Today is the birthday (1778) of Joseph Louis Gay-Lussac, a French chemist and physicist, known mostly for his discovery that water is made of two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen (with Alexander von Humboldt), for two laws related to gases, and for his work on alcohol-water mixtures, which led to the degrees Gay-Lussac used to measure alcoholic beverages in many countries.
Gay-Lussac was born at Saint-Léonard-de-Noblat in the present-day department of Haute-Vienne. His father, Anthony Gay, was a lawyer and prosecutor and worked as a judge in Noblat Bridge. He owned much of Lussac village and usually added the name of this hamlet, following a custom of the ancien régime. Towards the year 1803, father and son finally adopted the name Gay-Lussac. Gay-Lussac received his early education at the Abbey of Bourdeix, though later in life he became an atheist. Under the Abbot of Dumonteil he began his education in Paris, finally entering the École Polytechnique in 1798. Gay-Lussac narrowly avoided conscription and by the time of entry to the École Polytechnique his father had been arrested (due to Robespierre’s Reign of Terror). Three years later, Gay-Lussac transferred to the École des Ponts et Chaussées, and shortly afterward was assigned to C. L. Berthollet as his assistant. In 1802, he was appointed demonstrator to A. F. Fourcroy at the École Polytechnique, wherein (1809) he became the professor of chemistry. From 1808 to 1832, he was the professor of physics at the Sorbonne, a post which he only resigned for the chair of chemistry at the Jardin des Plantes. In 1821, he was elected a foreign member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. In 1831 he was elected to represent Haute-Vienne in the chamber of deputies, and in 1839 he entered the chamber of peers. He was elected a Foreign Honorary Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1832.
Gay-Lussac married Geneviève-Marie-Joseph Rojot in 1809. He had first met her when she worked as a linen draper’s shop assistant and was studying a chemistry textbook under the counter. They had five children, of whom the eldest (Jules) became assistant to Justus Liebig in Giessen. Some publications by Jules are mistaken as his father’s today since they share the same first initial (J. Gay-Lussac).
Gay-Lussac died in Paris, and his grave is at Père Lachaise Cemetery. His name is one of the 72 names inscribed on the Eiffel Tower.
Here is a timeline of Gay-Lussac’s accomplishments:
1802 – Gay-Lussac first formulated the law, Gay-Lussac’s Law, stating that if the mass and volume of a gas are held constant then gas pressure increases linearly as the temperature rises. His work was preceded by that of Guillaume Amontons, who established the rough relation without the use of accurate thermometers. The law is sometimes written as p = k T, where k is a constant dependent on the mass and volume of the gas and T is temperature on an absolute scale (in terms of the ideal gas law, k = n·R/V).
1804 – He and Jean-Baptiste Biot made a hot-air balloon ascent to a height of 7,016 meters (23,018 ft) in an early investigation of the Earth’s atmosphere. He wanted to collect samples of the air at different heights to record differences in temperature and moisture.
1805 – Together with his friend and scientific collaborator Alexander von Humboldt, he discovered that the composition of the atmosphere does not change with decreasing pressure (increasing altitude). They also discovered that water is formed by two parts of hydrogen and one part of oxygen (by volume).
1808 – He was the co-discoverer of boron.
1810 – In collaboration with Louis Thenard, he developed a method for quantitative elemental analysis by measuring the CO2 and O2 evolved by reaction with potassium chlorate.
1811 – He recognized iodine as a new element, described its properties, and suggested the name iode.
1815 – He synthesized cyanogen, determined its empirical formula and named it.
1824 – He developed an improved version of the burette that included a side arm, and coined the terms “pipette” and “burette” in an 1824 paper about the standardization of indigo solutions.
Clafoutis, is a baked French dessert of fruit, from the Limousin region where Gay-Lussac hailed from. It is traditionally made with unpitted black cherries, arranged in a buttered dish and covered with a thick flan-like batter. The clafoutis is dusted with powdered sugar and served lukewarm, sometimes with cream. The cherry pits contain amygdalin, the active chemical in almond extract, so during baking a small amount of amygdalin from the pits is released into the clafoutis, adding a complementary note to its flavor. If you cannot find fresh, unpitted cherries, pitted will work. While black cherries are traditional, there are now numerous variations using other fruits, including red cherries, plums, prunes, apples, pears, cranberries or blackberries. When other kinds of fruit are used instead of cherries, the dish is properly called a flaugnarde. The dish’s name derives from Occitan clafotís, from the verb clafir, meaning “to fill” Clafoutis apparently spread throughout France during the 19th century.
Clafoutis Aux Cerises
4 large eggs
½ cup sugar
½ tsp salt
1 cup milk
1 tablespoon vanilla extract
½ tablespoon kirsch
zest of 1 lemon
2 tablespoons melted butter
¾ cups all purpose flour
2 cups black cherries, unpitted
powdered sugar for dusting
Preheat oven to 350°F/175°C.
Butter and lightly flour a 9-inch round pie dish or cast iron pan.
Combine the eggs, sugar, salt, milk, lemon zest, kirsch and vanilla extract in a food processor. Blend just until combined. Add the flour and blend again, just until combined and smooth. Finally, add the melted butter and pulse a few times to incorporate into the batter. You can mix the ingredients by hand, if you don’t have a processor.
Pour the batter into the prepared dish. Top with the cherries.
Bake in the preheated oven for 45 minutes to one hour or until the custard is just set. A toothpick poked in the center should emerge relatively clean. Do not bake too long, so that the custard is completely dry.
Remove from the oven and let it cool slightly.
When ready to serve, dust with powdered sugar. Serve warm.
Today is the birthday (1875) of René Karl Wilhelm Johann Josef Maria Rilke better known as Rainer Maria Rilke, a Bohemian poet and novelist who is known for his lyrically intense poetry and prose. He invokes images that focus on the difficulty of communion with the ineffable in an age of disbelief, solitude and profound anxiety. While Rilke is most known for his contributions to German literature, over 400 poems were originally written in French and dedicated to the canton of Valais in Switzerland. Among English-language readers, his best-known works include the poetry collections Duino Elegies (Duineser Elegien) and Sonnets to Orpheus (Die Sonette an Orpheus), the semi-autobiographical novel The Notebooks of Malte Laurids Brigge (Die Aufzeichnungen des Malte Laurids Brigge), and a collection of ten letters that was published after his death under the title Letters to a Young Poet (Briefe an einen jungen Dichter). In the later 20th century, his work found new audiences through use by New Age theologians and self-help authors, which could explain why I find his work unappealing.
Rilke was born in Prague, then capital of Bohemia. His father, Josef Rilke (1838–1906), became a railway official after an unsuccessful military career. His mother, Sophie (“Phia”) Entz (1851–1931), came from a well-to-do Prague family, the Entz-Kinzelbergers, who lived in a house on the Herrengasse (Panská) 8, where Rilke also spent many of his early years. The relationship between Phia and her only son was colored by her mourning for an earlier child, a daughter who had died only one week old. During Rilke’s early years Phia acted as if she sought to recover the lost girl through the boy by dressing him in girl’s clothing. His parents’ marriage failed in 1884. His parents pressured him into entering a military academy in St. Pölten, Lower Austria, which he attended from 1886 until 1891, when he left owing to illness.
He moved to Linz, where he attended trade school. He was expelled from the school in May 1892, and returned to Prague. From 1892 to 1895 he was tutored for the university entrance exam, which he passed in 1895. Until 1896 he studied literature, art history, and philosophy in Prague and Munich.
In 1897 in Munich, Rilke met and fell in love with the widely traveled, intellectual – but married – woman of letters Lou Andreas-Salomé. Rilke changed his first name from “René” to “Rainer” at Salomé’s urging because she thought that name to be more masculine, forceful, and Germanic. His relationship with her lasted until 1900. But even after their separation, Salomé continued to be Rilke’s most important confidante until the end of his life. Having trained from 1912 to 1913 as a psychoanalyst with Sigmund Freud, she shared her knowledge of psychoanalysis with Rilke.
In 1898, Rilke undertook a journey lasting several weeks to Italy. In 1899, he traveled with Salomé and her husband, Friedrich Andreas, to Moscow where he met Leo Tolstoy. Between May and August 1900, a second journey to Russia, accompanied only by Salomé, again took him to Moscow and Saint Petersburg, where he met the family of Boris Pasternak and Spiridon Drozhzhin, a peasant poet.
