addition, one may find tennis, gymnastics, hockey, swimming, golf, volleyball, cross-country, and track and field teams, depending again on the size and financial resources of the school. Soccer is also growing in popularity. Usually schools have varsity teams, which complete with other schools and which have very intensive training, and intramural teams, which play other teams within the school itself. In most schools, there is a great deal of competition between students to join the varsity team. There often are schools regulations that make it difficult for new students to join. On the intramural teams most students are welcome to participate.
In many schools girls have fewer possibilities than boys. Smaller schools may not have some of the above-mentioned teams for girls. But a special group of girls and boys play an important part at the football and basketball games. They are called cheerleaders and they lead the crowd in cheers for their team.
In addition to clubs and sports teams, one will find the Student Council and the class officer meetings. Students are elected by their school and classmates to represent them in these bodies and to organize activities for their school U.S. colleges and universities offer a vide variety of programs ranging from highly academic courses to very practical ones.
Students can be educated not only for academic professions, but also for technical professions, such as mechanics, nursing, medical technology, computer technology and book-keeping. In universities young people study four years to get bachelor's degree. If one wants to get master's degree he/she must study two years more and do a research work. If one has master's degree, studies more, does a research work and passes an oral, comprehensive examination he/she gets doctor's degree (PhD).

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Skinny Sleeves provide stylish protection for your laptop or tablet. Our unique StretchShell Neoprene™ fabric has super-smooth finish that is water and stain resistant. Fully padded lining and zipper less design makes sliding your device in and out easy – with no scratching. The elastic band keeps your device secure inside the sleeve.
The design of Skinny Sleeves is for the fit to be snug. Ensuring your device is secure inside the sleeve.
In selection of the correct Skinny Sleeve make sure your device is slightly smaller than the sleeve dimensions in the reference chart.
Use the sidebar filter to search for your device, see our Fit Guide, or use our Skinny Sleeve chart above to determine the best size for you.
No products found in this collection


text:
أعلنت شركة كانون اليوم عن الكاميرا SX30IS والتي تحمل عدسه مجنونه 24-840 ملم وتقريب بصري واسع المجال يصل إلى 35 مره ودقة الكاميرا 14.1 ميجابيكسل وتصوير فيديو 720p ومعالج الصور DIGIC 4 أما الشاشة فطوله 2.7 أنش بتقنية LCD.موعد الأصدار هذا الشهر بـ 429 دولار أمريكي .
البيان الصحفي بالداخل
Perfect for use in any situation, the PowerShot SX30 IS provides full manual control, HD movie recording and a number of creative and automatic shooting modes – delivering as much or as little creative assistance as desired. Other design features, including a 6.8cm (2.7″) vari-angle LCD screen and hot shoe, also allow users to extend their creativity by shooting from different angles and with a range of compatible Canon accessories.
Class-leading zoom with outstanding image quality
The camera's 14.1 Megapixel sensor allows photographers to generate A2+ size prints, offering detailed images that users can crop creatively with no compromise on quality. The enormous focal range of the 35x optical zoom lens offers users a unique realm of creative possibilities, extending from 24mm to 840mm (35mm equiv.), capturing everything from ultra wide-angle images to extreme telephoto shots.
Developed with the same materials and processes used to manufacture Canon's range of EF lenses, the PowerShot SX30 IS showcases Canon's unrivalled optical expertise. The lens construction comprises of multiple special lens elements including an Ultra-low Dispersion (UD) element as well as a Hi-UD element, compensating for light aberrations while maintaining high image quality across the entire zoom range. Hi-UD elements are commonly used in Canon's globally-trusted range of professional broadcast camera lenses – ensuring maximum image quality while reducing the total lens weight.
A lens of such zooming power would typically pose a significant challenge for photographers shooting in low light or using the telephoto range without a tripod. For this reason, Canon has equipped this model with the most effective optical Image Stabilizer (IS) ever to be used in one of its compact cameras, offering up to 4.5 stops of compensation. This lens-shift system can effectively minimise blur when shooting with long zoom and when the use of a fast shutter speed is not possible.
The PowerShot SX30 IS also features Ultrasonic (USM) and Voice Coil (VCM) motors for fast, accurate and silent zooming and focusing which, along with the optical IS, work in both stills and movies.
The new Zoom Framing Assist function helps users to keep track of distant or moving subjects when shooting with long zoom. Pressing the dedicated shortcut button, the Zoom Framing Assist quickly retracts the lens to one of three preset zoomed-out positions – allowing the user to view more of the scene on the screen and seek the subject – while a rectangle marks the area of the originally zoomed-in frame. Once the user reacquires the subject and positions it back in the rectangular frame, the button can be released and the lens quickly extends back to its zoomed position, allowing the shooting to be resumed in its original framing.
Moving beyond stills
The PowerShot SX30 IS offers 720p HD movie capture with stereo sound and full optical zoom, allowing photographers to switch from stills to movies at the touch of a button. Focus and exposure can be locked or adjusted during movie recording, while a special Dynamic IS mode reduces the camera shake created when filming and moving at the same time, producing a more realistic, steadier picture. Smart Auto in Movie mode can detect 21 different scene types, automatically evaluating and adjusting the settings to achieve optimum exposure, give priority to faces and boost bright colours. Results can be enjoyed to their fullest by connecting the camera's HDMI-mini port to an HDTV screen.
Designed without compromise for quality, flexibility and creativity
In addition to the incredible zoom capability, the PowerShot SX30 IS offers a number of design features which enable photographers to take control of their images. A 6.8cm (2.7″) vari-angle PureColor II VA LCD screen with a 230k dot resolution provides maximum flexibility in all types of scenes ranging from floral close-ups to crowded concerts. These can be shot more comfortably even from awkward angles and then reviewed in brilliant colour and sharp detail. The Quick-bright function enables images to be viewed and subjects to be framed easily, even in bright sunlight.
For those who want to add more variety to their creative photography, the PowerShot SX30 IS features a hot shoe, allowing accessories such as Canon's EX Speedlite flash units to be used. Additionally, an optional lens filter adapter allows the attachment of 67mm filters such as the Canon PL-C B 67mm polarizer filter, providing photographers with nearly endless possibilities for adding a creative flair to their images.
For those who want to take great shots instantly, without worrying about manually changing settings, the PowerShot SX30 IS features Smart Auto, which uses Scene Detection Technology to identify shooting conditions and select the optimum settings from 28 variables. A series of new scenes have been added, including subjects with strong facial shadows under harsh lighting and subjects in spotlight. Smart Flash Exposure also controls the power of the camera's flash to ensure perfectly-exposed subjects both in macro shots and when backlit.
For more creative shooting options, photographers can also use Fish-eye, Miniature, Poster and Super Vivid effects to add a fresh perspective on images. Miniature Effect mode is also available in movies, shooting the scene at a reduced frame rate of 6, 3 or 1.5 fps, to create the effect of a high-speed, time-lapse film of a miniature-scale model.
Store, view and share stories
Sharing special moments with family and friends has never been easier. The PowerShot SX30 IS supports SDHC and SDXC memory cards, providing abundant capacity so photographers can keep shooting without worrying about filling their memory card too quickly. To find favourite shots among hundreds of others, users can tag each image in-camera, allowing it to be grouped with other favourites and easily located at a later date. Smart Shuffle playback also suggests similar images to be viewed based on the current image displayed, locating images in the memory card which may have been forgotten or overlooked in the larger library.
