Stranger than Fiction: Real History

[Rath Darkblade]

I find it curious (and, if I was paranoid, offensive) that when I google "famous women in Victorian England", Florence Nightingale is there, but Mary Seacole isn't.

Google also gives me Emmeline Pankhurst, although technically she belongs in the Edwardian Age, not the Victorian.

And nobody mentions Angela Burdett-Coutts, even though without her financial support, many philanthropic and humanitarian causes (particularly focused on children, housing, animal welfare, and education) would've withered and died.

Personally, I find Seacole and Burdett-Coutts much more interesting and admirable than Nightingale, who could be insufferably priggish.

 

[CatrionaGrace]

Personally, I find Seacole and Burdett-Coutts much more interesting and admirable than Nightingale, who could be insufferably priggish.

And above all, a woman's reputation rises and falls according to how personable and pleasant she is, hmm?

You are of course, entitled to admire whomsoever you choose, but if you wish to do women in history a service, add names to the list of achievers without tearing down those already there.

 

[Rath Darkblade]

Sigh. Being pleasant or personable is a bonus, but self-righteousness is not an admirable quality.

I am not trying to "tear down" Nightingale or deny her unquestionable achievements. I'm simply saying that the history books have given her a fairly free ride for a long time, and other women in the Victorian era (like Seacole and Burdett-Coutts) have been in her shade for too long. So it's long past time they were given a chance, too.

 

[Naomasa298]

I find it curious (and, if I was paranoid, offensive) that when I google "famous women in Victorian England", Florence Nightingale is there, but Mary Seacole isn't.

And there was me thinking you might come across a certain Queen Victoria in that list.

 

[Rath Darkblade]

And there was me thinking you might come across a certain Queen Victoria in that list.

Um ... of course Queen Victoria was there. Why shouldn't she be? I'm confused.

 

[Dante Dases]

Sigh. Being pleasant or personable is a bonus, but self-righteousness is not an admirable quality.

I am not trying to "tear down" Nightingale or deny her unquestionable achievements. I'm simply saying that the history books have given her a fairly free ride for a long time, and other women in the Victorian era (like Seacole and Burdett-Coutts) have been in her shade for too long. So it's long past time they were given a chance, too.

Nightingale's achievements were based on a complete misunderstanding of medicine which, through fortune rather than knowledge, worked. She was a believer in miasma until the day she died, which could have set medicine back a long way. That her beliefs in clean bedding, an airy environment and general cleanliness aligned with germ theory and the strategies needed to reduce disease were entirely coincidental. This belief in miasma and spontaneous generation led to some pretty nasty social ideas which are perhaps kindly referred to as 'conservative'. She was also, even by the standards of the time, hugely racist. When confronted with high death rates in Canadian native populations, she blamed their 'filth', leaning heavily on her belief in miasma. She believed non-white people were fundamentally dirty and died because of it.

She was bloody lucky to achieve what she did. At, perhaps, any other time her work would have been left behind rather than pioneering. She benefitted from the work of others and a growth in understanding germ theory a decade after her hospitals in the Crimean War had cut down on excess deaths. Others put germ theory together with her work and made significant steps forward as a result. On her own, she would not have changed much.

 

[Naomasa298]

She also made good pi charts.

 

[CatrionaGrace]

So it's long past time they were given a chance, too.

I agree, absolutely, but one needn't belittle one person in order to recognize the contributions of others.

 

[Rath Darkblade]

Here are a some other historical things I learned today (from listening to the "You're Dead To Me" episode on Medieval Christmas):

- In Catalonia (in northeastern Spain), the Christmas Nativity Scenes feature a man doing a poo. (This is also known as the Caganer). This little figurine is found Nativity Scenes all around Catalonia and neighbouring regions, but also in other parts of Spain (e.g. Murcia), Portugal, and Naples (Italy).

- King Henry II of England had a jester known as Roland, who every Christmas performed a scene for his monarch comprising of a hop, a whistle - and a fart. As a reward for his service, Henry rewarded Roland (known as "The Farter") with a manor in Suffolk and 30 acres. (See Roland the Farter on wikipedia).

- The feast of Saints Adam and Eve is a traditional Catholic feast day celebrated on December 24th, the vigil of Christmas. In medieval times, mummers (costumed singers and dancers) would go about re-enacting the story of Adam and Eve. (I can't find any evidence that the people playing Adam or Eve had to do it in the nude, but it's fun to imagine what'd happen if they did).

- Christmas in medieval times was certainly not celebrated as it is today. There was not as much emphasis on December 25th, for a start; the season started on Christmas Day (December 25) and ended on the Epiphany (January 6). The focus was more on communal celebration and feasting rather than gifts.

One of the most unusual customs was the election of a boy bishop - whereby a boy was chosen, for example, among cathedral choristers, to do the duties of the adult bishop. The boy bishop had to serve from St. Nicholas Day (December 6th) to the Feast of the Holy Innocents (December 28th). His duties included presiding over religious ceremonies, leading processions, delivering a sermon, collecting money for the church, and even declaring holidays. (The office was abolished in England by Henry VIII, one of the most unlovely kings. Mary I reinstated it, but Elizabeth banned it).

This tradition still continues in some communities in Spain, albeit in temporary and symbolic form. They can still lead some church services, bless people, and potentially grant holidays or treats.