In 1900, Rilke stayed at the artists’ colony at Worpswede. Here he met the sculptor Clara Westhoff, whom he married the following year. Their daughter Ruth (1901–1972) was born in December 1901. Paula Modersohn-Becker (1876–1907), an early expressionist painter, became acquainted with Rilke in Worpswede and Paris, and painted his portrait in 1906. In the summer of 1902, Rilke left home and traveled to Paris to write a monograph on Auguste Rodin. His wife left their daughter with her parents and joined Rilke there. The relationship between Rilke and Clara Westhoff continued for the rest of his life; a mutually-agreed-upon effort at divorce was bureaucratically hindered by Rilke’s “official” status as a Catholic, though a non-practicing one.
At first, Rilke had a difficult time in Paris, an experience that he called on in the first part of his only novel, The Notebooks of Malte Laurids Brigge. At the same time, his encounter with modernism was stimulating: Rilke became deeply involved with the sculpture of Rodin, then the work of Paul Cézanne. For a time, he acted as Rodin’s secretary, also lecturing and writing a long essay on Rodin and his work. Rodin taught him the value of observation and, under this influence, Rilke dramatically transformed his poetic style from the subjective and sometimes incantatory language of his earlier work into something quite new in European literature. The result was the New Poems, famous for the “thing-poems” expressing Rilke’s rejuvenated artistic vision. During these years, Paris increasingly became his main residence.
Between October 1911 and May 1912, Rilke stayed at the Castle Duino, near Trieste, home of Princess Marie of Thurn und Taxis. He began the poem cycle called the Duino Elegies there in 1912 which would remain unfinished for a decade because of a long-lasting creativity crisis. Rilke had developed an admiration for El Greco as early as 1908, so he visited Toledo during the winter of 1912/13 to see his paintings. Subsequently, Rilke spent extended periods in Ronda, the famous bullfighting center in southern Spain. He kept a permanent room at the Hotel Reina Victoria from December 1912 to February 1913.
The outbreak of World War I surprised Rilke during a stay in Germany. He was unable to return to Paris, where his property was confiscated and auctioned. He spent the greater part of the war in Munich. From 1914 to 1916 he had a turbulent affair with the painter Lou Albert-Lasard. Rilke was called up at the beginning of 1916 and had to undertake basic training in Vienna. Influential friends interceded on his behalf, and he was transferred to the War Records Office and discharged from the military on 9th June 1916. He returned to Munich, interrupted by a stay on Hertha Koenig’s Gut Bockel in Westphalia. The traumatic experience of military service, a reminder of the horrors of the military academy, almost completely silenced him as a poet.
On 11th June 1919, Rilke traveled from Munich to Switzerland. The outward motive was an invitation to lecture in Zurich, but the real reason was the wish to escape the post-war chaos and take up his work on the Duino Elegies once again. The search for a suitable and affordable place to live proved to be very difficult. Among other places, Rilke lived in Soglio, Locarno and Berg am Irchel. Only in mid-1921 was he able to find a permanent residence in the Château de Muzot in the commune of Veyras, close to Sierre in Valais. In an intensely creative period, Rilke completed the Duino Elegies in several weeks in February 1922. Before and after, Rilke rapidly wrote both parts of the poem cycle Sonnets to Orpheus containing 55 entire sonnets. Together, these two have often been taken as constituting the high points of Rilke’s work. In May 1922, Rilke’s patron Werner Reinhart bought and renovated Muzot so that Rilke could live there rent-free.
During this time, Reinhart introduced Rilke to his protégée, the Australian violinist Alma Moodie. Rilke was so impressed with her playing that he wrote in a letter: “What a sound, what richness, what determination. That and the Sonnets to Orpheus, those were two strings of the same voice. And she plays mostly Bach! Muzot has received its musical christening…” From 1923 on, Rilke increasingly had to struggle with health problems that necessitated many long stays at a sanatorium in Territet, near Montreux, on Lake Geneva. His long stay in Paris between January and August 1925 was an attempt to escape his illness through a change in location and living conditions. Despite this, numerous important individual poems appeared in the years 1923–1926 (including Gong and Mausoleum), as well as his abundant lyrical work in French.
In 1924, Erika Mitterer began writing poems to Rilke, who wrote back with approximately fifty poems of his own and called her verse a Herzlandschaft (landscape of the heart). This was the only time Rilke had a productive poetic collaboration throughout all his work. Mitterer also visited Rilke. In 1950, her Correspondence in Verse with Rilke was published.
Rilke supported the Russian Revolution in 1917 as well as the Bavarian Soviet Republic in 1919. He became friends with Ernst Toller and mourned the deaths of Rosa Luxembourg, Kurt Eisner, and Karl Liebknecht. He confided that of the five or six newspapers he read daily, those on the far left came closest to his own opinions. He developed a reputation for supporting left-wing causes, and thus, out of fear for his own safety, became more reticent about politics after the Bavarian Republic was crushed by the right-wing Freikorps. Yet, in January and February 1926, Rilke wrote three letters to the Mussolini-adversary Aurelia Gallarati Scotti in which he praised Benito Mussolini and described fascism as a healing agent.
Shortly before his death, Rilke’s illness was diagnosed as leukemia. He suffered ulcerous sores in his mouth, pain troubled his stomach and intestines, and he struggled with increasingly low spirits. Open-eyed, he died in the arms of his doctor on December 29th, 1926, in the Valmont Sanatorium in Switzerland. He was buried on January 2, 1927, in the Raron cemetery to the west of Visp.
Rilke had chosen as his own epitaph this poem:
Rose, oh reiner Widerspruch, Lust, Niemandes Schlaf zu sein unter soviel Lidern.
Rose, o pure contradiction, desire to be no one’s sleep beneath so many lids.
A legend developed surrounding his death and roses. It was said: “To honor a visitor, the Egyptian beauty Nimet Eloui Bey, Rilke gathered some roses from his garden. While doing so, he pricked his hand on a thorn. This small wound failed to heal, grew rapidly worse, soon his entire arm was swollen, and his other arm became affected as well”, and so he died.
Here is a Bohemian recipe for baked rabbit that I have selected for Rilke, partly because he reminds me of a rabbit (don’t ask), and partly because I miss rabbit since I left Italy.
Bohemian Baked Rabbit
1 rabbit, jointed
1 tbsp caraway seeds
1 onion, peeled and roughly chopped
100ml white wine vinegar
2 tbsp plain flour
oil, for frying
100 gm pitted prunes, halved
2 tbsp sour cream
salt and white pepper
Soak a clean tea towel with vinegar. Place the rabbit pieces on the towel and press the caraway seeds into the meat. Scatter the chopped onion over the rabbit, and then wrap it up in the tea towel. Place the wrapped meat on a dish and refrigerate overnight.
Preheat the oven to 150°C. Unwrap the pieces of meat and dust them with the flour. Heat a little oil in large skillet over a medium heat and sauté the rabbit pieces until browned on all sides. Transfer the rabbit pieces to a lidded casserole and add the prunes and beer. Cook in the oven for 1 hour, turning the pieces over from time to time. About 15 minutes before the end of cooking, season with salt and pepper.
Remove the meat from the casserole and leave to stand, covered, for 7–8 minutes. Add the sour cream to the sauce and stir. Place the rabbit pieces on a heated serving dish, pour the casserole sauce over the rabbit, and serve.
Anna Freud, youngest daughter of Sigmund Freud and Martha Bernays, was born in Vienna, on this date in 1895. She had difficulties getting along with her siblings, specifically with her sister Sophie Freud who was judged to be the more attractive child. They both competed for the affections of their father who once spoke of Anna’s “age-old jealousy of Sophie.” She also had developmental problems growing up. Biographers have indicated that she suffered from depression and had eating disorders. She was repeatedly sent to health farms for rest, and also to gain weight. Apparently, Anna had a reputation for mischief. Freud wrote to his friend Wilhelm Fliess in 1899: “Anna has become downright beautiful through naughtiness.” Freud is said to refer to her in his diaries more than others in the family.
Later, Anna Freud said that she didn’t learn much in school; instead she learned from her father and his guests at home. This was how she picked up Hebrew, German, English, French and Italian. At the age of 15, she started reading her father’s work and discovered a dream she had had at the age of nineteen months, cited in The Interpretation of Dreams.