This model also supports Eye-Fi connected functions, allowing remote uploads to image sharing websites such as CANON iMAGE GATEWAY. The camera features a dedicated Eye-Fi section within the User Interface, and disables the auto power-down function when the Eye-Fi card transmits data – allowing the easy transfer of content without interruption*1.
Share stories with CANON iMAGE GATEWAY
Owners of the PowerShot SX30 IS can join the CANON iMAGE GATEWAY, an online facility for sharing photos and video. Photographers can take advantage of up to 2GB of personal storage capacity, creating enough room for hundreds of high-quality images. Mobile browsing is also supported, making it easy for friends and family to view photos on the move.
PowerShot SX30 IS – key features:
35x ultra wide-angle zoom
Optical Image Stabilizer (4.5-stop), USM, VCM
6.8 cm (2.7″) vari-angle LCD, EVF
HD movies, HDMI
Smart Auto
Manual modes, Low Light and Miniature Effect movie
Zoom Framing Assist
Servo AF/AE
Extensive accessory system
*1 This product is not guaranteed to support Eye-Fi card functions (including wireless transfer). In case of an issue with an Eye-Fi card, please check with the card manufacturer.
Also note that approval is required to use Eye-Fi cards in many countries or regions. Without approval, use of the card is not permitted. If it is unclear whether the card has been approved for use in the area, please check with the card manufacturer.


text:
Expert's Rating
- Alluring design
- Excellent video quality
- Touchscreen isn't super responsive
- TouchWiz has some quirks
Our Verdict
With its eye-catching design and variety of multimedia features, the Omnia II is a solid Windows phone, but sluggish performance keeps it from being perfect.
On the surface, the Samsung Omnia II ($200 with a two-year contract from Verizon; price as of 12/1/09) seems to be the Windows Mobile phone that fans have been waiting for. With its gorgeous 3.7-inch AMOLED touch display, attractive design, and impressive specs, this phone is a real head-turner. Unfortunately, the Omnia II's performance disappoints. The TouchWiz 2.0 user interface seems to bog down the phone's speed; in one instance, our review unit crashed and had to be restarted.
On looks alone, the Omnia II is quite alluring and fits in nicely with Verizon's line of premium smartphones like the Motorola Droid, the HTC Droid Eris, and the BlackBerry Storm II. Measuring 4.7 by 2.4 by 0.5 inches thick and weighing 4.8 ounces, the Omnia II is just slightly larger and heavier than the original (which was 4.4 by 2.2 by 0.5 inches and weighed 4.3 ounces). Still, the phone remains quite slim. With its rounded corners, brushed metal details, and smooth red-and-black back cover it is much more aesthetically pleasing than its predecessor.
The 3.7-inch WVGA AMOLED display dominates its face with a piano-black border surrounding it. Hardware keys on the face are minimal: Talk and End/Power keys flank a large Main Menu key that looks deceptively like an optical mouse (which the first Omnia had). The left spine houses the 3.5mm headphone jack (a welcome upgrade–the original lacked one), an easy-to-press volume rocker, a microSD card slot, and the OK key (pressing it once closes an app; holding it down returns you to the home screen). On the right spine is the stylus (at the top), a USB port, a lock key (for locking the screen), and the camera/camcorder key.
The Omnia II has 8GB of built-in internal memory and 16GB of expandable memory with a microSD card (sold separately).
Call quality was consistently good over Verizon's 3G network, though I did notice a faint hiss on one call. The vast majority of my calls sounded loud and clear with very little background noise or distortion.
The Omnia II has no physical QWERTY keyboard, so you'll have to rely on its touchscreen keyboard. This keyboard is a bit cramped in portrait mode, but gives you plenty of room to type in landscape mode. Unfortunately, I encountered a few issues when using it. First, the spacebar is small, and oddly placed on the right side rather than at the bottom center, where you'd expect it. Second, the delay between what I typed and what appeared on screen was distracting. Finally, haptic touch (light, vibrating feedback when you press a touch key) is disabled for some reason in keyboard mode.
The Omnia II also comes with Swype technology, which lets you type faster and more easily with one continuous finger or stylus motion across the screen keyboard. Swype takes some practice, but is pretty nifty once you get the hang of it. Be sure to watch the how-to Swype video preloaded on the device.
Like the Samsung Behold II (Android-based), the Omnia runs TouchWiz 2.0, a touch-friendly user interface, over Windows Mobile 6.5. You get three home pages that you can customize with widgets and shortcuts to your favorite apps. To add a widget, you simply press the pull-out Widget Tray tab on the left of your screen, and drag one from the list onto your home screen. To remove a widget, you press down on it, and drag it back to the Widget Tray. You can also manage your widgets via the Widget Manager. And you can get more widgets for free via the Widget Store.
While it is nice to have some customization options, arranging widgets on your various home screens can be a tedious process; the screen simply isn't all that responsive. You have to press down pretty hard to move a widget, but sometimes that causes the widget to open–which is quite annoying.
Along the bottom of every home screen are shortcuts to your text messages, your e-mail, the dialer, and your contacts. At the top of the screen is the familiar Windows Mobile Start menu. But instead of the drop-down menu we're used to, pressing Start takes you to four Main Menus loaded with shortcuts to various applications and settings.
Here's where things get confusing: The interface also has an entirely separate menu for multimedia applications, called the Cube Navigation Menu. So that's four main menus, one widget menu, the Cube menu, and your three home screens–all with overlapping content.
You can access the Cube from a shortcut on one of your home pages. The menu provides access to photos, music, videos, the Web, the V Cast store, and Games. Though the 3D-like Cube visualization is kind of cool-looking, it feels a bit unnecessary, since you can reach the same applications through other menus. You can roll it around with your finger or shake the phone to move through the different menus. Unlike your home screens, the Cube is not customizable.
Unfortunately, in one of my hands-on tests I experienced a crash. I tried to close the messaging application after sending a text, but nothing happened. I tried to close it again, but got a screen that was halfway between my Main Menu screen and my home screen. I left the phone idle; it went into lock mode. I unlocked it and again tried returning to my home screen, but nothing happened. After some time, the phone went to my contacts screen. I tried closing out of that, but the phone froze and went into lock mode again. I eventually had to shut down and restart the phone to get it to work properly.
While this didn't happen again in my tests, it was disturbing. One of the great things about Windows Mobile is that you can multitask, meaning you can have multiple applications running at once. In this case, I only had one application–and a light one at that–running when it crashed. You might consider using the Omnia without TouchWiz 2.0 running over Windows Mobile 6.5 if you encounter this issue. (See PC World's review of the HTC Pure for more on Windows Mobile 6.5.)
The Omnia II ships with two browsers: the new Internet Explorer Mobile and Opera Mobile 9.7. To zoom into a page on Internet Explorer Mobile, you tap twice on the area that you want to enlarge. Scrolling through pages on Internet Explorer Mobile isn't as smooth as the iPhone's Safari, but browsing is adequate overall. The Opera 9.7 system of displaying open pages isn't ideal (it shrinks them to thumbnails and tiles them side by side), but it does load pages quicker than IE.
For music playback, you get two interface choices: the standard Windows Media Player and the more aesthetically pleasing TouchWiz player. With the latter, your library is displayed as touch-friendly "cards," which you can flip through to find what you want–sort of imitating the feeling of flipping through physical albums. If you want to tweak the audio, however, you'll have to do it from Windows Media Player. You can jump from the TouchWiz player to WMP by pressing "Library" in the lower left corner. But as far as I could tell, you can't go from WMP to the TouchWiz player. The phone doesn't come bundled with headphones, so you'll have to use your own. Music piped through my high-quality Skullcandy FMJ headphones sounded very good, though a bit flat from the external speakers.
