She looks pretty formidable. I wonder if she was able to deck anybody before they got her into the chair.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:Traces of ‘Old Leeds’ on Leodis
This week, Librarian Antony Ramm takes us through some of the oldest images on our recently relaunched Leodis photograph archive… This short article will explore the oldest photographs and ot…secretlibraryleeds.net
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
In a town near me there is a street where prostitues used to ply their trade and that used to be known as Swap Cunt Alley.A commonly accepted origin for Mabgate is that it is a corruption of Mablegate, a Mable being an alternative name for prostitute.
Lesson one : if they initially propose you for initiation rite to simply wash the dishes after diner, accept it without objection!My initiation into the mysterious society begins...
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.In a town near me there is a street where prostitues used to ply their trade and that used to be known as Swap Cunt Alley.
I suprised that the word cunt is that old, and grope had sexual conotations for that long.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.
Gropecunt Lane - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
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.Did Mideveal Christianity only became puritan later on?
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?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?
I would say it had far more to do with the invention of printing, the spread of literacy and the end of the Church’s monopoly on reading, writing and scholarship.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.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?
So, people turned to religion out of fear, rather than it being spreading of ideas like I thought?Well, that's a good question for the University of CruxForums Finals in History!
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, the religious reformations were used to distinguish themselves, and gain a moral highground, over the Catholic church?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.
Rather a political highground over the pope.So, the religious reformations were used to distinguish themselves, and gain a moral highground, over the Catholic church?
But the new religion could be justified by having a moral highground over the old, so it became more purtianical to form a distinction.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.
Which also gave it the justification of being authoritarian! Exactly what suited an absolutist monarch like Henry VIII.But the new religion could be justified by having a moral highground over the old, so it became more purtianical to form a distinction.