A visit to Britain in the autumn of 1914, which her father’s colleague, Ernest Jones, chaperoned, became of concern to Freud when he learned of the latter’s romantic intentions. His advice to Jones, in a letter of 22 July 1914, was that his daughter “… does not claim to be treated as a woman, being still far away from sexual longings and rather refusing man. There is an outspoken understanding between me and her that she should not consider marriage or the preliminaries before she gets two or three years older”. In 1914 she passed the test to work as a teaching apprentice at her old school, the Cottage Lyceum. From 1915 to 1917, she worked as a teaching apprentice for third, fourth, and fifth graders. For the school year 1917-18, she began her first position as Klassenlehrerin (head teacher) for the second grade. She was invited to stay on with a regular four-year contract starting in autumn 1918.
After experiencing multiple episodes of illness Anna Freud resigned her teaching post in 1920. This enabled her to pursue further her growing interest in her father’s work and writings. From 1918 to 1921 and from 1924 to 1929 she was in analysis with her father. In 1922 she presented her paper “Beating Fantasies and Daydreams” to the Vienna Psychoanalytical Society and became a member of the society. In 1923, she began her own psychoanalytical practice with children and by 1925 she was teaching at the Vienna Psychoanalytic Training Institute on the technique of child analysis. From 1925 until 1934, she was the Secretary of the International Psychoanalytical Association while she continued child analysis and contributed to seminars and conferences on the subject. In 1935, she became director of the Vienna Psychoanalytical Training Institute and the following year she published her influential study of the “ways and means by which the ego wards off depression, displeasure and anxiety”, The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defence. It became a founding work of ego psychology and established her reputation as a pioneering theoretician.
Among the first children Anna Freud took into analysis were those of Dorothy Burlingham. In 1925 Burlingham, heiress to the Tiffany luxury jewelry retailer, had arrived in Vienna from New York with her four children and entered analysis first with Theodore Reik and then, with a view to training in child analysis, with Sigmund Freud himself. Anna and Dorothy soon developed what have been described as “intimate relations that closely resembled those of lesbians”, though Anna categorically denied the existence of a sexual relationship. After the Burlinghams moved into the same apartment block as the Freuds in 1929 Anna became, in effect, the children’s stepparent.
In 1938, following the Anschluss in which Nazi Germany occupied Austria, Anna was taken to Gestapo headquarters in Vienna for questioning on the activities of the International Psychoanalytical Association. Unknown to her father, she and her brother Martin had obtained Veronal from Max Schur, the family doctor, in sufficient quantities to commit suicide if faced with torture or internment. However, she survived her interrogation ordeal and returned to the family home. After her father had reluctantly accepted the urgent need to leave Vienna, she set about organizing the complex immigration process for the family in liaison with Ernest Jones, the then President of the International Psychoanalytical Association, who secured the immigration permits that eventually led to the family establishing their new home in London at 20 Maresfield Gardens, Hampstead.
In 1941 Anna Freud and Burlingham collaborated in establishing the Hampstead War Nursery for children whose lives had been disrupted by the war. Premises were acquired in Hampstead, North London and in Essex to provide education and residential care with mothers encouraged to visit as often as practicable. Many for the staff were recruited from the exiled Austro-German diaspora. Lectures and seminars on psychoanalytic theory and practice were regular features of staff training. Freud and Burlingham went on to publish a series of observational studies on child development based on the work of the Nursery with a focus on the impact of stress on children and their capacity to find substitute affections among peers in the absence of their parents. The Bulldog Banks Home, run on similar lines to the Nursery, was established after the war for a group of children who had survived the concentration camps. Building on and developing their war-time work with children, Freud and Burlingham established the Hampstead Child Therapy Course and Clinic (now the Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families) in 1952 as a center for therapy, training and research work.
On her arrival in England Anna Freud began to give lectures on child analysis. At that time in London, the field of child analysis was largely the domain of Anna Freud and Melanie Klein, Anna’s theoretical and clinical rival. Anna’s arrival in London resulted in splitting the British psychoanalytic community into three schools: Freudian, Kleinian and Independent. The Kleinian approach differed from the Freudian in several methodological and theoretical techniques around infancy and object relationships. For example, the Freudian approach did not believe that children had a superego, and their therapist should be part of their transference. In contrast, Klein believed that children had a superego, and needed to be treated with the same techniques as adults. These differences had initially threatened the discipline of Anna’s Freudian techniques of child analysis in England, but by the end of World War II, the conflict was resolved through parallel acceptance for both schools.
From the 1950s until the end of her life Freud traveled regularly to the United States to lecture, to teach and to visit friends. She was elected Vice-President of International Association of Psychoanalysts and Foreign Honorary Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1959.
During the 1970s she was concerned with the problems of emotionally deprived and socially disadvantaged children, and she studied deviations and delays in development. At Yale Law School, she taught seminars on crime and the family: this led to a transatlantic collaboration with Joseph Goldstein and Albert J. Solnit on children’s needs and the law, published in three volumes as Beyond the Best Interests of the Child (1973), Before the Best Interests of the Child (1979), and In the Best Interests of the Child (1986).
Anna Freud died in London on 9th October 1982. She was cremated at Golders Green Crematorium and her ashes placed in a marble shelf next to her parents’ ancient Greek funeral urn. Her life-partner Dorothy Tiffany-Burlingham and several other members of the Freud family are also interred there.
If you have read my post on Sigmund Freud – http://www.bookofdaystales.com/sigmund-freud/ — you will know that I have great respect for his originality of thought, and for some of his ideas that have survived the withering criticism of a century. You will also know that I am a severe critic of much of his work. Ditto for his daughter. Freud’s identification of certain psychological processes, especially projection, is ironic. A good case could be made for the entire corpus of Freudian theory being one gigantic, narcissistic projection of his own upbringing. Anna’s role throughout her career was to both expand and defend her father’s work especially as it came under increasing attack in the post-war era. She never strayed from a doctrinaire Freudian approach, although her work focused more on the ego and latency in children than on the whole range of psychosexual development.
Both Sigmund and Anna Freud based their theory on self analysis, and in Anna’s case you have a depressed anorexic child with fantasies of being beaten, striving for the affections of a dominant father with her sister, and indifferent to a distant mother, who spent her adult life in a lesbian relationship (consummated or otherwise), and with no children of her own. Yes, I am sure that a balanced, healthy theoretical perspective will emerge from those experiences !!!
One thing that sticks out for me concerning Anna’s care for children in difficult circumstances was her emphasis on letting them eat what they chose. I don’t know what the choices might have been, but one dish that is child friendly in Austria is Viennese Rindsuppe, a beef bone consommé usually with noodles or dumplings. It is not difficult to make, although it is time consuming. I’ll give you an instructive video although the process is simple: simmer meaty beef bones for several hours, then add soup vegetables (celery, carrot, onion, leek) and herbs, simmer for several more hours, strain and serve with noodles or dumplings. Sorry that the video is in German — it is easy to follow, anyway.
Today is a National Day in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic marking the anniversary of the victory of the Pathet Lao in the Laotian Civil War that was an adjunct of the Vietnam war. Let’s talk about the country’s name before I get into the heart of things. The country was called Laos (with an /s/) by French colonists, but both the people and their language are known as Lao indigenously, and they refer to their country by the full name, sometimes, or as Muang Lao (ເມືອງລາວ) more commonly. After independence from France in 1953 until 1973 the country retained the French colonial name, Laos, but subsequently it has been called Lao. I will use the name Laos here for the country prior to 1973.
The First Indochina War (1946 – 1954) was centered on Vietnam, but involved Laos and Cambodia as well, and eventually led to French defeat and the signing of a peace accord for Laos at the Geneva Conference of 1954. In 1955, the US Department of Defense created a special Programs Evaluation Office to replace French support of the Royal Lao Army against the communist Pathet Lao as part of the US policy of “containment” of communism in Asia.
In 1960, amidst a series of rebellions in the kingdom of Laos, fighting broke out between the Royal Lao Army and the communist North Vietnam-backed, and Soviet Union-backed Pathet Lao guerillas. A second Provisional Government of National Unity formed by Prince Souvanna Phouma in 1962 was unsuccessful, and the situation steadily deteriorated into large scale civil war between the Royal Laotian government and the Pathet Lao, backed militarily by the NVA and Vietcong.