The Omnia II comes with an FM antenna/mic adapter that you can plug your headphones into, so if you get bored with your collection, you can see what's on the radio. You can also buy music via Rhapsody through V Cast Music on the Omnia II.
Video quality, as to be expected, looked great on the Omnia II's large AMOLED display. One of the best things about AMOLED is its wide viewing angle. You can place the Omnia II on a flat surface and watch video without any distortion or color change. Colors were bright and accurate, motions were smooth, and I saw only a bit of blurriness in some clips.
Camera quality, for the most part, was quite good. Colors looked bright and accurate both indoors and out. The camera also managed to capture detail quite well, handling some close-up shots of action figures without any blurring or pixelation. One design flaw: The shutter button's placement on the top right edge mirrors the OK button on the phone's bottom right edge. When you're gripping the phone, you may accidentally hit the OK button and close the camera app midshot.
The Omnia II is an excellent upgrade from the original Omnia and definitely one of the best Windows Mobile phones available. The crash I experienced was disturbing, however, even though it happened only once. I was also disappointed with both the phone's sluggishness and the unresponsiveness of the touchscreen–issues we had with the previous version, as well. Most Verizon customers will probably pick the Motorola Droid over the Omnia II, but Windows Mobile loyalists will find a lot to like about this multimedia powerhouse.
–Ginny Mies


text:
The head of the German data protection authority has asked Facebook to disable its facial recognition feature over concerns that it violates European Union privacy laws.
Johannes Caspar, head of the Hamburg Data Protection Authority, sent Facebook a letter, in which he argued that facial recognition amounts to unauthorized data collection on individuals. Caspar sent the letter on Wednesday, and has given Facebook two weeks to respond.
This is far from the first time Facebook's facial recognition feature has been criticized–the feature was introduced in December, and it's been constantly attacked since. Pushback against the feature increased in June after security firm Sophos warned Facebook's users that the site had expanded its use of the facial recognition feature. This prompted Facebook to apologize for how it had handled the rollout.
The European Union's advisory board–the Article 29 Working Party–is also looking into Facebook's facial recognition and whether it's a violation of EU law. Investigations at the member-state level are underway in Ireland, the United Kingdom, and, now, Germany.
If the social networking site is found guilty of breaching consumer privacy, German laws allow Facebook to be fined up to 300,000 euros ($429,000). Regulators would also be able to force Facebook to disable facial recognition within the country.
Facebook has defended itself by denying that it's doing anything wrong–though the company did say it would take Caspar's concerns into consideration. "We will consider the points the Hamburg Data Protection Authority have made about the 'photo tag suggest' feature, but firmly reject any claim that we are not meeting our obligations under European Union data protection law," a company spokesperson said.
It's not clear if Germany's move will affect the United States. While no official investigation into Facebook's facial recognition feature currently exists in the United States, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has filed a complaint with the FTC.
EPIC's effort has received support from Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who chairs the bi-partisan privacy caucus. "When it comes to users' privacy, Facebook's policy should be: 'Ask for permission, don't assume it," Rep. Markey has said.
For more tech news and commentary, follow Ed on Twitter at @edoswald and on Facebook.


text:
A Commentary on the Book of Psalms, in which Their Literal in Historical Sense, as They Relate to King David and the People of Israel, is Illustrated and Their Application to Messiah, to the Church, and to Individuals, as Members Thereof, is Pointed Out: with a View to Render the Use of the Psalter Pleasing and Profitable to All Orders and Degrees of Christians
A. Towar, 1833 - Всего страниц: 425
Избранные страницы
Другие издания - Просмотреть все
A Commentary on the Book of Psalms. In which Their Literal Or Historical ...
George Horne
Полный просмотр - 1813
Часто встречающиеся слова и выражения
according afflicted appear ARGUMENT beauty become behold believe blessed body brought called cause Christ Christian church comfort consider continually David death deliverance delivered desire Divine earth effect enemies eternal evil eyes faith Father fear flesh former give given glorious glory God's Gospel grace hand hath head hear heart heaven holy hope Israel Jehovah Jerusalem Jesus Jews judge judgment King kingdom land latter light living LORD manner mercy Messiah mouth nature never peace persecution person praise prayer present promises prophet Psalm Psalmist Redeemer redemption rejoice resurrection righteousness salvation sense servants sing sins sorrow soul speak Spirit strength sufferings thee thine things thou hast throne tion trouble true trust truth turn unto verse voice waters whole wicked
Популярные отрывки
Стр. 91 - Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part ; and also his coat : now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it whose it shall be : that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots.
Стр. 356 - And white robes were given unto every one of them ; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.
Стр. 143 - And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.
Стр. 273 - And they cried with a loud voice, saying, "How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
Стр. 297 - He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, And herb for the service of man: That he may bring forth food out of the earth ; 15 And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, And oil to make his face to shine, And bread which strengtheneth man's heart.
Стр. 295 - Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain : Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters : who maketh the clouds his chariot ; who walketh upon the wings of the wind...
Стр. 223 - For He •established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a law in Israel, which He commanded our fathers, that they should make them known to their children : that the generation to come might know them, even the children which should be born ; who should arise and declare them to their children : that they might set their hope in God, and not forget the works of •God, but keep His commandments...
Стр. 320 - And they said one to another, We are verily guilty concerning our brother, in that we saw the anguish of his soul, when he besought us, and we would not hear; therefore is this distress come upon us.
Стр. 277 - Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called Today ; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.
Стр. 97 - Lead me in thy truth, and teach me : for thou art the God of my salvation ; on thee do I wait all the day.


text:
Monday, March 3, 2008
Official Cloverfield Movie Monster Figure Collectible
There is a much better picture of the "Official Cloverfield Movie Monster Figure Collectible", and you can even hear the monster's roar:
All of the specs are the same, same price, release date, etc.
* Thanks to Eddy at tagruato.blogspot.com for finding this, and to Pierce for emailing me!
Also, check out this, from the official press release:
Standing at an imposing 14 inches tall, the creature that wreaks havoc on New York City in the film is immortalized as a super-articulated figure for fans and collectors alike. As with other beasts in the annals of great movie monsters, the creature in "Cloverfield" captures the imagination and tugs at the fears of thrill seeking moviegoers.
The party may be over when this beast comes to town, but the fright inducing look of the creature lives on from the creepy people-sucking underbelly to the swath of parasites the beast lets loose to hunt citizens of the 'Big Apple.'
9 comments:
I'm confused about the "people-sucking underbelly" Is there something we've missed here??ReplyDelete
This one looks more like what we seen in the film. The flesh colored air sacks is a nice improvement...ReplyDelete
Why Exclusive ? Why Limited ? :'(ReplyDelete
why not "Mass-Producted" for fans worldwide ?!
I want One so bad ...
Now we can see the little arms and maybe even see where the monsters second feeding area may be located.ReplyDelete
Way better picture.
it seems that cloverfield is no longer in american theaters *sob*ReplyDelete
huh, that what the little nubs r for.ReplyDelete
I still say the tail is too short
fandango has posted a release date for a supposed Cloverfield 2.
God no...Why can't we just have no sequel. Great films can be ruined by a sequel. Nowadays nearly every film has a sequel, even though they aren't needed. It's the norm - something Cloverfield isn't.ReplyDelete
Take Planet of the Apes. The story wasn't explained, but it could easily have worked as a lone film (it was, however, ruined by sequels).