 

[Naomasa298]

- Christmas in medieval times was certainly not celebrated as it is today. There was not as much emphasis on December 25th, for a start; the season started on Christmas Day (December 25) and ended on the Epiphany (January 6). The focus was more on communal celebration and feasting rather than gifts.

Ever wonder what the twelve days of Christmas were?

 

[CatrionaGrace]

Well, they start with a partridge and a pear tree.

Years ago, I went to the dentist in December and he had a bullet casing hanging from a twig on a dead branch that was propped in a pot. Took me a long minute to figure that one out: a cartridge in a bare tree.

 

[Rath Darkblade]

Ever wonder what the twelve days of Christmas were?

I did, yes. (But I wasn't raised Christian, so I never learned about the significance of the Christmas season, other than Christmas Day itself).

I just remembered another thing about medieval Christmas: people would still exchange gifts, but they would do it on New Year's Day rather than Christmas Day. (I'm not sure why, but it's a fun fact).

 

[Louanne Learning]

Queen Victoria's real first name was Alexandrina, named for Tsar Alexander of Russia. In 1837, when Princess Alexandrina officially became Queen of the United Kingdom, she chose to rule under her middle name, hence the title: Queen Victoria.

 

[Rath Darkblade]

Correct. I suppose I should mention that "Tsar Alexander" accurately refers to Alexander I, whose realm Napoleon famously invaded in 1812. (Victoria became queen in 1837, 25 years later. She was also Alexander's goddaughter).

Speaking of Alexander, here's a fun fact: Alexander was a shy and introspective man, and became more so as he aged. In his late 40s, he took a trip to Taganrog, a city on the Taganrog Bay by the Sea of Azov, connected to the Black Sea (which is just north of Turkey). While there, he contracted typhus and died.

Alexander died childless on 18 November, 1825, but the news didn't reach Moscow until December. His two brothers immediately started quarreling over who should be the next Tsar, because neither of them wanted the throne.

This is where the story becomes mysterious. There is a legend that Alexander faked his death in order to become a wandering mystic called Feodor Kuzmich. This theory is supported by various similarities between Alexander and Kuzmich, and is even mentioned in wikipedia: Alexander I of Russia - Wikipedia

I've read some odd stories about the Romanovs over the years, but I've never come across that one!

 

[CatrionaGrace]

My niece's middle name is Alejandrina (j pronounced as an h). She was named for a grandmother. I'll have to tell her about Victoria, but she may already know.

 

[Naomasa298]

Queen Victoria's real first name was Alexandrina, named for Tsar Alexander of Russia. In 1837, when Princess Alexandrina officially became Queen of the United Kingdom, she chose to rule under her middle name, hence the title: Queen Victoria.

It's not unknown. George VI's first name was Albert.

EDIT: Added the missing "not"...

 

[JT Woody]

Do you know of an interesting, strange or astonishing fact or event from history? Post it here!

Feel free to use any posted event as a spring board for a story.

(Let's keep away from the politics of current events)

So, way back when i started doing my family history, i came across petitions from the late 1800s (more on this later) and hadnt thought about them since.

TODAY, i was listening/reading the book OURS by Phillip B Williams. "Ours" is a fictional town in Missouri that was formed by freed slaves for freed slaved. How it happened was literally, a former slave woman moved into an all white town and purchased a plot of land. then her white neighbors moved out. so she invited other former slaves to move into those houses. then more white people moved out, and eventually, the town became "Ours."

This reminded me of the petitions i found years ago and I decided to pull it back up.
the county my grandmother was born and raised in, where her family had been enslaved on a plantation and then, once freed, remained on the farm (i'd wondered why the cemetery in town had all their last names and the last name of another family). Grandma told me that once they'd been freed, the families all stayed in town and formed a community....
apparently for this was because they're been 2 mass migrations of black people from the south going north. My great-great(great?) grandfather was in that migration that stopped in the town Granny lived and they fell in love and he stayed. ANYWAY back to the petition:

in 1840, 36 residents petitioned the court to keep the black migrants out, saying that they are "cursed with a free colored population that migrated" there. And then, in so many words, said that while they weren't breaking any laws, they were still disrupting their way of life.
their petition was rejected. (Digital Library on American Slavery)
and then the white people started moving out... including the family who owned my relatives. They moved to Tennessee and left their slaves with another relative who didnt want them and freed them before also moving away (or dying).
and my family are still there in that same town. I remember visiting my granny on the farm when i was small, and have a picture with her there before she died. and her youngest daughter moved back there and died there. my grandma wants to go back, but she isnt in the best of health to be travelling.
the land was willed to my mom and her siblings now.

 

[Rath Darkblade]

Amazing story. Thank you for sharing it, JT Woody.

 

[CatrionaGrace]

So, way back when i started doing my family history,..

Greetings, sister genealogist! Thanks for sharing a story from your history. Maybe we need a genealogy research thread?

Family history can be a great jumping off place for story ideas. Twenty years ago, I came across an 1852 divorce notice wherein a a woman unrelated to me (alas) divorced my great, great, great grandfather. She then moved to Texas with their children as well as his children from a previous marrage. That is the last mention of him I've ever found. I've always wondered, what happened? Conjectures about that question resulted in Book II.

Huh. Maybe I'll go start the thread.

 

[Louanne Learning]

A piece of Canadiana I thought you might enjoy.