Laos was a key part of the Vietnam War since parts of Laos were invaded and occupied by North Vietnam for use as a supply route for its war against the South. In response, the United States initiated a bombing campaign against the North Vietnamese positions, supported regular and irregular anticommunist forces in Laos and supported South Vietnamese incursions into Laos. In 1968 the North Vietnamese Army launched a multi-division attack to help the Pathet Lao to fight the Royal Lao Army. The attack resulted in the army largely demobilizing, leaving the conflict to irregular ethnic Hmong forces of the “U.S. Secret Army” backed by the United States and Thailand, and led by General Vang Pao.
Massive aerial bombardment against the Pathet Lao and invading People’s Army of Vietnam forces were carried out by the United States to prevent the collapse of the Royal Kingdom of Laos central government, and to deny the use of the Ho Chi Minh Trail to attack US forces in the Republic of Vietnam. Between 1964 and 1973, the U.S. dropped 2 million tons of bombs on Laos, nearly equal to the 2.1 million tons of bombs the U.S. dropped on Europe and Asia during all of World War II, making Laos the most heavily bombed country in history relative to the size of its population; The New York Times noted this was “nearly a ton for every person in Laos”. Around 80 million bombs failed to explode and remain scattered throughout the country, rendering vast swathes of land impossible to cultivate and killing or maiming 50 Laotians every year. (Due to the particularly heavy impact of cluster bombs during this war, Laos was a strong advocate of the Convention on Cluster Munitions to ban the weapons, and was host to the First Meeting of States Parties to the convention in November 2010.
In 1975 the Pathet Lao, along with the Vietnam People’s Army, and backed by the Soviet Union, overthrew the royalist Lao government, forcing king Savang Vatthana to abdicate on 2nd December 1975. He later died in prison. Between 20,000 and 62,000 Laotians died during the Civil War. On 2nd December 1975, after taking control of the country, the Pathet Lao government under Kaysone Phomvihane renamed the country as the Lao People’s Democratic Republic and signed agreements giving Vietnam the right to station armed forces and to appoint advisers to assist in overseeing the country.
Larb is probably the best known Lao dish and I covered a version of it here. http://www.bookofdaystales.com/lao-new-year/ This recipe is for a common beef version, but there is also a fish version which is popular. It resembles ceviche a little, in that the fish has a lime juice dressing, but it is parboiled, and other herbs and vegetables are added. The greens preferred in Laos, and SE Asia in general, are not easily found outside of Asia, but you might find a friendly Vietnamese market. When I lived in New York there was one near my work. In Lao the fish used is local fish from the Mekong. You can use any white fish, but remember, the more you substitute ingredients, the farther you get from the taste of Lao.
¼ cup fresh squeezed lime juice
1 tbsp lemongrass, white parts only, finely minced
1 tsp fresh ginger, minced
1 clove garlic, minced
1 tsp fish sauce
2 tbsp shallots, thinly sliced
¼ cup scallions, green part only, thinly sliced
¼ teaspoon sea salt
1-2 red Thai bird chiles, chopped (or Prik Bon chili powder)
3 cups Asian greens, whole leaves, coarsely chopped
¼ cup cilantro, fresh, whole leaves, coarsely chopped
½ cup fresh mint leaves, coarsely chopped
1 lb white fish, sliced
1 stalk lemongrass, cut into 2” pieces
1 ½ tablespoons ground roasted rice (optional)
In a small bowl, mix together the lime juice, lemongrass, ginger, garlic, fish sauce, shallots, salt and chili. Set aside.
Put the watercress, cilantro and mint into a medium bowl.
In a small saucepan, boil 3 inches of water with 1 stalk of lemongrass, place the fish into the boiling water, turn off the heat. Let sit 3-4 minutes.
Toss the greens with lime-lemongrass dressing plus the roasted rice (if using). Drain the fish and mix in gently. Serve immediately.
Today is the birthday (1846) of Ledi Sayadaw U Ñaṇadhaja (လယ်တီဆရာတော် ဦးဉာဏဓဇ), usually called simply Ledi Sayadaw, one of the foremost Burmese Buddhist figures of his age. He was instrumental in reviving the traditional practice of Vipassana, making it more available for renunciates and lay people alike. Many of his works are still available, including in English through the Buddhist Publication Society.
Ledi Sayadaw began his studies at age 20 in Mandalay at Thanjaun. While there he was considered to be a bright and ambitious young monk but his work was scholarly and there is no evidence that he engaged in any serious meditation practice during his years in Mandalay. After a great fire in 1883 caused the loss of his home and his written work up to that time, he left Mandalay and returned to the village of his youth.
Soon, Ledi Sayadaw founded a forest monastery in the Ledi forest and began practicing and teaching intensive meditation. It was from this monastery that he took his name, Ledi Sayadaw, meaning “respected teacher of the Ledi forest.” In 1885, Ledi Sayadaw wrote the Nwa-myitta-sa (နွားမေတ္တာစာ), a poetic prose letter that argued that Burmese Buddhists should not kill cattle and eat beef, since Burmese farmers depended on them as beasts of burden to maintain their livelihoods, that the marketing of beef for human consumption threatened the extinction of buffalo and cattle, and that the practice was ecologically unsound. He subsequently led successful beef boycotts during the colonial era, despite the presence of beef eating among locals, and influenced a generation of Burmese nationalists in adopting this stance. In 1900, Ledi Sayadaw gave up control of the monastery and pursued more focused meditation in the mountain caves near the banks of the Chindwin River. At other times he traveled throughout Burma. Because of his knowledge of pariyatti (theory), he was able to write a number of books on Dhamma in both Pali and Burmese languages such as, Paramattha-dipani (Manual of Ultimate Truth), Nirutta-dipani, a book on Pali grammar and The Manuals of Dhamma. At the same time he kept alive the pure tradition of patipatti (practice) by teaching the technique of Vipassana to a few people.
Among Ledi’s disciples, Theik-cha-daung Sayadaw(1871-1931) and Mohnyin Sayadaw(1872-1964) are well-known. Theik-cha-daung Sayadaw taught an illiterate farmer and layman Saya Thet Gyi, who went on to receive training from Ledi himself. Thetgyi’s lineage continues to the present, the most prominent being U Wunnathiri and U Ba Khin and his disciples, others include S.N. Goenka.
Burmese fermented tea leaf salad, or lahpet thoke, is extremely popular in Myanmar. You can get lahpet in any number of places, and when I lived in Mandalay, friends in other countries often asked me to send some to them. I frequently had lahpet rice for breakfast. There is an old Burmese saying: “Of all the fruits, mango is the best; of all the meats, pork is the best; of all the leaves, laphet is the best.” Lahpet has a very long history in Myanmar. In ancient times, fermented tea leaves were used as a peace symbol or as a peace offering between kingdoms at war. Now, a lahpet tray is the traditional expression of hospitality offered to house guests.
A typical lahpet thoke consists of fried legumes such as broad beans or yellow split peas, toasted sesame seeds, fried garlic, roasted peanuts, dried shrimp, chili, sliced tomatoes, shredded cabbage and oil, along with the fermented tea leaves. You can then add fresh lime juice. When served as a snack on a tray, pickled tea leaf is called ahlu laphet (ahlu means “donation ceremony”), and all the ingredients are served separately. This presentation is traditionally served after a meal, at ceremonies such as engagements, weddings, and funeral ceremonies.
Lahpet is so important to Burmese culture that when tea leaves are harvested, the best of the crop is set aside for fermenting and eating, while the rest is dried and processed for tea and drinking. The freshly harvested tea leaves are briefly steamed, then packed into bamboo vats and set in pits, pressed by heavy weights to encourage fermentation.
Today is Independence Day in Barbados. The island was an English and later British colony from 1625 until 1966. Since 1966, it has been a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy, modelled on the Westminster system, with Elizabeth II as head of state.
Some evidence suggests that Barbados may have been settled in the second millennium BCE, but this is limited to fragments of conch lip adzes found in association with shells that have been radiocarbon-dated to about 1630 BCE. Fully documented Amerindian settlement dates to between about 350 and 650 CE. The arrivals were a group known as the Saladoid-Barrancoid from mainland South America. A second wave of settlers appeared around the year 800 (the Spanish referred to these as “Arawaks”) and a third in the mid-13th century (called “Caribs” by the Spanish). This last group was politically more organized and came to rule over the others. Frequent slave-raiding missions by the Spanish Empire in the early 16th century led to a massive decline in the Amerindian population, that by 1541 a Spanish writer claimed they were uninhabited. The Amerindians were either captured for use as slaves by the Spanish or fled to other, more easily defensible mountainous islands nearby.