If a sequel is going to be done, don't do it well - do it amazingly...
the only cool thing about this figure is the 70 points of articulation.ReplyDelete
i think this figure is horrible and gives the movie a bad image, cause this toy looks like an albino turd.


text:
I've spent January mourning the losses in our metastatic community, trying to enjoy sleep-deprived new-puppy-parenthood, briefly visiting my brother and his family in Spokane, and making room for a few other advocacy endeavors I've got going (stay tuned!) Not to mention start-of-the-year doctors' visits, dental check-ups, and a biopsy of a weird spot on my elbow thanks to an overly-cautious dermatologist.
I haven't found much time to collect my thoughts these past few weeks. I've been waiting for my words to come back. Waiting for my anger to subside.
Related, I find, to letting go of some anger is me trying to work on my patience. It was my one resolution for 2016. As one mama put it on theglow.com:
"I wish I was better at patience. I had a lot of it when it was just River, but I physically feel my patience going throughout the day, in a way it used to not go. Sometimes I have to lock myself in a bathroom to gather it up again. And it isn't just the kids, it's life. Kids with life, it's a lot, and takes a toll on your patience. I try to think in my head a lot when I feel myself getting frazzled. It's good to just check in with my inner self and remind it that nothing is more important than the right now, so focus on right now." - honest and beautiful words from @latonyayvette which resonate deeply with all mamas as we try to be in the moment with our kids #theglow #motherhood #honesty #patience #inthemoment
"Nothing is more important than the right now, so focus on right now." Yes, a million times this.
Last night I dreamt that I had a bad PET scan, even though I'm not due to cross that bridge for another couple of months. I dreamt that I had to start broad-spectrum chemo again, that I was losing my hair but didn't tell anyone until my friend noticed I was wearing a wig at Pilates. I woke myself up crying. Scared. Angry. Quinn was in our bed, between Chris and me, and I snuggled up against him, inhaling his little boy scent, feeling the reality of his warmth and the steadiness of his breath until I was able to steady my own. It was -- for now -- just a bad dream.
Nothing is more important than the right now, even at 3:30 in the morning. But, man, do cancer and mortality and friends dying know how to mess with a girl's subconscious. My nurse (and friend) at my infusion center tells me there's a pattern to these deaths, that she's been doing this long enough to know January is the worst. People set goals for the holidays.
In that case, I'm setting a goal for Christmas of 2074.
I hope to get back to some sort of regularity here sometime soon, but in the meantime I've been busy focusing on the right now -- busy with soccer practices and birthday parties and puppy hikes (much shorter than regular hikes) and trying to think of ways to better serve this metastatic community to which I belong. As I said, I have some things brewing. I hope they'll pan out. I hope they'll make you guys proud. Please bear with me.


text:
''Tis certain they died by heaps and were buried by heaps; that is to say, without account'.1
Disposal of the bodies of those who died in the major plague epidemics of the early modern period undoubtedly presented huge problems for the responsible authorities; but did it descend into chaos, as Defoe suggests it did in 1665? And if it did, how and when did normal patterns of burial and funerary observance break down?
Although the gross figures of 35,000 dead in the epidemic of 1625, or 69,000 in 1665,2 do in some sense represent a problem facing the city as a whole, in practice the problem was confronted at an intimate and local level. The way in which disposal of the victims was tackled was shaped by what was regarded as normal burial practice, by contemporary views on the role and competence of government, and by the epidemiology of the disease itself. In sixteenth- and seventeenth-century London, these factors combined to place the major administrative responsibility on the parish. In normal times burial of the dead fell largely within the scope of parish government - almost all places of burial in London were parish churchyards, all parishioners had the right to be buried there (and most chose to do so), and it was the vestry and churchwardens who controlled burial within their own parish. They set and collected burial fees, directed the layout of graves, and organized the acquisition of new space for burial when necessary. Parishes were seen as the natural unit of local government, within and without the city, and undertook an increasing burden of administration in this period. The government of the city of London had general responsibility for public hygiene in a broad sense in the city, and of course issued the plague orders, which make some reference to burial, but even these delegated most tasks to the parishes.3 Only, it seems, when the parishes' ability to cope was breaking down did the city government itself take action.
The burden of disposing of the dead, and the resources to do it with, were very unevenly spread across the capital. The 120-130 parishes covered in the Bills of Mortality varied hugely in size, population and social character, and in the space they had for burial. Moreover, as we know, the plague epidemics of early modern London did not hit all areas of the capital with equal force. By the seventeenth century the inner city was less severely affected by plague mortality than extramural and suburban areas, and it also had greater resources to deal with the problem: the average size of the parish was much smaller, the wealth of inhabitants greater, while mortality rates were higher and absolute numbers of dead each parish dealt with very much greater further from the centre.4 Local responses also reflected varying local conditions and traditions of burial, often established over a long period.5
The epidemiology of the disease contributed to the problem: its rapid spread over short distances, its high case-fatality, the geometrical increase in weekly deaths once it had taken hold in an area, helped to concentrate most of the deaths in a parish in a relatively short period of time. The practice of shutting up whole households after one confirmed case may have increased local mortality, and also meant that the family could not take its usual share of responsibility for organizing and paying for burial - even had participation in funerals and processions not been restricted by the Plague Orders. An important factor shaping the parishes' response to the problems of epidemic burial was the strong popular attachment to traditional practices: the individual funeral and interment, in which the family played an important role; the attendance of friends and neighbours; the desire for commemoration.6 These desires were in conflict with the Plague Orders and orders of the Privy Council, which aimed to restrict public assemblies and processions. Parish officers coped as best they could with these conflicting pressures, and with the enormous financial burden the epidemic placed on their straitened resources.
The principal sources for this study are parish records: burial registers, vestry minutes, and churchwardens' accounts. These are plentiful and often very explicit, and survival has been good, but the data for an overview of plague burial is scattered among hundreds of manuscripts.7 A major problem with parish records as a source for the study of epidemic burial, however, is that normal practices of record- keeping were liable, under the extreme pressure of the epidemic itself, to break down. Parish clerks and officers might die, or quit their posts, or the volume of events for recording might simply overwhelm them or their successors. Parish registers, accounts, and minutes were not always written up event by event, even in normal times, but were made up from contemporary notes, which may not have survived the confusion.8 Even when records were kept, they may have become attenuated and patchy, with many silent omissions. Many parishes have defective registers for 1665-6: the Great Fire of September 1666 probably destroyed a quantity of papers, less carefully conserved than the registers and parish books themselves, which would otherwise have been used to complete the record.
The records of St Bride Fleet Street, in the western suburbs of the city of London, offer an example of how one parish coped during the plague of 1665.9Total deaths in the parish in the year 1665 came to 2,111 (five and a half times normal), of which 1,427 were attributed to plague.10 The disease established itself in the northern and western suburbs of London in the month of May. St Bride's burial register does not distinguish plague deaths, but no elevation of deaths above normal levels is visible until mid-June. Thirty-two people were buried in May, 22 in the first half of June, 34 in the second half.11 The first reference to plague in the vestry minutes is a meeting called on 16 June, before the publication of the Plague Orders, 'to consider of several things necessary in this time of visitation'.
