• Sign up or login, and you'll have full access to opportunities of forum.

Odds And Ends And Anything You Fancy

Go to CruxDreams.com
pic_cfe276b3fc9c0ab8f1a28bc074334bd4.jpg
Jivan Gasparyan, an Armenian musician and composer, an outstanding master of playing the duduk, has died.

"It is with deep pain that I write about my great loss. May God rest your soul in heaven, " Gasparyan Jr. wrote. The maestro died at the age of 93. The cause of his death was not disclosed.

Jivan Gasparyan was born on October 12, 1928 in the village of Sulak, Armenian SSR. At the age of six, he began to play the duduk independently. Subsequently, he became one of the most famous performers of music on this instrument. He was the author of soundtracks for many Hollywood films, including: "The Last Temptation of Christ", "Gladiator", "The Da Vinci Code", "The Chronicles of Narnia" and others.

In 1978, Gasparyan was awarded the title of "People's Artist of the Armenian SSR". He was also the winner of the American Golden Globe Award, worked with such famous musicians as Lionel Richie, Sting, Peter Gabriel, Hans Zimmer, Brian May. In recent years, the performer has lived in the United States.

I know his name was mentioned on the forum, I'm also a fan of his duduk.
 
Here's one for you @Dorothy Brown and not very far away in Leeds city centre.
It's from https://secretlibraryleeds.files.wordpress.com/2021/04/1694-200435_60471743-high-res.jpg
and the description reads:

The extraordinary image below, a 1694 sketch from the Corporation Court Books, showing a woman – Anne Saule – being led to a ducking stool on Lady Beck in Mabgate, after complaints that she was “a person of lewd behaviour, a common scold” who “daily maketh strife and discord among her neighbours.”

A commonly accepted origin for Mabgate is that it is a corruption of Mablegate, a Mable being an alternative name for prostitute.

1694-200435_60471743-high-res.jpg
 
Here's one for you @Dorothy Brown and not very far away in Leeds city centre.
It's from https://secretlibraryleeds.files.wordpress.com/2021/04/1694-200435_60471743-high-res.jpg
and the description reads:

The extraordinary image below, a 1694 sketch from the Corporation Court Books, showing a woman – Anne Saule – being led to a ducking stool on Lady Beck in Mabgate, after complaints that she was “a person of lewd behaviour, a common scold” who “daily maketh strife and discord among her neighbours.”

A commonly accepted origin for Mabgate is that it is a corruption of Mablegate, a Mable being an alternative name for prostitute.

View attachment 1032587
She looks pretty formidable. I wonder if she was able to deck anybody before they got her into the chair.
 
Probably a variation on "Gropecunt" (various spellings) lane or road, a name found on a street in many English towns until the Puritans and Victorians made them clean up.
I suprised that the word cunt is that old, and grope had sexual conotations for that long.
I didn't think slang or innuendo would persist for that long, being abandoned when they become too recognizable. And I also assumed that grope would have primarily been used for its innocent meaning, only adopting its sexual usage recently, but not if it was used in conjuction with cunt since 1230. If that was the case, I would have thought that it would outright be considered a curseword by now, and would have probably be banned at some point during that time frame.
I'm also suprised that prositution was so open at the time, that they would have dedicate streets to it, as if it was indistinguishable from any other trade. Did Mideveal Christianity only became puritan later on?
 
Last edited:
Did Mideveal Christianity only became puritan later on?
The short answer is yes - the Puritans were hard-line Protestants during and after the Reformation. But medieval Christianity, and the medieval world-views and lived experiences were very rich and varied, perhaps especially in the growing towns of the central and later middle ages, marked by extremes of ascetic rigour and riotous indulgence, extreme poverty and luxurious wealth, saints and sinners - and the Church had the full range of all these, it's impossible to generalise without immediately coming up against exceptions and inconsistencies.
 
The short answer is yes - the Puritans were hard-line Protestants during and after the Reformation. But medieval Christianity, and the medieval world-views and lived experiences were very rich and varied, perhaps especially in the growing towns of the central and later middle ages, marked by extremes of ascetic rigour and riotous indulgence, extreme poverty and luxurious wealth, saints and sinners - and the Church had the full range of all these, it's impossible to generalise without immediately coming up against exceptions and inconsistencies.
Would the reformations be the result of England, or Mideval Europe, becoming more structured or organized, so a more consitant world view can become prominant?
 
Would the reformations be the result of England, or Mideval Europe, becoming more structured or organized, so a more consitant world view can become prominant?

Well, that's a good question for the University of CruxForums Finals in History! :D

If anything, I see it rather as the outcome of things falling apart, long-held certainties no longer seeming to be reliable - leading to panicky terrors, e.g. of (supposed) witches, or of (supposed) heresies, with horrific outcomes. And really this went on from the 'Black Death' in the mid-14th century to the devastating religious wars of the 17th. I'm not sure that a more consistent world-view emerged, even then, though a very different one was coming into being - grounded in empirical sciences.
 
Would the reformations be the result of England, or Mideval Europe, becoming more structured or organized, so a more consitant world view can become prominant?
Kings and emperors have always tried to get control over the church in the countries they ruled (e.g. the Investiture Controversy in the Holy Roman Empire in the 11th and 12th century). They prefered to appoint their own candidates as bishops, abbots, etc... and hence came in conflict with the pope. Reformation was an excellent opportunity to break with the pope and take control, by appointing themselves as head of the national churches.
 
Well, that's a good question for the University of CruxForums Finals in History! :D

If anything, I see it rather as the outcome of things falling apart, long-held certainties no longer seeming to be reliable - leading to panicky terrors, e.g. of (supposed) witches, or of (supposed) heresies, with horrific outcomes. And really this went on from the 'Black Death' in the mid-14th century to the devastating religious wars of the 17th. I'm not sure that a more consistent world-view emerged, even then, though a very different one was coming into being - grounded in empirical sciences.
So, people turned to religion out of fear, rather than it being spreading of ideas like I thought?
 
Kings and emperors have always tried to get control over the church in the countries they ruled (e.g. the Investiture Controversy in the Holy Roman Empire in the 11th and 12th century). They prefered to appoint their own candidates as bishops, abbots, etc... and hence came in conflict with the pope. Reformation was an excellent opportunity to break with the pope and take control, by appointing themselves as head of the national churches.
So, the religious reformations were used to distinguish themselves, and gain a moral highground, over the Catholic church?
 
So, the religious reformations were used to distinguish themselves, and gain a moral highground, over the Catholic church?
Rather a political highground over the pope.
The whole process goes together with the transition of kingdoms and empires from feudal organisations towards nation states, with centralisation of power.. It is an evolution that was already going on during 2 centuries.
 
Rather a political highground over the pope.
The whole process goes together with the transition of kingdoms and empires from feudal organisations towards nation states, with centralisation of power.. It is an evolution that was already going on during 2 centuries.
But the new religion could be justified by having a moral highground over the old, so it became more purtianical to form a distinction.
 
Last edited:
But the new religion could be justified by having a moral highground over the old, so it became more purtianical to form a distinction.
Which also gave it the justification of being authoritarian! Exactly what suited an absolutist monarch like Henry VIII.
Of course there were Catholic absolutist monarchs too (which also claimed to defend the moral highground).
 
Back
Top Bottom