From about 1600 the English, French and Dutch began to found colonies in the North American mainland and the smaller islands of the West Indies. Although Spanish and Portuguese sailors had visited Barbados, the first English ship touched the island on 14th May 1625, and England was the first European nation to establish a lasting settlement there from 1627. England is commonly said to have made its initial claim to Barbados in 1625, although an earlier claim may have been made in 1620. Nonetheless, Barbados was claimed from 1625 in the name of James I of England. There were earlier English settlements in The Americas (1607: Jamestown, 1609: Bermuda, and 1620: Plymouth Colony), and several islands in the Leeward Islands were claimed by the English at about the same time as Barbados (1623: St Kitts, 1628: Nevis, 1632: Montserrat, 1632: Antigua). Nevertheless, Barbados quickly grew to become the third major English settlement in the Americas due to its prime eastern location.
The first English ship, which had arrived on 14 May 1625, was captained by John Powell. The first settlement began on 17 February 1627, near what is now Holetown (formerly Jamestown), by a group led by John Powell’s younger brother, Henry, consisting of 80 settlers and 10 English laborers. The latter were young indentured laborers who according to some sources had been abducted, effectively making them slaves. Courten’s title was transferred to James Hay, 1st Earl of Carlisle, in what was called the “Great Barbados Robbery.” Carlisle then chose as governor Henry Hawley, who established the House of Assembly in 1639, in an effort to appease the planters, who might otherwise have opposed his controversial appointment.
In the period 1640–60, the West Indies attracted over two-thirds of the total number of English emigrants to the Americas. By 1650, there were 44,000 settlers in the West Indies, as compared to 12,000 on the Chesapeake and 23,000 in New England. Most English arrivals were indentured. After five years of labor, they were given “freedom dues” of about ₤10, usually in goods. (Before the mid-1630s, they also received 5 to 10 acres of land, but after that time the island filled and there was no more free land.) Around the time of Cromwell, a number of rebels and criminals were also transported there. Parish registers from the 1650s show, for the white population, four times as many deaths as marriages.
Sugar cane cultivation in Barbados began in the 1640s, after its introduction in 1637 by Pieter Blower. Initially, rum was produced but by 1642, sugar was the focus of the industry. As it developed into the main commercial enterprise, Barbados was divided into large plantation estates which replaced the small holdings of the early English settlers as the wealthy planters pushed out the poorer. Some of the displaced farmers relocated to the English colonies in North America, most notably South Carolina. To work the plantations, Africans – primarily from West Africa – were imported as slaves in such numbers that there were three for every one planter. Increasingly after 1750 the plantations were owned by absentee landlords living in Britain and operated by hired managers. The slave trade ceased in 1807 and slaves were emancipated in 1834. Persecuted Catholics from Ireland also worked the plantations. Life expectancy of slaves was short and replacements were purchased annually.
The introduction of sugar cane from Dutch Brazil in 1640 completely transformed society and the economy. Barbados eventually had one of the world’s biggest sugar industries. One group instrumental in ensuring the early success of the industry were the Sephardic Jews, who had originally been expelled from the Iberian peninsula, to end up in Dutch Brazil. As the of the new crop increased, so did the shift in the ethnic composition of Barbados and surrounding islands. The workable sugar plantation required a large investment and a great deal of heavy labor. At first, Dutch traders supplied the equipment, financing, and African slaves, in addition to transporting most of the sugar to Europe. In 1644, the population of Barbados was estimated at 30,000, of which about 800 were of African descent, with the remainder mainly of English descent. These English smallholders were eventually bought out and the island filled up with large African slave-worked sugar plantations. By 1660, there was near parity with 27,000 blacks and 26,000 whites. By 1666, at least 12,000 white smallholders had been bought out, died, or left the island. Many of the remaining whites were increasingly poor. By 1680, there were 17 slaves for every indentured servant. By 1700, there were 15,000 free whites and 50,000 enslaved blacks.
Due to the increased implementation of slave codes, which created differential treatment between Africans and the white workers and ruling planter class, the island became increasingly unattractive to poor whites. Black or slave codes were implemented in 1661, 1676, 1682, and 1688. In response to these codes, several slave rebellions were attempted or planned during this time, but none succeeded. Nevertheless, poor whites who had or acquired the means to emigrate often did so. Planters expanded their importation of African slaves to cultivate sugar cane. One early advocate of slave rights in Barbados was the visiting Quaker preacher Alice Curwen in 1677: ” “For I am perswaded, that if they whom thou call’st thy Slaves, be Upright-hearted to God, the Lord God Almighty will set them Free in a way that thou knowest not; for there is none set free but in Christ Jesus, for all other Freedom will prove but a Bondage.”
By 1660, Barbados generated more trade than all the other English colonies combined. This remained so until it was eventually surpassed by geographically larger islands like Jamaica in 1713. But even so, the estimated value of the colony of Barbados in 1730–31 was as much as ₤5,500,000. Bridgetown, the capital, was one of the three largest cities in English America (the other two being Boston, Massachusetts and Port Royal, Jamaica.) By 1700, the English West Indies produced 25,000 tons of sugar, compared to 20,000 for Brazil, 10,000 for the French islands and 4,000 for the Dutch islands. This quickly replaced tobacco, which had been the island’s main export.
The British abolished the slave trade in 1807, but not the institution itself. In 1816, slaves rose up in the largest major slave rebellion in the island’s history, of 20,000 slaves from over 70 plantations. They drove whites off the plantations, but widespread killings did not take place. This was later termed “Bussa’s Rebellion” after the slave ranger, Bussa, who with his assistants hated slavery, found the treatment of slaves on Barbados to be “intolerable”, and believed the political climate in Britain made the time ripe to peacefully negotiate with planters for freedom. Bussa’s Rebellion failed. One hundred and twenty slaves died in combat or were immediately executed, and another 144 were brought to trial and executed. The remaining rebels were shipped off the island. In 1826, the Barbados legislature passed the Consolidated Slave Law, which simultaneously granted concessions to the slaves while providing reassurances to the slave owners. Slavery was finally abolished in the British Empire 18 years later, in 1834. In Barbados and the rest of the British West Indian colonies, full emancipation from slavery was preceded by an apprenticeship period that lasted four years.
In 1884, the Barbados Agricultural Society sent a letter to Sir Francis Hincks requesting his private and public views on whether the Dominion of Canada would favorably entertain having the then colony of Barbados admitted as a member of the Canadian Confederation. Asked from Canada were the terms of the Canadian side to initiate discussions, and whether or not the island of Barbados could depend on the full influence of Canada in getting the change agreed to by the British Parliament at Westminster.
In 1952, the Barbados Advocate newspaper polled several prominent Barbadian politicians, lawyers, businessmen, the Speaker of the Barbados House of Assembly and later as first President of the Senate, Sir Theodore Branker, Q.C. and found them to be in favor of immediate federation of Barbados along with the rest of the British Caribbean with complete Dominion Status within five years from the date of inauguration of the West Indies Federation with Canada.
However, plantation owners and merchants of British descent still dominated local politics, owing to the high income qualification required for voting. More than 70 percent of the population, many of them disenfranchised women, were excluded from the democratic process. It was not until the 1930s that the descendants of emancipated slaves began a movement for political rights. One of the leaders of this, Sir Grantley Adams, founded the Barbados Progressive League in 1938, which later became known as the Barbados Labour Party
Adams and his party demanded more rights for the poor and for the people, and staunchly supported the monarchy. Progress toward a more democratic government in Barbados was made in 1942, when the exclusive income qualification was lowered and women were given the right to vote. By 1949, governmental control was wrested from the planters, and in 1958 Adams became Premier of Barbados.
From 1958 to 1962, Barbados was one of the ten members of the West Indies Federation, a federalist organization doomed by nationalist attitudes and the fact that its members, as British colonies, held limited legislative power. Grantley Adams served as its first and only “Premier”, but his leadership failed in attempts to form similar unions, and his continued defense of the monarchy was used by his opponents as evidence that he was no longer in touch with the needs of his country. Errol Walton Barrow, a fervent reformer, became the people’s new advocate. Barrow had left the BLP and formed the Democratic Labour Party as a liberal alternative to Adams’ conservative government. Barrow instituted many progressive social programmes, such as free education for all Barbadians and a school meals system. By 1961, Barrow had replaced Adams as Premier and the DLP controlled the government.