At this meeting they organized searchers of the dead, appointed bearers for the plague dead, fixed their wages, and established accommodation for them in the churchyard where they would not mix with other people. The churchwardens were to direct the gravedigger where to make graves; and they decided, 'because our ground begins to fill', not to accept any more bodies from the neighbouring parish of St Martin Ludgate except on payment of double duties. On 3 July they decided to give extra remuneration to the gravedigger to encourage him to dig graves deep 'as it is ordered [in the Plague Orders] and as the time requires'.
On 7 July they agreed to appoint and pay bearers of plague dead jointly with the neighbouring parish, St Dunstan in the West, and four days later appointed two more bearers to replace one who had died. Payments to these bearers recur several times in the accounts, and in the accounts for St Dunstan's parish.12 On 11 July the vestry of St Bride also decided to bury no more plague victims within the church, but to allow parish notables and the better-off who died of the plague ('and none other') to be buried in the upper churchyard. In the early weeks of the plague the parish paid for the burial of several individuals, including parish pensioners and children, but there is no reference to their buying a coffin for anyone between 26 July and 8 October; the implication is that between these dates all burials paid for by the parish were in sheets or shrouds only. Mortality began to soar upwards from mid-July: 110 were buried in the last two weeks in July, and 189 in the first fortnight in August. By 12 August the vestry was concerned at the rapidity with which burial space was filling up. Although they thought it necessary to appoint someone 'to see the ground be well husbanded', and to take charge of paying the gravemaker and the labourers employed to dig graves, no one could be found willing to undertake this. Perhaps as a result of this failure, as well as of increasing mortality (heaviest between mid-August and mid-September, when recorded burials totalled 831, often over 30 per day), traditional burial practice began to break down. What Defoe calls 'burial in form'13 - the individual service and interment - was in part at least replaced by mass burial in a common grave. The parish's first substantial common grave or pit was dug in late August.14 We do not know how this was used, but the probability is that it was filled up over a matter of days or weeks and then closed, and a new one opened. Payments in the churchwardens' accounts suggest that a second pit was dug in early September and perhaps a third in late September, with more work 'digging in the pit' in mid-October.
At the end of August the vestry felt sufficiently in control of things to defer a petition for a gravemaker's place until suitable competition could be found, and rejected a petition for a bearer's place since the present bearers were able to cope.15 In fact mortality did not begin to decline until late September: deaths did not exceed 20 per day after 18 September, and were in single figures from 11 October, but the first day with no burial at all was 11 November and not until December was the monthly total (29) down to previous levels. More work was done on or in 'the pit' in December 1665 and February 1666, but probably by the latter date this was consolidating and levelling.
St Bride's, though a large and populous parish, nevertheless had a reasonable amount of churchyard space, having acquired a new site for burial of about a quarter of an acre (large by London standards) in 1610.16 This new site was a few hundred yards from the church, near Fleet Ditch, and was known as the 'lower churchyard'; the 'upper churchyard', also superior in status, was the older graveyard by the church. The burial register gives no clue to the location of burials, either before or during the plague, but the vestry order cited above, banning church burial of plague victims and restricting the upper churchyard to a few, should have meant that nearly all plague victims buried within the parish went to the lower churchyard, and this is almost certainly where the pits were dug.
The records of St Bride's seem to show the parish as an administrative unit and as a community struggling under the pressure of events but not overwhelmed. The accounts are in remarkably good order, despite the deaths of the senior churchwarden and his successor in late September and early October. The clerk or sexton continued to send in monthly accounts of burial fees, indicating that individual interments continued alongside the mass burials throughout the period of the plague (even, by October, in the church), though not all those listed were necessarily plague victims.17 The only major loss is of the vestry minutes from 28 August onwards, and this may be due to the Fire, not the plague.18
The records of St Bride's also show that at least two of the expedients often considered characteristic of plague burial in London, the organized collection of corpses and the opening of mass graves, were at least to begin with parish initiatives. St Bride's and St Dunstan's jointly employed a party of bearers from July onwards; an early reference to 'slinges to carry the dead corpes',19 and the absence of any later references to carts suggests that bearing was always done on foot in these parishes. Other parishes, perhaps especially the larger ones, bought or hired carts as they found necessary.20 It is difficult to discover whether a centralized system of dead-carts ever existed, or whether it was always carried out by parishes, perhaps acting together in groups. Defoe says that 'the dead carts in the city were not confined to particular parishes, but one cart went through several parishes, according as the number of dead presented,'21 but, if this is so, the means by which this was organized and financed is not clear.
Whoever organized the bearing, the restriction to night-time collection and burial was imposed by the Privy Council. The City had at first resisted the idea of night burial, believing this might facilitate the concealment of plague deaths, but by the seventeenth century this requirement was the norm.22 It was not always observed, however; Pepys commented on 12 August that the nights were too short to bury all the dead, and though he was particularly conscious of the danger of meeting corpses being carried out at night, he also saw public, presumably daytime, funerals. On 6 September he noted 'strange to see in broad daylight two or three Burialls upon Bankside' and in mid- September encountered corpses being carried though the city at noonday.23
Mass graves were probably never dug in London outside epidemics: the individual burial was standard, though two or three might share a grave, and new graves might well disturb earlier burials.24 There is literary evidence for communal graves in the 1603 and 1625 epidemics, but an extensive search would be necessary to discover the earliest reference among parish records.25Many, probably most, of these large pits were in existing churchyards, created by the parish when its need for burial space became critical. In the 1665 plague, at St Dunstan in the West, the first pits were dug in mid-August; at St Bride's, as we have seen, in late August.26 At St Botolph Aldgate a number of pits were dug in August, but the 'great pit' in the churchyard, and which came to contain over a thousand bodies, received its first corpse on 6 September, according to Defoe's account. 'Some blamed the churchwardens for suffering such a frightful thing ... but time made it appear the churchwardens knew the condition of the parish better than they did': within a fortnight it had been filled up with 1,114 bodies.27 It seems likely that most, perhaps all, of the larger suburban parishes of London ended by burying their plague dead in mass graves, but that the smaller city-centre parishes did not need to do so. The main motive for digging mass graves was obviously to accommodate the maximum number of corpses in a small space, but the parishes may also have been driven to it to save money. They were shouldering the massive financial burden of supporting 'visited' families, watching houses, searching and reporting the dead, and by the height of the epidemic the great majority of families could make no contribution to the cost of burial.28 Though the pits were expensive to dig, taking several days' labour, they were cheap to fill, while individual graves and interments would have been more costly, even had space been available.
One of the most popular elements in the mythology of London is the plague pit, and especially the idea that many pits were dug in unconsecrated ground and afterwards forgotten. The site of any discovery of plentiful human remains in a location no longer used for burial tends to be identified as a plague pit, unless a more reliable history is quickly attached to it. There were undoubtedly some temporary and irregular plague burial sites, but though few are well documented, their overall number may have been quite limited. Defoe is our main source for new or temporary burial grounds opened in 1665. He suggests that 'many if not all of the out-parishes were obliged to make new burying-grounds', though he concentrates on the northern and eastern suburbs of the city rather than Westminster or Southwark. He mentions 'the great pit in Finsbury Fields', and lists sites or grounds (not necessarily pits) near Goswell Street, in Shoreditch, at Moorfields, and off Bishopsgate Street, and eight in the huge parish of Stepney. His account clearly associates several of these with use by a particular parish or hamlet, though some may have been shared, and the dead carts may have used them more indiscriminately.29 These new grounds seem to fit within the general pattern of parish responsibility for burial outlined above; the scarcity of evidence for them in parish records may suggest that these were late and desperate expedients, invoked when record-keeping had already broken down. W.G. Bell, in general a rather uncritical reporter of plague pits,30suggests another group of new burial sites, those attached to pest-houses. The pest-house in the parish of St Martin in the Fields (which also served a number of other parishes) had a fenced burial ground, used by a number of parishes at the height of the epidemic; dead from the pest-house at Westminster were probably buried in a marked-off part of Tothill Fields, along with plague dead from the parish of St Margaret's as a whole.31 The City pest-house returned separate numbers of dead from the parochial totals in the Bills of Mortality, but it is not clear where they were buried; possibly the nearby 'great pit in Finsbury Fields' accommodated them.