With the Federation dissolved, Barbados reverted to its former status, that of a self-governing colony. The island negotiated its own independence at a constitutional conference with Britain in June 1966. After years of peaceful and democratic progress, Barbados finally became an independent state on 30 November 1966, with Errol Barrow its first Prime Minister, although queen Elizabeth II remained the monarch. Upon independence Barbados maintained historical linkages with Britain by becoming a member of the Commonwealth of Nations. A year later, Barbados’ international linkages were expanded by obtaining membership of both the United Nations and the Organization of American States.
Barbadian cuisine, also called Bajan cuisine, is a mixture of African, Indian, Irish, Creole, and British influences. A typical meal consists of a main dish of meat or fish, normally marinated with a mixture of herbs and spices, hot side dishes, and one or more salads. The meal is usually served with one or more sauces. The national dish of Barbados is cou-cou and fried flying fish with spicy gravy. I’ll give you a two-fer today: a video on cou-cou and flying fish, followed by a recipe for pepperpot, one of my favorites.
2lbs stewing steak, cubed
2 pig’s trotters, split and chopped
2lbs ox tail, chopped
3 cloves garlic, peeled and thinly sliced
2 scotch bonnet peppers, minced
1 large onion, peeled and sliced
1 cinnamon stick
2 whole cloves
fresh basil, chopped
fresh thyme, chopped
Place the stewing steak in a non-reactive mixing bowl with a generous amount of lime juice. Set aside for one hour.
Put the pig’s trotters and oxtail in a large stock pot and cover with water. Bring slowly to the boil, skim, and continue to simmer.
Remove the stewing steak from the lime juice and add to the pot. Fill the pot with fresh hot water. Add the cinnamon stick, and cloves, plus basil, thyme, salt and sugar to taste. Also add the onion, garlic, and hot pepper. Simmer gently, covered, for at least 4 hours, until the meat is very tender.
Refrigerate overnight. Reheat the next day to boiling point. You can serve the soup then, or continue to refrigerate overnight and reheat the next day for several days. Flavor develops over time.
The first observation of a pulsar took place on this date in 1967, by Jocelyn Bell, a postgraduate student in astrophysics at Cambridge university, and later confirmed by her doctoral adviser Antony Hewish. She observed pulses separated by 1.33 seconds that originated from the same location in the sky, and kept to sidereal time (time measured by the stars rather than the sun). In looking for explanations for the pulses, the short period of the pulses eliminated most astrophysical sources of radiation, such as stars, and since the pulses followed sidereal time, it could not be human radio frequency interference. When observations with another telescope confirmed the emission, it eliminated any sort of instrumental effects.
At this point, Bell said of herself and Hewish that “we did not really believe that we had picked up signals from another civilization, but obviously the idea had crossed our minds and we had no proof that it was an entirely natural radio emission. It is an interesting problem—if one thinks one may have detected life elsewhere in the universe, how does one announce the results responsibly?” Even so, they nicknamed the signal LGM-1, for “little green men”. It was not until a second pulsating source was discovered in a different part of the sky that the “LGM hypothesis” was entirely abandoned. The first pulsar was later dubbed CP 1919, and is now known by a number of designators including PSR 1919+21 and PSR J1921+2153. Although CP 1919 emits in radio wavelengths, pulsars have subsequently been found to emit pulses in visible light, X-ray, and gamma ray wavelengths. The word “pulsar” is a portmanteau of ‘pulsating’ and ‘quasar’, and first appeared in print in March 1968 in the Daily Telegraph.
The existence of neutron stars was first proposed by Walter Baade and Fritz Zwicky in 1934, when they argued that a small, dense star consisting primarily of neutrons would result from a supernova. Lodewijk Woltjer proposed in 1964 that such neutron stars might contain magnetic fields as large as 1014 to 1016 G. In 1967, shortly before the discovery of pulsars, Franco Pacini suggested that a rotating neutron star with a magnetic field would emit radiation, and even noted that such energy could be pumped into a supernova remnant around a neutron star, such as the Crab Nebula. After the discovery of the first pulsar, Thomas Gold independently suggested a rotating neutron star model similar to that of Pacini, and explicitly argued that this model could explain the pulsed radiation observed by Bell and Hewish. The discovery of the Crab pulsar later in 1968 seemed to provide confirmation of the rotating neutron star model of pulsars. The Crab pulsar has a 33-millisecond pulse period, which was too short to be consistent with other proposed models for pulsar emission. Moreover, the Crab pulsar is so named because it is located at the center of the Crab Nebula, consistent with the 1933 prediction of Baade and Zwicky.
In 1974, Antony Hewish and Martin Ryle became the first astronomers to be awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics, with the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences noting that Hewish played a “decisive role in the discovery of pulsars”. Considerable controversy is associated with the fact that Hewish was awarded the prize while Bell, who made the initial discovery while she was his doctoral student, was not. That Bell did not receive recognition in the 1974 Nobel Prize in Physics has been a point of controversy ever since. She helped build the Interplanetary Scintillation Array over two years, which was used to observe quasars, and initially noticed the anomaly in the Array’s data, sometimes reviewing as much as 96 feet (29 m) of paper data per night. Bell later claimed that she had to be persistent in reporting the anomaly in the face of skepticism from Hewish, who was initially insistent that it was due to interference from human sources. She spoke of meetings held by Hewish and Ryle to which she was not invited. In 1977, she commented on the issue:
First, demarcation disputes between supervisor and student are always difficult, probably impossible to resolve. Secondly, it is the supervisor who has the final responsibility for the success or failure of the project. We hear of cases where a supervisor blames his student for a failure, but we know that it is largely the fault of the supervisor. It seems only fair to me that he should benefit from the successes, too. Thirdly, I believe it would demean Nobel Prizes if they were awarded to research students, except in very exceptional cases, and I do not believe this is one of them. Finally, I am not myself upset about it – after all, I am in good company, am I not!
She is certainly in good company. As I reported here — http://www.bookofdaystales.com/world-diabetes-day/ — the 1923 Nobel Prize in medicine was awarded to Frederick Banting and J.J.R Macleod for the discovery of insulin. Banting was the lead researcher, and Macleod was the director of the lab where Banting made his discovery, assisted by Charles Best, a medical student. Macleod was on holiday when Banting and Best were conducting their experiments. Yet Banting and Macleod got the Nobel, and Best, the student, was left out even though he made major contributions and Macleod did next to nothing. Likewise, Bell got overlooked, while Hewish, whom she had to convince that pulsars were real, got the honor.
Bell has since received many prestigious honors. This year she was awarded the Special Breakthrough Prize in Fundamental Physics, worth three million dollars (£2.3 million), for her discovery of radio pulsars. The Special Prize, in contrast to the regular annual prize, is not restricted to recent discoveries. She donated all of the money “to fund women, under-represented ethnic minority and refugee students to become physics researchers.”
If you have star-shaped cookie cutters you can make star cookies today, or something of the sort. But, in honor of the Crab pulsar in the Crab nebula, you might consider a nebula cake. This site gives a thorough recipe.
Today is the anniversary of the Berners Street hoax, perpetrated by Theodore Hook in London in 1809. Hook had made a bet with his friend, Samuel Beazley, that he could transform any house in London into the most talked-about address in a week, which he achieved by sending out thousands of letters in the name of Mrs Tottenham, who was supposedly the resident at 54 Berners Street, requesting deliveries, visitors, and assistance. There was a widow living there but her name was not Tottenham.
At five o’clock in the morning, a sweep arrived to sweep the chimneys of Mrs Tottenham’s house. The maid who answered the door informed him that no sweep had been requested, and that his services were not required. A few moments later another sweep presented himself, then another, and another: twelve in all. After the last of the sweeps had been sent away, a fleet of carts carrying large deliveries of coal began to arrive, followed by a series of cake makers delivering large wedding cakes, then doctors, lawyers, vicars and priests summoned to minister to someone in the house they had been told was dying. Fishmongers, shoemakers, and over a dozen pianos were among the next to appear, along with “six stout men bearing an organ”. Dignitaries, including the governor of the Bank of England, the Duke of York, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Lord Mayor of London also arrived. The narrow streets soon became severely congested with tradesmen and onlookers. Deliveries and visits continued until the early evening, bringing a large part of London to a standstill. A London newspaper noted:
Every Officer that could be mustered was enlisted to disperse the people, and they were placed at the corners of Berners Street to prevent trades people from advancing towards the house with goods. The street was not cleared at a late hour, as servants of every denomination wanting places began to assemble at five o’clock. It turned out that letters had been written to the different trades people, which stated recommendations from persons of quality. A reward has been offered for the apprehension of the author of the criminal hoax.
Hook rented a room in the house directly opposite 54 Berners Street, where he and Beazley spent the day watching the chaos unfold.
Despite fervent efforts to find the perpetrator, Hook managed to evade detection, although many of those who knew him suspected him of being responsible. It was reported that he felt it prudent to be “laid up for a week or two” before embarking on a tour of the country, supposedly to convalesce. The site at 54 Berners Street is now occupied by the Sanderson Hotel.
A hoax recipe would do well today, but I have given quite a few already: for example, here — http://www.bookofdaystales.com/p-t-barnum/ Hoax dishes involve making a dish that looks like one thing, but is, in fact another entirely. Bob Blumer is a modern master at hoax recipes. You can check out his cauliflower popcorn or salmon cupcakes here: http://www.bobblumer.com/recipes/ I am going to go with a peculiar Georgian recipe, deep-fried strawberries from Cookery reformed; or, The Lady’s assistant, (1755). I have edited the recipe slightly, but you get the idea. Move over deep fried Mars bars.
Make a batter with flour, a spoonful of sweet oil, another of white wine, a little rasped lemon-peel, and the whites of two or three eggs, make it soft, so as to drop with a spoon. Mix it with some large strawberries, and drop them with a spoon into hot oil. When they are of a good color, take them out, and drain them on a sieve. When they are done, strew some sugar over them, and glaze them.
Today is the birthday (1638) of Catherine of Braganza, queen consort of England, Scotland and Ireland from 1662 to 1685, as the wife of Charles II. She was the daughter of John IV, who became the first king of Portugal from the House of Braganza in 1640 after overthrowing the rule of the Spanish Habsburgs in Portugal.
Negotiations for the marriage of Catherine and Charles began during the reign of Charles I, were suspended during the Commonwealth, and then renewed immediately after the Restoration. On 23rd June 1661, in spite of Spanish opposition, the marriage contract was signed. In the contract, England secured Tangier (in North Africa) and the Seven Islands of Bombay (in India), trading privileges in Brazil and the East Indies, religious and commercial freedom in Portugal, and two million Portuguese crowns (about £300,000). In return Portugal got assurance of British military and naval support in its fight against Spain and liberty of worship for Catherine. She arrived at Portsmouth on the night of 13–14th May 1662, but was not visited there by Charles until 20th May. The following day they were married in Portsmouth at two ceremonies – a Catholic one conducted in secret, followed by a public Anglican service.
On 30th September 1662 Charles and Catharine entered London as part of a large procession, which included the Portuguese delegation and many members of the court. There were also minstrels and musicians, among them ten playing shawms and twelve playing Portuguese bagpipes, Catharine’s favorite instruments. The procession continued over a large bridge, especially designed and built for the occasion, which led into the palace where Henrietta Maria, the queen mother waited, along with the British court and nobility. This was followed by feasting and firework displays.
Catherine had been brought up in a convent, secluded from the world, and was scarcely a wife Charles would have chosen for himself. The queen mother wrote that she is “The best creature in the world, from whom I have so much affection, I have the joy to see the King love her extremely. She is a Saint!” In reality, Catherine’s personal charms could not draw Charles away from the society of his mistresses, and in a few weeks after her arrival she became aware of her position as the wife of a licentious king.
Little is known of Catherine’s own thoughts on the match. While her mother plotted to secure an alliance with England and thus support in Portugal’s fight for independence, and her future husband celebrated his restoration with his mistresses, Catherine’s time had been spent in the seclusion of her convent home, with little opportunity for fun or frivolity. Even outside the convent her actions were governed by the strict etiquette of the royal court of Portugal. By all accounts Catherine grew into a quiet, even-tempered young woman.
At the time of her marriage she was already 23 and had long since resigned herself to the necessity of making a match abroad to help her family and country. Catherine’s response on being told of her impending nuptials was to request permission to make a pilgrimage to a favorite shrine of hers in Lisbon. Catherine became pregnant and miscarried at least three times, and during a severe illness in 1663, she imagined, for a time, that she had given birth. Charles comforted her by telling her she had indeed given birth to two sons and a daughter. Her position was a difficult one, and though Charles continued to have children by his many mistresses, he insisted she be treated with respect, and sided with her against his mistresses when he felt she was not receiving the respect she was due. After her three miscarriages, it seemed to be more and more unlikely that the queen would bear an heir. Royal advisors urged Charles to seek a divorce, hoping that the new wife would be Protestant and fertile – but Charles refused. This eventually led to her being made a target by courtiers. Throughout his reign, Charles firmly dismissed the idea of divorcing Catherine, and she remained faithful to Charles throughout their marriage.
Catherine was not a particularly popular choice of queen since she was Roman Catholic. Her religion prevented her from being crowned, as Catholics were forbidden to take part in Anglican services. She initially faced hardships due to the language barrier, the king’s infidelities and the political conflicts between Roman Catholics and Anglicans. Over time, her quiet decorum, loyalty and genuine affection for Charles changed the public’s perception of her.
Although her difficulties with the English language persisted, as time went on, the once rigidly formal Portuguese Infanta mellowed and began to enjoy some of the more innocent pleasures of the court. She loved to play cards and shocked devout Protestants by playing on Sundays. She enjoyed dancing and took great delight in organising masques. She had a great love for the countryside and picnics; fishing and archery were also favourite pastimes. In a far cry from her convent-days the newly liberated Catherine displayed a fondness for the recent trend of court ladies wearing men’s clothing, which we are told, “showed off her pretty, neat legs and ankles”; and she was even reported to have considered leading the way in wearing shorter dresses, which would show off her feet. In 1670, on a trip to Audley End with her ladies-in-waiting, the once chronically shy Catherine attended a country fair disguised as a village maiden, but was soon discovered and, due to the large crowds, forced to make a hasty retreat. And when in 1664 her favorite painter, Jacob Huysmans, a Flemish Catholic, painted her as St Catherine, it promptly set a trend among court ladies.
She did not involve herself in English politics, instead she kept up an active interest in her native country. Anxious to re-establish good relations with the Pope and perhaps gain recognition for Portuguese independence, she sent Richard Bellings, later her principal secretary, to Rome with letters for the pope and several cardinals. In 1669 she involved herself in the last-ditch effort to relieve Candia in Crete, which was under siege by the Turks and whose cause Rome was promoting, although she failed to persuade Charles to take any action. In 1670, as a sign of her rising favor with the pope she requested, and was granted, devotional objects. In 1670 Charles II ordered the building of a Royal yacht HMY Saudadoes for her, used for pleasure trips on the Thames and to maintain communications with the Queen’s homeland of Portugal, making the journey twice.
Catherine fainted when Charles’s official mistress, Barbara Palmer was presented to her. Charles insisted on making Palmer Catherine’s Lady of the Bedchamber. After this incident, Catherine withdrew from spending time with the king, declaring she would return to Portugal rather than openly accept the arrangement with Palmer. Clarendon failed to convince her to change her mind. Charles then dismissed nearly all the members of Catherine’s Portuguese retinue, after which she stopped actively resisting, which pleased the king, however she participated very little in court life and activities.
In 1675 the stress of a possible revival of the divorce project indirectly led to another illness, which Catherine’s physicians claimed was “due as much to mental as physical causes”. In the same year, all Irish and English Catholic priests were ordered to leave the country, which left Catherine dependent upon foreign priests. As increasingly harsher measures were put in place against Catholics, Catherine appointed her close friend and adviser, the devoutly Catholic Francisco de Mello, former Portuguese Ambassador to England, as her Lord Chamberlain. It was an unusual and controversial move but wishing to please Catherine and perhaps demonstrate the futility of moves for divorce, the King granted his permission. De Mello was dismissed the following year for ordering the printing of a Catholic book, leaving Catherine even more isolated at court. One consolation was that Louise de Kérouaille, duchess of Portsmouth, who replaced Barbara Palmer as reigning mistress, always treated Catharine with proper deference. Catharine in return showed her gratitude by using her own influence to protect Louise during the Popish Plot.