Although, as has been shown, the greater part of the burden of accommodating the plague dead fell on the parishes, there were two important civic initiatives in this period, which helped to relieve pressure on burial space without resort to irregular burial. The first of these was the creation of the New Churchyard at Bethlem in 1569. Until then London had had no significant extra-parochial burial ground, though St Paul's churchyard in the city centre had always been a popular burial site, especially with inhabitants of the small parishes around the cathedral. Some of the dead in the plague of 1563 were buried there.32 The high mortality in this epidemic spurred the Mayor and Aldermen to action: in 1569, believing that space in the churchyards of the City might be insufficient if such an epidemic happened again, they decided to establish a new burial ground 'before the time of necessity requireth it'. They chose a site of about one acre already belonging to the City, adjoining the NE side of Moorfields, part of the lands of Bethlem Hospital. The plot, until then used as a tenterground, was walled in, at the expense of Sir Thomas Rowe, then Lord Mayor, usually credited as the New Churchyard's founder.33 Though the immediate incentive was the fear of an excessive number of plague dead, and the New Churchyard was certainly used for many burials in later epidemics, it was also used extensively in non-plague years by a number of parishes with limited local accommodation, and remained in use to the mid-eighteenth century.34
Over-use of the New Churchyard in 1665 produced a new crisis. The 'noisome stenches arising from the great number of dead' buried there, together with the plea from many parishes that their own churchyards were now full, forced the Mayor and Aldermen to seek new accommodation. On 6 September they deputed Sir John Robinson, Alderman, to treat with the City's tenant of Finsbury Fields, to the north of the city, to obtain a piece of ground there for burial 'during this present visitation'.35 Their intention was that it be 'speedily set out and prepared for a burial place', and Robinson must have acted fairly quickly, since the site ('the new burial place in Bunhill Fields') had been walled by 19 October, though the gates were not finished until 1666.36 This burial ground later became the famous Dissenters' ground, Bunhill Fields. There is some confusion over whether the ground was used for plague burials: many writers follow the statement in Maitland's History of London (1756) that it was 'not ... made use of on that occasion', but Strype (1720) does not say this, and Defoe (1722) refers to Bunhill Fields as one of the new burying-grounds made during the Plague.37 It seems highly improbable that a ground created specifically for plague burial and presumably available for use by October at the latest, when weekly deaths were still running at over 4,000,38 would not have been used extensively. Indeed the City's order, on the same day as the commission to Robinson, that the keeper of the New Churchyard should desist from making pits there and dig only single graves (and its later comment that he had done so) implies that alternative space was quickly made available.39References in some parish registers to burials in 'the new ground' from September 1665 could be to Bunhill Fields, though they might also be to new parochial grounds.40
The patterns and practices of burial of the plague dead in sixteenth- and seventeenth- century London suggest that it was seen principally as a problem of quantity, not quality. Traditional practices were adhered to as long as possible; only when they were seen to be completely inadequate were alternatives employed. Certainly the problem grew worse as the size of the city increased, and as the built-up area extended, and as the heaviest mortality occurred in larger but poorer parishes, but it is difficult to see any qualitative change, any trace of an 'Enlightened' or 'Hygienic' sensitivity towards the problem, in the responses at parish level. It is true that plague victims were buried quickly, but the interval between death and burial was rarely longer than two or three days anyway,41 and burying quickly was surely the only way to avoid a backlog of unburied bodies from building up. True, corpses and those who handled them were treated with great caution; the Plague Orders said that bodies must not be kept in church during public assemblies or services there, and made the searchers and bearers of the dead identify themselves and keep their distance in public.42 But though many people were afraid of contact with the bodies of those who had died, they were almost equally afraid of their clothes and personal possessions, and it is never quite clear where the danger was felt to inhere. The Plague Orders say more about the bedding and clothing of the sick, and rubbish disposal generally, than about burial.
An important point that distinguishes plague burial in London from some other major European cities is that there never seems to have been any official attempt to override traditional burial practices in favour of specific plague burial sites. The instructions of the public health board for the country round Florence in 1630 banned the burial of suspected plague dead in churches, and indeed insisted that they be buried 'in the countryside far from the high roads, a hundred arms'-lengths from the houses'.43 In Paris, plague dead were buried in city churchyards, but not inside the churches: among the few Parisian burial records that survive, there are several cases of high- status people excluded from church burial because they had died of plague. One young man was even dug up some months later (when presumably the danger had passed) and reburied in his rightful place in church near his ancestral chapel.44 Though some English contemporaries advised burial outside the city, the London Plague Orders did not exclude burials from the built-up area, and are ambiguous on the question of burial inside churches.45 Very large numbers of plague victims were buried, as we have seen, in small city churchyards in densely populated areas, and though St Bride's decided to refuse church burial to plague victims about halfway through the 1665 epidemic (having presumably allowed it thus far), several other parishes buried plague dead within their churches.46 When the bodies of plague victims were transported out of the city to the suburbs for burial, this was because there was no space to bury them within the city, not because they were thought to be a cause of infection once interred.
Anxiety about the consequences of overcrowded churchyards and burial grounds seems to have surfaced after the epidemic was over, but concern about 'annoyances' mingled with fear of real danger. The City's order during the 1665 plague to cease pit burial in the New Churchyard and to cover the ground with a layer of fresh earth is expressed in terms of suppressing 'stenches and annoyances'; its order to bury all the bones lying above ground and to burn the pieces of coffin boards sounds more like a desire for tidiness.Nevertheless there was real concern that plague burials should be adequately covered with earth: contemporary writers enlarged on the dire consequences if decomposing bodies were exposed, though they did not agree on what depth of burial was necessary.48 In the months after the plague St Bride's parish paid for further work, including levelling, in its lower and middle churchyards, and probably many parishes consolidated or covered their burial grounds.49In February 1666 Lord Craven noted that the churchyards had been partly (though not adequately) covered with earth and lime, and that care was being taken not to open the same graves again. New orders issued by the Privy Council in May 1666 banned the burial of future plague victims in churches and small churchyards, prescribed the use of quicklime, and forbad the re-opening of such graves in under a year, for fear of infection.50 Though 898 plague deaths were recorded in the London Bills between May and December 1666, the disarray of many burial registers in 1666, as a result of plague and Fire, makes it hard to see if these instructions were carried out.51 Defoe's account of the abandonment, and subsequent re-excavation, of some plague burial sites suggests however that once the immediate danger was over, precautions were ignored, and people were much less scrupulous that might have been expected; 'the people had cast off all apprehensions, and that too fast'.52
This brief survey of plague burial in early modern London prompts two queries or speculations. The first concerns the attitude of city government. The New Churchyard was established in 1569, and there was then no further major civic initiative in this field for a hundred years. Is it significant that the 1563 plague - a very severe one admittedly - which prompted this action was also the last to strike the city centre more heavily than the periphery? Were the seventeenth-century aldermen less sensitive to a problem whose worst effects were felt in the suburbs (even though some of these were within the City's jurisdiction) than their predecessors had been to a problem in the city heartland? If so, was there another change in attitude in 1665, which led to the establishment of Bunhill Fields, or was this just a panic response to the exceptionally high mortality - within and without the city - of the first major plague for 30 years?
The second concerns the long-term influence of plague-time expedients on normal burial practice, and on burial practice in later epidemics. Did the experience of massive mortality during the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century epidemics contribute to the evolution of new responses to the problem of burial, that put practicality and perhaps hygiene ahead of personal and communal sensitivities? The idea of opening a large trench or pit and leaving it open till filled with successive burials seems to have been novel in seventeenth-century London, and it would be interesting to know how soon after the early modern epidemics it became normal in London. It was clearly a feature of the crowded city churchyards by the early nineteenth century.53 But it is striking that real change in burial practice and location did not take place until after the appearance of a new epidemic disease, cholera.
1. Daniel Defoe, A Journal of the Plague Year (Penguin Classics edition, 1986), p. 246.Back to text
2. Attributed plague deaths of 35,417 (1625) and 68,596 (1665) from A collection of the yearly bills of mortality from 1657 to 1758 inclusive (1759); hereafter cited as Yearly Bills.Back to text
3. Plague orders for 1665 quoted in Defoe, Plague Year, pp. 57-66; cf. Paul Slack, 'Metropolitan government in crisis' in A.L. Beier and Roger Finlay (eds.), London 1500-1700. The making of the metropolis (1986), p. 68.Back to text
4. Slack, 'Metropolitan government', pp. 62-4, 70. The parish of St Bride in the western suburbs of the city (about 29 acres) buried 2111 persons in 1665 (5� times its normal yearly mean of 375), while in an area of equivalent size in the city centre, 13 parishes (All Hallows Bread Street, All Hallows Honey Lane, St Antonin, St Benet Sherehog, St Lawrence Jewry, St Martin Pomary, St Mary Aldermary, St Mary le Bow, St Mary Colechurch, St Mary Magdalen Milk Street, St Mildred Poultry, St Olave Old Jewry, St Pancras Soper Lane: total area, 28.56 acres) were responsible for disposing of only 611 corpses, 2� times the annual mean of 238: Yearly Bills. Back to text
5. Most London parishes had at least one churchyard, but a few had none, and several had two or more. Some of those acquiring new burial space in the early modern period made status distinctions between old and new churchyards: Vanessa Harding, ' "And one more may be laid there": the location of burials in early modern London', London Journal, 14 (1989), pp. 115-118.Back to text
6. 'Plague epidemics provide a touchstone against which to measure the strength of commitment to the traditional and customary burial rites in early modern England': Clare Gittings, Death, burial and the individual in early modern England (1984), p. 80.Back to text
7. See Joan Bullock-Anderson, Clare Clubb and Jacqueline Cox (compilers), A guide to archives and manuscripts at Guildhall Library (1989).Back to text
8. The churchwardens of St Dunstan in the West were unable to include the usual itemized list of burials and burial fees for the period July-December 1666 in their final fair account, 'the particulars ... being lost [by the parish clerk] in the tyme of sickness'. The parish clerk died in November 1666, before the account for 1665 had been audited. GL MS 2968/4, ff. 432v-436v.Back to text
9. Unless otherwise stated, the sources for this section are GL MS 6540/1, Register of baptisms, marriages and burials, 1653-72; GL MS 6552/1, Churchwardens' Accounts 1639-78; GL MS 6554/1, Vestry Minutes 1644-65.Back to text
10. These figures, and the average of 373 deaths per annum 1660-4, are from Yearly Bills.Back to text
11. Thirty-five and 30 had been buried in May and June 1663, 39 and 31 in May and June 1664: GL MS 6540/1.Back to text
12 .For St Dunstan's, see GL MS 2968/4, Churchwardens' Accounts 1645-65.Back to text
13. Defoe, Plague Year, p. 106. Back to text
14. Two labourers worked on the pit for six days and five for four days, and were paid on 26 August: GL MS 6552/1.Back to text
15 .GL MS 6554/1, f. 290.Back to text
16. GL MS 9531/13, pt. 2, ff. 394v-395v.Back to text
17. GL MS 6570/1, items 62-9. These accounts only list a small fraction of the burials recorded in the register (89 out of 610 in August, 107 out of 635 in September, 58 out of 246 in October). In June 1665 the vestry had instructed the clerk to take the usual fee paid for bearers from 'the persons visited that are able to pay' and account for it to the churchwardens with pits and knells: GL MS 6554/1, f. 275v.Back to text
18. GL MS 6554/1 is written right up to the flyleaf, and the last meeting recorded is 28 August. Presumably some record of continuing meetings was kept, but the next surviving volume of minutes begins in 1681.Back to text
19 .St Bride's accounts (GL MS 6552/1), 14 June 1665.Back to text
20. The dead carts did not 'begin to go about' Defoe's parish, St Botolph Aldgate, until the beginning of August 1665: Plague Year, p. 78. The parish of St Margaret Westminster began with a board to carry the dead on, then hired a cart, and later bought one: Walter George Bell, The Great Plague in London in 1665 (1924), p. 51.Back to text
21. Defoe, Plague Year, p.108.Back to text
22. Charles F. Mullett, The bubonic plague in England. An essay in the history of preventive medicine. (1956), pp. 69, 111, 149.Back to text
23 .The Diary of Samuel Pepys, ed. Robert Latham and William Matthews, Vol. VI, 1665 (1972), 12 August, 15 August, 20 August, 3 Sept., 6 Sept., 14 Sept.Back to text
24. Harding, 'And one more', pp. 116-117.Back to text
25. 'Open graves where sundry are buried together': J. Balmford, A short dialogue concerning the plagues infection (London, 1603), p. 32, quoted by Slack, 'Metropolitan government', p. 75; 'an hundred hungry graves' each to be daily filled with 60 bodies: Thomas Dekker, The wonderfull year (1603), in F.P. Wilson (ed.), The plague pamphlets of Thomas Dekker (1925), pp. 28-9; 'they are compelled to dig Graves like little cellers, piling up forty or fifty in a Pit': Dekker, A rod for run-awaies (1625), in Wilson, op. cit., pp. 158-9.Back to text
26. GL MS 2968/4, 16 August 1665.Back to text
27 .Defoe, Plague Year, pp. 77-8.Back to text
28. At St Bride's, fees were paid for 89 burials in August, 107 in September, and 58 in October: GL MS 5570/1, items 62-9. The register records 610, 635, and 246 burials in the same months: GL MS 6540/1. The clerk had been instructed to take the usual fees from 'the persons visited that are able to pay': GL MS 6554/1, f. 275v. Back to text
29. Defoe, Plague Year, pp. 192, 240-2.Back to text
30. Bell, Great Plague, esp. pp. 48-9, 281-4.Back to text
31. Ibid., p. 39, citing BL Add MS 10,117 (Rugge's 'Diurnal'), f. 147; pp. 47-8.Back to text
32. Cf. e.g. registers of All Hallows Bread Street (Harl. Soc. 43), All Hallows Honey Lane (Harl. Soc. 44-5). St Margaret Moses also buried there in 1625: Harl. Soc. 42.Back to text
33. CLRO, Journal 19, ff. 180, 180v; Repertory 16, ff. 476v, 491v, 492; Letterbook V, ff. 237, 274b. The site is shown as 'Bethlehem Church yard' on Ogilby and Morgan's map of 1676: The A to Z of Restoration London, ed. Ralph Hyde, John Fisher, and Roger Cline (1992), spreads 17, 18.Back to text
34. Harding, 'And one more', pp. 119-20.Back to text
35. CLRO, Repertory 70, f. 153v.Back to text
36 .Ibid., f. 155v; John Strype's edition of John Stow's, Survey of the cities of London and Westminster (1720), vol. II, book IV, p. 54. The site is shown as 'Church Yard' in 1676: A to Z of Restoration London, spread 6.Back to text
37. William Maitland, The history of London from its foundation to the present time (1756), vol. II, p. 1370; Strype, Survey, vol. II, book IV, p. 54; Defoe, Plague Year, p. 240. Maitland's account is followed by Isabella Holmes, The London burial grounds. Notes on their history from the earliest times to the present day (1896), p. 134; Alfred W. Light, Bunhill Fields (1915), vol. I, pp. 2-3; and Bell, Great Plague, p. 211.Back to text
38. J.F.D. Shrewsbury, A history of bubonic Plague in the British Isles (1970), p. 476, table 40.Back to text
39. CLRO, Repertory 70, ff. 153v, 156.Back to text
40. E.g. registers of St Martin Orgar (Harl. Soc. 68).Back to text
41. Stephen Porter, 'Death and burial in a London parish: St Mary Woolnoth 1653-99', London Journal, 8 (1982), p. 77.Back to text
42. Plague orders for 1583 in CLRO, Journal 21, ff. 285-286v (reference from Slack, 'Metropolitan government', n. 18); orders for 1665 in Defoe, Plague Year, pp. 57-66.Back to text
43. Carlo M. Cipolla, Cristofano and the plague, a study in the history of public health in the age of Galileo (1973), pp. 166-70.Back to text
44. Biblioth�que Nationale, Paris, MS Fr 32589 (extracts from parish registers of Saint Andr� des Arts): burials on 5/11/1580, 15/9/1591 (exhumed and reburied 2/4/1592), 23/8/1606, 1/7/1628.Back to text
45. Mullett, Bubonic plague, pp. 123, 380-3; Defoe, Plague Year, p. 62. The Orders appear to ban burial of plague victims in churches during service time, but not altogether. Church burial of plague victims was banned in the Privy Council Orders of May 1666, after the epidemic was over: quoted in Bell, Great Plague, pp. 333-5.Back to text
46. For St Bride's ban, see GL MS 6554/1, f. 208. Not all parish registers indicate both location of burial and plague as a cause of death, but among those which do, and which indicate the burial of plague dead in the church, were All Hallows Bread Street (Harl. Soc. 43) in 1607-8; St Helen Bishopsgate (Harl. Soc. 31) in 1603; St Mary Colechurch (GL MS 64) in 1603, 1625; St Olave Hart Street (Harl. Soc. 46) in 1609; St Pancras Soper Lane (Harl. Soc. 44-5) in 1563, 1603, 1625.Back to text
47. CLRO, Repertory 70, ff. 153v, 156.Back to text
48. Cited by Mullett, Bubonic plague, pp. 45-6, 57n., 193, 209- 10, 235. The 1665 Plague Orders specify 6 ft.: Defoe, Plague Year, p. 62.Back to text
49. GL MS 6552/1, entries for 10 Feb. 1666, 15 Feb., 11 April, 9 June.Back to text
50. Quoted in Bell, Great Plague, pp. 315, 333-5.Back to text
51. Shrewsbury, Bubonic plague, Table 42, p. 484.Back to text
52. Defoe, Plague Year, pp. 240-2, 255.Back to text
53. George Alfred Walker, Gatherings from graveyards (1839), passim; Report from the Select Committee on Improvement of the Health of Towns (Parliamentary Papers 1842 (x), no. 327); J. Saunders, 'London burials', in Charles Knight (ed.), London (1841-4), vol. IV, pp. 161-74.Back to text
[Epidemic Disease Contents] [Epidemic Disease Bibliography] [Next paper] [CMH Home Page] [IHR-Info Home Page]


text:
Strating from 11 January 2012 Suzanne Khardalian's documentary "Grandma's Tattoo" was aired 8 times on the Al Jazeera TV's (English channel) Witness program.
"Filmmaker Suzanne Khardalian makes a journey into her own family to investigate the terrible truth behind her late grandma's odd tattoos. Her grandma was always a bit strange, never liking physical contact and covered with unusual marks. Everybody in the family seemed to know the story, but no-one ever spoke about it. So when grandma's mystery is slowly unveiled, family taboos are broken down and Suzanne exposes the bigger story – the fate of the Armenian women driven out of Ottoman Turkey during the First World War. The painful journey behind Suzanne's grandma's tattoos unfolds through Armenia, Lebanon, Sweden and Syria, finally bringing out the truth," said Al Jazeera TV's introduction.
The webpage attracted many comments. Leila Fakhoury said "The Arabs should also remember their own history, since some Arabs recently seemed to forget. When the Turks hung Abdel Karim al Khalil, An Arab Muslim, he shouted down from the scaffold: My dear fellow countrymen, the Turks want to suffocate our voices in our lungs, but we will ask all the civilised nations of the world for our independence and freedom."
See the full documentary on Al Jazeera TV's link here (47 minutes):
About Suzanne Khardalian:
Independent filmmaker and journalist, born 1956. She studied journalism in
Films by Suzanne Khardalian:
Back to Ararat (The Armenian Genocide 1988)
Unsafe Ground (Sweden / Lebanon 1993)
The Lion from
Her Armenian Prince (1997)
From Opium to Chrysanthemums (2000)
Where Lies My Victory (2002)
Suzanne Khardalian in Azad-Hye:
Suzanne Khardalian visits UAE and presents one of her movies to Armenian audience in Sharjah
Review of two films by Suzanne Khardalian and Rea Holmquist
An article by Suzanne Kharadlian about the immigration problem in Armenia


text:
Some of the links on this website may be affiliate links, which means the site owner may earn a commission if you click on the affiliate link or make a purchase using the link. When you make a purchase, the price you pay is the same whether you use the affiliate link or go directly to the vendor's website using a non-affiliate link.
The opinions expressed in this website are those of the writer as an individual and are not necessarily the opinions of nor reflect the views of any merchants I am affiliated with.
Required Amazon Affiliate Disclosure:this website is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.


text:
My conscious mind just boggles
When confronted with their view
It's as if they're wearing goggles
Only letting in one hue—
They can see the world around them
And they think that all is fine
Where a rainbow might astound them,
They just see a curving line.
You can talk about the beauty
Of a multi-colored sight
And as if it is their duty
They say "what about the white?"
In yesterday's Washington Post, an article on the awarding of the Congressional Gold Medal to the surviving hundreds of African-American veterans, those who were on two fronts simultaneously–fighting World War Two, and fighting for integration in the armed forces.
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi told the Marines: "You served our country at a time that it took an extra dose of patriotism to do so. Because all of the freedoms that you were fighting for were not afforded to everyone in our country at that time."
Speaker of the House John Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell also spoke.
"Allowing blacks to serve the Marine Corps was seen as an experiment," Boehner told the crowd. "If it was an experiment, it didn't last any long. Before the end of the war, the Marine commandant at the time said the experiment was over. The men trained at Montford were Marines, period."
In the very first comment, missing the point entirely…
uh' seems like there were a few white marines in that conflict also, did they receive a bronze plaque?….