The Test Act of 1673 had driven all Catholics out of public office, and anti-Catholic feelings intensified the following years. Although she was not active in religious politics, in 1675 Catherine was criticized for supposedly supporting the idea of appointing a bishop to England who, it was hoped, would resolve the internal disputes of Catholics. Critics also noted the fact that, despite orders to the contrary, English Catholics attended her private chapel. As the highest-ranking Catholic in the country, Catherine was an obvious target for Protestant extremists, and it was hardly surprising that the Popish Plot of 1678 would directly threaten her position. The Popish Plot was a fictitious conspiracy concocted by Titus Oates that gripped England and Scotland in anti-Catholic hysteria between 1678 and 1681. Oates alleged that there was an extensive Catholic conspiracy to assassinate Charles II, accusations that led to the executions of at least 22 men and precipitated the Exclusion Bill Crisis. Eventually Oates’s intricate web of accusations fell apart, leading to his arrest and conviction for perjury.
Fortunately, Catherine was completely secure in her husband’s favor (“she could never do anything wicked, and it would be a horrible thing to abandon her” he told Gilbert Burnet), and the House of Lords, most of whom knew her and liked her, refused by an overwhelming majority to impeach her. Relations between the royal couple became notably warmer: Catherine wrote of Charles’ “wonderful kindness” to her. and it was noted that his visits to her apartments became longer and more frequent.
At Charles’ final illness in 1685, Catharine showed expectations for his reconciliation with Catholic faith, and she exhibited great grief at his death. When he lay dying in 1685, he asked for Catherine, but she sent a message asking that her presence be excused and “to beg his pardon if she had offended him all his life.” He answered, “Alas poor woman! she asks for my pardon? I beg hers with all my heart; take her back that answer.” Later in the same year, she unsuccessfully interceded with James II for the life of James Scott, 1st Duke of Monmouth, Charles’s illegitimate son and leader of the Monmouth Rebellion – even though Monmouth in rebellion had called upon the support represented by the staunch Protestants opposed to the Catholic Church.
Catherine remained in England, living at Somerset House, through the reign of James and his deposition in the Glorious Revolution by William and Mary. She remained in England partly because of a protracted lawsuit against her former Lord Chamberlain, Henry Hyde, 2nd Earl of Clarendon, over money that she claimed as part of her allowance and that he claimed was part of the perquisite of his office. Catherine’s fondness for money is one of the more unexpected features of her character: her brother-in-law James, who was himself notably avaricious, remarked that she always drove a hard bargain.
Initially on good terms with William and Mary, her position deteriorated as the practice of her religion led to misunderstandings and increasing isolation. A bill was introduced to Parliament to limit the number of Catherine’s Catholic servants, and she was warned not to agitate against the government. She finally returned to Portugal in March 1692, where she took care of and mentored her nephew, prince John. His mother, Maria Sofia of Neuburg, had recently died, and the prince had fallen into a depression. Catherine was instrumental in lifting the young prince’s spirits, and soon became a key part in his life, as his tutor and main female figure in his life. Her death would, in fact, cause John to experience another depression.
In 1703, she supported the Treaty of Methuen between Portugal and England. She acted as regent for her brother, Peter II, in 1701 and 1704–05. She died at the Bemposta Palace in Lisbon on 31st December 1705 and was buried at the Monastery of São Vicente de Fora Lisbon.
Here is a Stuart era recipe from The Whole Duty of a Woman: Or a Guide to the Female Sex, (1696). It is described as a way to prepare lamb so that it tastes like venison. The “coffin” mentioned in the recipe means pastry, so it appears to be a kind of lamb roulade en croute.
Lamb to make like Venison.
Bone it, and take the side or quarter, and dip it in its Blood, sprinkle it over with Salt, Cinamon and Pepper, rowl it up, and parboyl it, adding some Vinegar to the Water you boyl it in, a sprig or two of Hysop and Thyme, let it stand six hours in the water when it is off the Fire, put it into a coffin, and pour to it when half Baked, Claret and Melted Butter, with some Cloves Mace and dryed Rosemary, finely beaten.
On this date in 1974 Donald Johanson and Tom Gray discovered the 40% complete Australopithecus afarensis skeleton, nicknamed “Lucy” (after The Beatles song “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds” which played constantly at the field site), in the Awash Valley of Ethiopia’s Afar Depression. This makes today something of a coincidence day because on this date in 1859, Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species, so the date is now celebrated as Evolution Day. The coincidence is not quite perfect since Origin has little to say about human evolution, contrary to popular belief. He had more to say about human evolution in The Descent of Man in 1871, but his speculations are largely wrong because there was almost nothing in the way of fossil evidence to support or oppose them. Both publications did, however, spur research and now we have a much better picture. Finding Lucy was an incredibly important breakthrough in refining the nature of the Australopithecine branch of hominids that led to the genus Homo. I remember the early reports of the discovery of Lucy very well because I was studying human evolution at the time.
Lucy is the common name of AL 288-1. In Ethiopia, the assembly is also known as Dinkinesh, which means “you are marvelous” in the Amharic language. The Lucy specimen is an early australopithecine and is dated to about 3.2 million years ago. The skeleton has a small skull akin to that of non-hominin apes, plus evidence of a walking-gait that was bipedal and upright, akin to that of humans (and other hominins). This combination supports the view that bipedalism preceded increase in brain size in human evolution.
On the morning of 24th November 1974, near the Awash River, Johanson abandoned a plan to update his field notes and joined graduate student Tom Gray to search Locality 162 for bone fossils. By Johanson’s later (published) accounts, both he and Tom Gray spent two hours on the increasingly hot and arid plain, surveying the dusty terrain. On a hunch, Johanson decided to look at the bottom of a small gully that had been checked at least twice before by other workers. At first view nothing was immediately visible, but, as they turned to leave, a fossil caught Johanson’s eye; an arm bone fragment was lying on the slope. Near it lay a fragment from the back of a small skull. They noticed part of a femur (thigh bone) about one meter away. As they explored further, they found more and more bones on the slope, including vertebrae, part of a pelvis, ribs, and pieces of jaw. They marked the spot and returned to camp, excited at finding so many pieces apparently from one individual hominin. In the afternoon, all members of the expedition returned to the gully to section off the site and prepare it for careful excavation and collection, which eventually took three weeks.
Over the next three weeks the team found several hundred pieces or fragments of bone with no duplication, confirming their original speculation that the pieces were from a single individual; ultimately, it was determined that an amazing 40 percent of a hominin skeleton was recovered at the site. Johanson assessed it as female based on the one complete pelvic bone and sacrum, which indicated the width of the pelvic opening.
Lucy was 1.1 m (3 ft 7 in) tall, weighed 29 kg (64 lb), and (after reconstruction) looked somewhat like a chimpanzee. The creature had a small brain like a chimpanzee, but the pelvis and leg bones were almost identical in function to those of modern humans, showing with certainty that Lucy’s species were hominins that had stood upright and had walked erect. Additional finds of A. afarensis were made during the 1970s and forward, gaining for anthropologists a better understanding of the ranges of morphic variability and sexual dimorphism within the species. An even more complete skeleton of a related hominid, Ardipithecus, was found in the same Awash Valley in 1992. “Ardi”, like “Lucy”, was a hominid-becoming-hominin species, but, dated at 4.4 million years ago, it had evolved much earlier than the afarensis species. Excavation, preservation, and analysis of the specimen Ardi was very difficult and time-consuming. Work was begun in 1992, with the results not fully published until October 2009.
Initial attempts were made in 1974 by Maurice Taieb and James Aronson in Aronson’s laboratory at Case Western Reserve University to estimate the age of the fossils using the potassium-argon radiometric dating method. These efforts were hindered by several factors: the rocks in the recovery area were chemically altered or reworked by volcanic activity; datable crystals were very scarce in the sample material; and there was a complete absence of pumice clasts at Hadar. (The Lucy skeleton occurs in the part of the Hadar sequence that accumulated with the fastest rate of deposition, which partly accounts for her excellent preservation.)
Fieldwork at Hadar was suspended in the winter of 1976–77. When it was resumed thirteen years later in 1990, the more precise argon-argon technology had been updated by Derek York at the University of Toronto. By 1992 Aronson and Robert Walter had found two suitable samples of volcanic ash—the older layer of ash was about 18 m below the fossil and the younger layer was only one meter below, closely marking the age of deposition of the specimen. These samples were argon-argon dated by Walter in the geochronology laboratory of the Institute of Human Origins at 3.22 and 3.18 million years.
An Ethiopian meal is in order today. I have given a recipe for injera here, http://www.bookofdaystales.com/abebe-bikila/ as well as for beef wat which includes a recipe for berbere spice mix which you will need for many Ethiopian dishes including this lentil dish, misr wat: