This Day in Goodlove History, October 15, 2014
Like us on Facebook!
https://www.facebook.com/ThisDayInGoodloveHistory
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jeff-Goodlove/323484214349385
Join me on http://www.linkedin.com/
Jeffery Lee Goodlove email address: Jefferygoodlove@aol.com
Surnames associated with the name Goodlove have been spelled the following different ways; Cutliff, Cutloaf, Cutlofe, Cutloff, Cutlove, Cutlow, Godlib, Godlof, Godlop, Godlove, Goodfriend, Goodlove, Gotleb, Gotlib, Gotlibowicz, Gotlibs, Gotlieb, Gotlob, Gotlobe, Gotloeb, Gotthilf, Gottlieb, Gottliebova, Gottlob, Gottlober, Gottlow, Gutfrajnd, Gutleben, Gutlove
The Chronology of the Goodlove, Godlove, Gottlob, Gottlober, Gottlieb (Germany, Russia, Czech etc.), and Allied Families of Battaile, (France), Crawford (Scotland), Harrison (England), Jackson (Ireland), Jefferson, LeClere (France), Lefevre (France), McKinnon (Scotland), Plantagenets (England), Smith (England), Stephenson (England?), Vance (Ireland from Normandy), Washington, Winch (England, traditionally Wales), including correspondence with George Rogers Clark, and including ancestors William Henry Harrison, Andrew Jackson, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, John Adams, John Quincy Adams and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Martin Van Buren, Teddy Roosevelt, U.S. Grant, Benjamin Harrison “The Signer”, Benjamin Harrison, Jimmy Carter, Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, William Taft, John Tyler (10th President), James Polk (11th President)Zachary Taylor, and Abraham Lincoln.
The Goodlove Family History Website:
http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/g/o/o/Jeffery-Goodlove/index.html
The Goodlove/Godlove/Gottlieb families and their connection to the Cohenim/Surname project:
• New Address! http://wwwfamilytreedna.com/public/goodlove/default.aspx
• • Books written about our unique DNA include:
• “Abraham’s Children, Race, Identity, and the DNA of the Chosen People” by Jon Entine.
•
• “ DNA & Tradition, The Genetic Link to the Ancient Hebrews” by Rabbi Yaakov Kleiman, 2004.
Daniel P. Custis (husband of the wife of the grandnephew of the wife of the 1st cousin 10x removed)
Jacob Godlove
William M. Goodlove (1st cousin 3x removed)
Peter L. LeClere (1st cousin 2x removed)
Maria B. LeFevre LEFEVRE (grandaunt of the wife of the 1st cousin 3x removed)
William F. Mckinnon (3rd cousin 2x removed)
Kristina L. Repstien Peters (3rd cousin 1x removed)
October 15, 533 - Byzantine general Belisarius makes his formal entry into Carthage, having conquered it from the Vandals. [1]
October 1529: In 1526 Norfolk's niece Anne Boleyn had caught the King's eye,[6] and Norfolk's political fortunes revived with his involvement in the King's attempt to have his marriage to Queen Catherine of Aragon annulled. By 1529 matters of state were being increasingly handled by Norfolk, Suffolk and the Boleyns, who pressed the King to remove Wolsey. In October 1529 the King sent Norfolk and Suffolk to obtain the great seal from the Cardinal. [2]
October 1529: Within months of the circulation of Fish’s pamphlet, St. Thomas More produced a response in defense of the Roman Catholic Church, entitled The Supplycatyon of Soulys. The response, printed by October 1529, came in two books, the first addressing the social and economic concerns raised by Fish, and the second defending the doctrine of purgatory. More’s lengthy, legalistic and logic-driven response was ten-times longer than Fish’s sixteen-page pamphlet.
Fish’s Legacy
Fish’s legacy continues through his famous pamphlet. Its repeated printings, either despite or because of its banned status, show the sustained interest in the piece throughout the sixteenth-century. After its initial circulation, the Supplycacion is known to have been reprinted five times in the nineteenth century and twice in the twentieth century, not counting its repeated inclusion in various editions of John Foxe’s Acts and Monuments that reach up into the present. Fish’s propagandistic pamphlet functioned within a broader, international clash that entangled politics and religion. Joining in a growing anti-clerical movement, Fish’s pamphlet, however inflammatory, demonstrates some of the popular objections to the Roman Catholic Church in the years preceding the English Reformation.[3]
October 1531: Since 1527, Henry VIII had sought to have his marriage to Queen Catherine annulled so he could marry Anne Boleyn. At the centre of the campaign to secure the divorce was the emerging doctrine of royal supremacy over the church. The third session of what is now known as the Reformation Parliament had been scheduled for October 1531, but was postponed until January 15, 1532 due to government indecision as to the best way to proceed. [4]
October 1537: Lady Jane Grey was the eldest daughter of Henry Grey, 1st Duke of Suffolk, and his wife, Lady Frances Brandon. The traditional view is that she was born at Bradgate Park in Leicestershire in October 1537, while more recent research indicates that she was born somewhat earlier, possibly in London, in late 1536 or in the spring of 1537.[6][7] Lady Frances was the daughter of Mary Tudor, Queen of France, the younger sister of Henry VIII. Jane had two younger sisters, Lady Catherine Grey and Lady Mary Grey; through their mother, the three sisters were great-granddaughters of Henry VII, grandnieces of Henry VIII, and first cousins once removed of Edward VI. Jane received a first-rate humanist education, studying Latin, Greek and Hebrew with John Aylmer, and Italian with Michelangelo Florio.[8] Through the influence of her father and her tutors, she became a committed Protestant and also corresponded with the Zürich reformer, Heinrich Bullinger.[9]
Jane preferred book studies to hunting parties[10] and regarded her strict upbringing, which was well-meant and typical of the time,[11] as harsh. To the visiting scholar Roger Ascham, who found her reading Plato, she is said to have complained:
"For when I am in the presence either of father or mother, whether I speak, keep silence, sit, stand or go, eat, drink, be merry or sad, be sewing, playing, dancing, or doing anything else, I must do it as it were in such weight, measure and number, even so perfectly as God made the world; or else I am so sharply taunted, so cruelly threatened, yea presently sometimes with pinches, nips and bobs and other ways (which I will not name for the honour I bear them) ... that I think myself in hell."[12][5]
October 1539: Queen Jane had died in 1537, less than two weeks after the birth of her only child, the future Edward VI. In early October 1539, the King finally accepted Cromwell's suggestion that he marry Anne, the sister of Duke Wilhelm, of Cleves. [6]
May-October 1544: During the campaign of May–October 1544 he besieged Montreuil, while the King captured Boulogne before returning home. Complaining of lack of provisions and munitions, Norfolk eventually raised the siege of Montreuil, and realizing that Boulogne could not realistically be held by the English for long, left it garrisoned and withdrew to Calais, for which he was severely rebuked by the King.[2] [7]
Imprisonment and release
During the King's final years Edward Seymour, 1st Earl of Hertford, and Henry's last queen, Catherine Parr, both of whom favoured the reformed faith, gained influence with the King while the conservative Norfolk became isolated politically. He attempted to form an alliance with the Seymours through a marriage between his widowed daughter, Mary Fitzroy and Hertford's brother Thomas Seymour,[2] but the effort was forestalled by the provocative conduct of his eldest son and heir, Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey, who had displayed in his own heraldry the royal arms and insignia.[10] [8]
October 1551. — At the end of October, on her return from
Paris, Mary Queen of Scots lands at Portsmouth. [9]
October 1551: While accompanying Mary to Dieppe on her return, her son Francis died at Amiens.[40] In October 1551 she met Edward VI in England. Mary landed at Portsmouth and stayed her first night at Southwick Priory. On her way to London she stopped at Warblington, Cowdray, Hampton Court and Fulham Palace.[41] At his meeting with Mary at Whitehall Palace, Edward gave her a diamond ring.[42] The ring, "sett with a fayer table diamount", had belonged to Catherine Parr.[43] Lady Mary declined to attend her visit.[44] Lady Elizabeth was present, and according to John Aylmer, unlike the other women at Edward's court she did not try to emulate the novel French "frounsed, curled and double-curled" hairstyles of Guise's Scottish retinue.[45] [10]
October 1553: Mary's first Parliament, which assembled in early October 1553, declared the marriage of her parents valid, and abolished Edward's religious laws.[112] Church doctrine was restored to the form it had taken in the 1539 Six Articles, which, for example, re-affirmed clerical celibacy. Married priests were deprived of their benefices.[113]
Mary had always rejected the break with Rome instituted by her father and the establishment of Protestantism by Edward VI. She and her husband wanted England to reconcile with Rome. Philip persuaded Parliament to repeal the Protestant religious laws passed by Mary's father, thus returning the English church to Roman jurisdiction. Reaching an agreement took many months, and Mary and Pope Julius III had to make a major concession: the monastery lands confiscated under Henry were not returned to the church but remained in the hands of the new landowners, who were very influential.[114] By the end of 1554, the pope had approved the deal, and the Heresy Acts were revived.[115]
Under the Heresy Acts, numerous Protestants were executed in the Marian Persecutions. Many rich Protestants, including John Foxe, chose exile, and around 800 left the country.[116] [11]
October 1555-October 1558: King Philip, who ascended the Spanish throne in 1556, acknowledged the new political reality and cultivated his sister-in-law. She was a better ally than the chief alternative, Mary, Queen of Scots, who had grown up in France and was betrothed to the Dauphin of France.[38] When his wife fell ill in 1558, King Philip sent the Count of Feria to consult with Elizabeth.[39] This interview was conducted at Hatfield House, where she had returned to live in October 1555. By October 1558, Elizabeth was already making plans for her government. [12]
October 1559:
Son of Matthew Stewart, Earl of Lennox, and Margaret Douglas, niece of King Henry VIII of England; was brought up in England and tutored by John Elder and Arthur Lallart; his high position in the succession to the English and Scottish thrones was impressed upon him at an early age by his ambitious parents; was sent to France (1559) secretly to visit Queen Mary I (Mary Stuart); attended the coronation of King François II of France at Mary's invitation (returned to England October 1559). [13] [14]
October 1562: Elizabeth's foreign policy was largely defensive. The exception was the English occupation of Le Havre from October 1562 to June 1563, which ended in failure when Elizabeth's Huguenot allies joined with the Catholics to retake the port. [15]
October 15, 1562: The Earl of Huntly is declared rebel, and is not permitted to come to justify himself. He then assembles in haste five hundred men of the clan Gordon, and puts himself in a position of defence. [16]
At the beginning of October 1565, Bothwell is confirmed in the hereditary office of High-Admiral of Scotland, and nominated Warden of the Southern Marches. Huntly and he were then the most influential leaders of the Queen's party. [17]
October 1569: Prior to ascending the French throne in 1574, Henry served as a leader of the royal army in the French Wars of Religion of 1562-1598 against the Huguenots and took part in the victories over them at the Battle of Jarnac (March 1569) and at the Battle of Moncontour (October 1569). While still Duke of Anjou, he also became involved in the plot for the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre of 1572. Though Henry did not participate directly, historian Thierry Wanegffelen sees him as the royal-family member most responsible for the massacre, which involved the killing of thousands of Huguenots. Henry III's reign as King of France, like those of his elder brothers Francis II and Charles IX, would see France in constant turmoil over religion.
Henry continued to take an active role in the French Wars of Religion, and in 1572/1573 led the siege of La Rochelle, a massive military assault on the Huguenot-held city of La Rochelle by Catholic troops during the fourth phase of the Wars of Religion. [18]
Beginning of October 1574: Marshal de Damville retires to Montpelier, and declares for the Protestants.
In the same month, Charles Stuart, Earl of Lennox, and brother of Darnley, marries Elizabeth Cavendish, youngest daughter of the Countess of Shrewsbury and Sir William Cavendish, of Chatsworth, her
second husband. Queen Elizabeth, learning this some time after, throws the dowager Countess of Lennox and the Countess of Shrewsbury into prison, for having brought about this alliance without her knowledge. [19]
In October 1581, Queen Elizabeth lends large sums of money to the Duke of Anjou, to assist his expedition in Flanders.'[20]^[21]
October 1582: Our Current calendar was slightly modified by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582.[22] 10 days from October 1582 were completely erased from the calendar to allow the time to catch up. He also decreed that the new year would begin January 1, not in late March as it did before. The Protestant American colonies were slow to adopt the Popes new Calendar and did not change it for two hundred years. They continued to celebrate the new year at the end of March. The Americans were considered fools, which is a likely reason why April 1 is April fools day.[23]
October 1584: Creighton a Jesuit, and Abdy a Scottish priest, are taken at sea by an English cruizer, carried to London, and imprisoned in the Tower. Being tortured, they revealed the whole particulars
of a new invasion projected for the deliverance of the Queen of Scots, and from that moment all negotiations with Mary were suspended.
On the first rumour of the new dangers which appeared to threaten the kingdom, an association is formed in England of which the object was to prosecute with the utmost severity, not only those who should conspire against Elizabeth, but those even in whose favour such plots should be set on foot. This deed was read to Mary, and she proposed to give her
adhesion to it, provided that she was furnished with a copy.
At the end of this month, Grav arrived in London as ambassador from James VI. At first he was received with great suspicion ; but he opened himself so freely to Burleigh, that they soon came to an understanding, and the unfortunate Mary was again betrayed by one of those in whom she had the utmost confidence.
It seems that it was about this time that Mary, driven to extremity by the constant deceptions of which she was the victim, was determined to avenge herself on her most bitter enemies, by making those revelations with which she had long threatened them.
She then wrote to Elizabeth a letter, in which she discovered to her, with the most circumstantial details, all the secrets which the indiscretion of the Countess of Shrewsbury had formerly communicated
to her.^
As soon as Mary was informed of the arrival of the Master of Gray in England, she was eager to gain permission for Nau to visit London also, in order that he might negotiate in concert with James's ambassador. At the same time she renewed her entreaties to M. De Mauvissière to keep a watchful * It is certain that the letter was written by the Scottish queen ; but there is no evidence that it reached Elizabeth.
About this time also the Archbishop of Glasgow received instructions to exercise all his influence at the French court, to engage the king and queenmother to interpose openly in favour of Mary, in the serious circumstances in which she w^as then placed. [24]
To Patrick, Master of Gray, if[25][26][27] [28]
October 1584: Instructions sent by Queen Mary to the Master of
Gray. [29]
Without date [October 1584.]
instructions to MR. GRAY, IN ADDITION TO THOSE WHICH HE
HAS FROM MY SON.
You will declare to the queen that, as by all law, divine and human, my son acknowledges himself to be indebted to me, not only for his birth, but also for all which he has, and expects through me in this world, he is very desirous to signify to her, as he has recently done by my Lord Seton to the King of France, the close accord which in all things he is
resolved to have and keep with me. And, therefore, that, during all these last years, especially since he has enjoyed his liberty, the authority and government of Scotland, having been in expectation of some treaty and agreement between the queen, me, and him, he had always sought to urge matters forward, until it should succeed from the proceedings and negotiations of the queen, both with me and with him, in that respect. Now that he understands matters * Thomas Phelipps.
to be upon the eve of a termination and resolution to that effect here, he is unwilling to wait longer to request very earnestly the queen for my complete liberation and freedom, either to be given up to him, as he desires, or to remain in this kingdom, as had been agreed on in the conference with Sir Walter Mildmay.
Whereupon you can demonstrate to the queen, that, having always taken notice both of the intrigues and evil intentions of the kings and foreign princes, who would never have so securely [kept] me as she has done, if I had fallen into their hands, she cannot misinterpret any of the aforesaid reasons, since my child and the foreign princes with him re-demand me, especially the King of France, who has written to the queen at different times, and has caused it to be constantly urged by
his ambassador for two years ; that inasmuch as this detention,
or rather imprisonment, cannot be founded on any law of nations, as if taken in just warfare, or otherwise by any authority to which she can pretend over me or the Kings of Scotland, it will be to her more safe and honourable to deserve by a favourable liberty [the gratitude of] her captive, and willingly by the same means to oblige my son to her, than to seek to secure herself by severity and bad treatment towards me^, and by supporting and assisting rebels against him.
You will require the queen to proceed and go through with the treaty commenced with her for my said liberation and freedom, olfering for the performance and consideration of it, on the part of my son, all perfect friendship and mutual good understanding in future with the said queen,
and between these two kingdoms ; as more particularly will be proposed and designed for the peace and security, and common good of all this island, by those who on either side shall be commissioned, you being unable to enter upon any more equitable offer, as matters have gone hitherto with me touching the said treaty and my intention .... and to
this effect you shall insist, as soon as you can, that you shall be permitted to come here, and, particularly, that after having remained here, I may dispatch with you on your return one of my people to my son; such intercourse being so very praiseworthy between a mother and a child, when its object is but to ascertain the real state of our health and condition after being long separated, that no one, having any feelings of humanity, would wish to forbid or prevent it, much less
this queen, to whom we have the honour of being so nearly related ; yet, in giving us this liberty, to provide sufficiently for the vain suspicions and mistrusts which our enemies might cause her to imagine, by appointing some of her people to accompany you hither, if she cannot implicitly rely on those who are already here to watch me.
In the meanwhile, upon the information which you say my son has written, that they wish me to send the state of my affairs here, as it now is, by the appointment of Sir Ralph Sadler in the absence of the Earl of Shrewsbury, you will make an urgent request, in name of my son, that, during the short time that the said treaty can last and come to a complete rupture or agreement, I shall not be removed from the cus-
tody of the said earl : this change being unnecessary if the queen has any intention to fulfil the said treaty, and impracticable without much inconvenience on either side. Farther, that in consideration of the scandalous reports which are current as between me and the said earl, I cannot be removed from him without having my name handed about amongst
the more malicious, who will certainly make use of it, and the less informed, who will fancy that some evil and improper conversation has taken place between us, and for which we have been separated ; so that, at the utmost, they cannot deny me, that, before being removed from the custody of the said earl, I shall be [completely] cleared and sufficiently exonerated from the said reports, as I have constantly and very importunately required this whole year, and this day week by an express dispatch to the said queen by the French ambassador, naming the Countess of Shrewsbury and her two sons, Charles and William Cavendish, as the inventors and disseminaters of this report; upon whom you will demand justice in the name of my son, in unison with the said ambassador, pretending that the said countess and her children have not been declared and named by us, and that my son generally has given you most express instructions to insist for justice against all who shall be found guilty of it. At all events, if it shall be resolved to remove me from the custody of the Earl of Shrewsbury, endeavour at least that
they make choice of a man capable in two points to succeed him ; — the first, that it may be none of those who pretend to this crown against me and my son, or any other soever ... « [30]
October 15, 1585: James VI learns that the banished lords are already on the Scottish border, and are mustering forces there, under the command of Elizabeth's officers. He resolved to arrest the English ambassador immediately; but he had already taken flight, and they pursued him as far as Berwick in vain. [31]
October 15, 1586: Mary is tried and found guilty of treason at Fotheringhay Castle.[32]The Queen of Scots, cited before the commissioners, again repeated her protest, and at the same time declared that she appealed to God and all Christian sovereigns. Lord Burleigh then produced some imperfect copies of the deciphers of letters, written by Mary to Don Bernard de Mendoça, Doctor Allen^ Lord Paget, Charles Paget, and Sir Francis Englefield. The Queen replied to the charges which they pretended to bring against her from these letters, that having been detained a prisoner against all the laws of nations, and against all justice, she had only employed a lawful self-defence in seeking the assistance of her friends, and of the sovereigns her allies, to put an end to her long captivity.
On the same day. Lord Burleigh, having received orders from the court, commanding him not to suffer sentence to be pronounced before the return of the commissioners to London, declares, in the name of
Queen Elizabeth, that the commission is adjourned to the 25th October, in the Star Chamber, at Westminster. [33]
October 15th, 1598 - Spanish general strategist Bernardino de Mendoza occupies fort Rhine[34]
October 15, 1667:
Louis XIV visits the Gobelins with Colbert, October 15, 1667. Tapestry from the series, "Histoire du roi" designed by Charles Le Brun and woven between 1667 and 1672. Articles of Louis XIV's silver furniture are seen in this tapestry.
In 1667, the name of the enterprise was changed to the Manufacture royale des Meubles de la Couronne. The Gobelins were charged with all decoration needs of the palace, which was under the direction of Charles Le Brun (Bluche, 1991).
One of the most costly elements in the furnishing of the Grands appartements during the early years of the personal reign of Louis XIV was the silver furniture, which can be taken as a standard – with other criteria – for determining a plausible cost for Versailles. The Comptes meticulously list the expenditures on the silver furniture – disbursements to artists, final payments, delivery – as well as descriptions and weight of items purchased. Entries for 1681 and 1682 concerning the silver balustrade used in the salon de Mercure serve as an example:
•Year 1681
II. 5 In anticipation: For the silver balustrade for the king's bedroom: 90,000 livres
II. 7 18 November to Sieur du Metz, 43,475 livres 5 sols for delivery to Sr. Lois and to Sr. de Villers for payment of 142,196 livres for the silver balustrade that they are making for the king's bedroom and 404 livres for tax: 48,861 livres 5 sol.
II. 15 June 16, 1681 – January 23, 1682 to Sr. Lois and Sr. de Villers silversmiths on account for the silver balustrade that they are making for the king's use (four payments): 88,457 livres 5 sols.
II. 111 March 25, – April 18, to Sr. Lois and Sr. de Villers silversmiths who are working on a silver balustrade for the king, for continued work (two payments): 40,000 livres
•Year 1682
II. 129 March 21 to Sr. Jehannot de Bartillay 4,970 livres 12 sols for the delivery to Sr. Lois and de Villers silversmiths for, with 136,457 livres 5 sol to one and 25,739 livres 10 sols to another, making the 38 balusters, 17 pilasters, the base and the cornice for the balustrade for the château of Versailles weighing 4,076 marc at the rate of 41 livres the marc[24] including 41 livres 2 sols for tax: 4,970 livres 12 sols (Guiffrey, 1880–1890).
Accordingly, the silver balustrade, which contained in excess of one ton of silver, cost in excess of 560,000 livres. It is difficult – if not impossible – to give an accurate rate of exchange between 1682/82 and today.[25] However, Frances Buckland provides valuable information that provides an idea of the true cost of the expenditures at Versailles during the time of Louis XIV. In 1679, Mme de Maintenon stated that the cost of providing light and food for twelve people for one day amounted to slightly more than 14 livres (Buckland, 1983). In December 1689, to defray the cost of the War of the League of Augsburg, Louis XIV ordered all the silver furniture and articles of silver at Versailles—including chamber pots—sent to the mint to be melted (Dangeau, 1854–1860).
Clearly, the silver furniture alone represented a significant outlay in the finances of Versailles. While the decoration of the palace was costly, certain other costs were minimised. For example, labour for construction was often low, due largely to the fact that the army during times of peace and during the winter, when wars were not waged, was pressed into action at Versailles. Additionally, given the quality and uniqueness of the items produced at the Gobelins for use and display at Versailles, the palace served as a venue to showcase not only the success of Colbert's mercantilism, but also to display the finest that France could produce (Bluche, 1986, 1991).
On October 15,1685, Louis issued the Edict of Fontainebleau, which cited the redundancy of privileges for Protestants given their scarcity after the extensive conversions. The Edict of Fontainebleau revoked the Edict of Nantes, and repealed all the privileges that arose therefrom.[3] By his edict, Louis no longer tolerated Protestant groups, pastors, or churches to exist in France. No further churches were to be constructed, and those already existing were to be demolished. Pastors could choose either exile or a secular life. Those Protestants who had resisted conversion were now to be baptised forcibly into the established church.[38]
Writers have debated Louis's reasons for issuing the Edict of Fontainebleau. He may have been seeking to placate Pope Innocent XI, with whom relations were tense and whose aid was necessary to determine the outcome of a succession crisis in the Electorate of Cologne. He may have also have acted to upstage Emperor Leopold I and regain international prestige after the latter defeated the Turks without Louis's help. Otherwise, he may simply have desired to end the remaining divisions in French society dating to the Wars of Religion by fulfilling his coronation oath to eradicate heresy.[39][40]
Many historians have condemned the Edict of Fontainebleau as gravely harmful to France.[41] In support, they cite the emigration of approximately 200,000 Huguenots (roughly one-fourth of the Protestant population, or 1% of the French population) who defied royal decrees, fled France for various Protestant states, and took their skills with them. On the other hand, there are historians who view this as an exaggeration. They argue that most of France's preeminent Protestant businessmen and industrialists converted to Catholicism and remained.[42] What is certain is that reaction to the Edict was mixed. Even while French Catholic leaders exulted, Pope Innocent XI still argued with Louis over Gallicanism and criticised the use of violence. Protestants across Europe were horrified at the treatment of their co-religionists, but most Catholics in France applauded the move. Nonetheless, what is sure is that Louis's public image in most of Europe, especially in Protestant regions, was dealt a severe blow.
In the end, however, despite renewed tensions with the Camisards of south-central France at the end of his reign, Louis may have helped ensure that his successor would experience fewer instances of the religion-based disturbances that had plagued his forebears. French society would sufficiently change by the time of his descendant Louis XVI to welcome toleration in the form of the 1787 Edict of Versailles, also known as the Edict of Tolerance. This restored to non-Catholics their civil rights and the freedom to worship openly.[43]
The League of Augsburg
Main article: War of the Grand Alliance
Causes and conduct of the war
Louis in 1690.
The War of the League of Augsburg, which lasted from 1688 to 1697, initiated a period of decline in Louis's political and diplomatic fortunes. The conflict arose from two events in the Rhineland. First, in 1685, the Elector Palatine Charles II died. All that remained of his immediate family was Louis's sister-in-law, Elizabeth Charlotte. German law ostensibly barred her from succeeding to her brother's lands and electoral dignity, but it was unclear enough for arguments in favour of Elizabeth Charlotte to have a chance of success. Conversely, the princess was quite clearly entitled to a division of the family's personal property. Louis pressed her claims to land and chattels, hoping that the latter at least would be given to her.[44] then, in 1688, Maximilian Henry of Bavaria, Archbishop of Cologne, an ally of France, died. The archbishopric had traditionally been held by the Wittelsbachs of Bavaria. However, the Bavarian claimant to replace Maximilian Henry, Prince Joseph Clemens of Bavaria, was at that time not more than 17 years' old and not even ordained. Louis sought instead to install his own candidate, William Egon of Fürstenberg, to ensure the key Rhenish state remained an ally.[45]
In light of his foreign and domestic policies during the early 1680s, which were perceived as aggressive, Louis's actions fostered by the succession crises of the late 1680s created concern and alarm in much of Europe. This led to the formation of the 1686 League of Augsburg by the Holy Roman Emperor, Spain, Sweden, Saxony, and Bavaria. Their stated intention was to return France to at least the borders agreed to in the Treaty of Nijmegen.[46] Emperor Leopold I's persistent refusal to convert the Truce of Ratisbon into a permanent treaty fed Louis's fears that the Emperor would turn on France and attack the Reunions after settling his affairs in the Balkans.[47]
Another event that Louis found threatening was the Glorious Revolution of 1688 in England. Although King James II was Catholic, his two Anglican daughters, Mary and Anne, ensured the English people a Protestant succession. However, when James II's son James was born, he took precedence in the succession over his elder sisters. This seemed to herald an era of Catholic monarchs in England. Protestant lords took up arms and called on the Dutch Prince William III of Orange, grandson of Charles I of England, to come to their aid. He sailed for England with troops despite Louis's warning that France would regard it as a provocation. Witnessing numerous desertions and defections, even among those closest to him, James II fled England. Parliament declared the throne vacant, and offered it to James's daughter Mary II and his son-in-law and nephew William. Vehemently anti-French, William (now William III of England) pushed his new kingdoms into war, thus transforming the League of Augsburg into the Grand Alliance. Before this happened, Louis expected William's expedition to England to absorb his energies and those of his allies, so he dispatched troops to the Rhineland after the expiry of his ultimatum to the German princes requiring confirmation of the Truce of Ratisbon and acceptance of his demands about the succession crises. This military manoeuvre was also intended to protect his eastern provinces from Imperial invasion by depriving the enemy army of sustenance, thus explaining the pre-emptive scorched earth policy pursued in much of southwestern Germany (the "Devastation of the Palatinate").[48]
Louis XIV at the Siege of Namur (1692).
French armies were generally victorious throughout the war because of Imperial commitments in the Balkans, French logistical superiority, and the quality of French generals such as Condé's famous pupil, François Henri de Montmorency-Bouteville, duc de Luxembourg. His triumphs at the Battles of Fleurus in 1690, Steenkerque in 1692, and Landen in 1693 preserved northern France from invasion.[49]
Marshal de Luxembourg
Although an attempt to restore James II failed at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690, France accumulated a string of victories from Flanders in the north, Germany in the east, and Italy and Spain in the south, to the high seas and the colonies. Louis personally supervised the captures of Mons in 1691 and Namur in 1692. Luxembourg gave France the defensive line of the Sambre by capturing Charleroi in 1693. France also overran most of the Duchy of Savoy after the battles of Marsaglia and Staffarde in 1693. While naval stalemate ensued after the French victory at the Battle of Beachy Head in 1690 and the Allied victory at Barfleur-La Hougue in 1692, the Battle of Torroella in 1694 exposed Catalonia to French invasion, culminating in the capture of Barcelona. Although the Dutch captured Pondichéry in 1693, a French raid on the Spanish treasure port of Cartagena in 1697 yielded a fortune of 10 000 000 livres.
Peace was broached by Sweden in 1690. And, by 1692, both sides evidently wanted peace, and secret bilateral talks began, but to no avail.[50] Louis tried to break up the alliance against him by dealing with individual opponents, but this did not achieve its aim until 1696, when the Savoyards agreed to the Treaty of Turin and switched sides. Thereafter, members of the League of Augsburg rushed to the peace table, and negotiations for a general peace began in earnest, culminating in the Treaty of Ryswick of 1697.[51]
Treaty of Ryswick
Main article: Treaty of Ryswick
The Treaty of Ryswick ended the War of the League of Augsburg and disbanded the Grand Alliance. By manipulating their rivalries and suspicions, Louis divided his enemies and broke their power.
The treaty yielded many benefits for France. Louis secured permanent French sovereignty over all of Alsace, including Strasbourg, and established the Rhine as the Franco-German border to this day. Pondichéry and Acadia were returned to France, and Louis's de facto possession of Saint-Domingue was recognised as lawful. However, he returned Catalonia and most of the Reunions. French military superiority might have allowed him to press for more advantageous terms. Thus, his generosity to Spain with regard to Catalonia has been read as a concession to foster pro-French sentiment and may ultimately have induced King Charles II to name Louis's grandson Philip, Duke of Anjou, as heir to the throne of Spain.[52] In exchange for financial compensation, France renounced its interests in the Electorate of Cologne and the Palatinate. Lorraine, which had been occupied by the French since 1670, was returned to its rightful Duke Leopold, albeit with a right of way to the French military. William and Mary were recognised as joint sovereigns of the British Isles, and Louis withdrew support for James II. The Dutch were given the right to garrison forts in the Spanish Netherlands that acted as a protective barrier against possible French aggression. Though in some respects, the Treaty of Ryswick may appear a diplomatic defeat for Louis since he failed to place client rulers in control of the Palatinate or the Electorate of Cologne, he did in fact fulfil many of the aims laid down in his 1688 ultimatum.[53] In any case, peace in 1697 was desirable to Louis, since France was exhausted from the costs of the war.
War of the Spanish Succession
Main article: War of the Spanish Succession
Causes and build-up to the war
Philip V of Spain
By the time of the Treaty of Ryswick, the Spanish succession had been a source of concern to European leaders for well over forty years. King Charles II ruled a vast empire comprising Spain, Naples, Sicily, Milan, the Spanish Netherlands, and numerous Spanish colonies. He produced no children, however, and consequently had no direct heirs.
The principal claimants to the throne of Spain belonged to the ruling families of France and Austria. The French claim derived from Louis XIV's mother Anne of Austria (the older sister of Philip IV of Spain) and his wife Maria Theresa (Philip IV's eldest daughter). Based on the laws of primogeniture, France had the better claim as it originated from the eldest daughters in two generations. However, their renunciation of succession rights complicated matters. In the case of Maria Theresa, nonetheless, the renunciation was considered null and void owing to Spain's breach of her marriage contract with Louis. In contrast, no renunciations tainted the claims of the Emperor Leopold I's son Charles, Archduke of Austria, who was a grandson of Philip III's youngest daughter Maria Anna. The English and Dutch feared that a French or Austrian-born Spanish king would threaten the balance of power and thus preferred the Bavarian Prince Joseph Ferdinand, a grandson of Leopold I through his first wife Margaret Theresa of Spain (the younger daughter of Philip IV).
In an attempt to avoid war, Louis signed the Treaty of the Hague with William III of England in 1698. This agreement divided Spain's Italian territories between Louis's son le Grand Dauphin and the Archduke Charles, with the rest of the empire awarded to Joseph Ferdinand. William III consented to permitting the Dauphin's new territories to become part of France when the latter succeeded to his father's throne.[54] The signatories, however, omitted to consult the ruler of these lands, and Charles II was passionately opposed to the dismemberment of his empire. In 1699, he re-confirmed his 1693 will that named Joseph Ferdinand as his sole successor.[55]
Six months later, Joseph Ferdinand died. Therefore, in 1700, Louis and William III concluded a fresh partitioning agreement, the Treaty of London. This allocated Spain, the Low Countries, and the Spanish colonies to the Archduke. The Dauphin would receive all of Spain's Italian territories.[56] Charles II acknowledged that his empire could only remain undivided by bequeathing it entirely to a Frenchman or an Austrian. Under pressure from his German wife, Maria Anna of Neuburg, Charles II named the Archduke Charles as his sole heir.
Acceptance of the will of Charles II and consequences
Louis in 1701.
On his deathbed in 1700, Charles II unexpectedly changed his will. The clear demonstration of French military superiority for many decades before this time, the pro-French faction at the court of Spain, and even Pope Innocent XII convinced him that France was more likely to preserve his empire intact. He thus offered the entire empire to the Dauphin's second son Philip, Duke of Anjou, provided it remained undivided. Anjou was not in the direct line of French succession, thus his accession would not cause a Franco-Spanish union.[56] If Anjou refused, the throne would be offered to his younger brother Charles, Duke of Berry. If the Duke of Berry declined it, it would go to the Archduke Charles, then to the distantly related House of Savoy if Charles declined it.[57]
Louis was confronted with a difficult choice. He might agree to a partition of the Spanish possessions and avoid a general war, or accept Charles II's will and alienate much of Europe. Initially, Louis may have been inclined to abide by the partition treaties. However, the Dauphin's insistence persuaded Louis otherwise.[58] Moreover, Louis's foreign minister, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, marquis de Torcy, pointed out that war with the Emperor would almost certainly ensue whether Louis accepted the partition treaties or Charles II's will. He emphasised that, should it come to war, William III was unlikely to stand by France since he "made a treaty to avoid war and did not intend to go to war to implement the treaty".[55] Indeed, in the event of a war, it might be preferable to be already in control of the disputed lands. Eventually, therefore, Louis decided to accept Charles II's will. Philip, Duke of Anjou, thus became Philip V, King of Spain.
Most European rulers accepted Philip as king, though some only reluctantly. Depending on one's views of the war as inevitable or not, Louis acted reasonably or arrogantly.[59] He confirmed that Philip V retained his French rights despite his new Spanish position. Admittedly, he may only have been hypothesising a theoretical eventuality and not attempting a Franco-Spanish union. But his actions were certainly not read as being disinterested. Moreover, Louis sent troops to the Spanish Netherlands to evict Dutch garrisons and secure Dutch recognition of Philip V. In 1701, Philip transferred the asiento (the right to supply slaves to Spanish colonies) to France, alienating English traders. As tensions mounted, Louis decided to acknowledge James Stuart, the son of James II, as king of England on the latter's death, infuriating William III. These actions enraged Britain and the Dutch Republic.[60] With the Holy Roman Emperor and the petty German states, they formed another Grand Alliance and declared war on France in 1702. French diplomacy, however, secured Bavaria, Portugal, and Savoy as Franco-Spanish allies.[61]
Commencement of fighting
Even before war was officially declared, hostilities began with Imperial aggression in Italy. When finally declared, the War of the Spanish Succession would last almost until Louis's death, at great cost to him and the kingdom of France.
The war began with French successes, however the joint talents of John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough, and Eugene of Savoy checked these victories and broke the myth of French invincibility. The duo allowed the Palatinate and Austria to occupy Bavaria after their victory at the Battle of Blenheim. Maximilian II Emanuel, Elector of Bavaria, had to flee to the Spanish Netherlands. The impact of this victory was what won the support of Portugal and Savoy. Later, the Battle of Ramillies delivered the Low Countries up to the Allies, and the Battle of Turin forced Louis to evacuate Italy, leaving it open to Allied forces. Marlborough and Eugene of Savoy met again at the Battle of Oudenarde, which enabled them to mount an invasion of France.
Defeats, famine, and mounting debt greatly weakened France. In particular, two massive famines struck France between 1693 and 1710 that killed over two million people. In both cases, the impact of harvest failure was exacerbated by wartime demands on the food supply.[62] In his desperation, Louis XIV even ordered a disastrous invasion of the British island of Guernsey in the autumn of 1704 with the aim of raiding their successful harvest. By the winter of 1708–1709, Louis was willing to accept peace at nearly any cost. He agreed that the entire Spanish empire should be surrendered to the Archduke Charles, and he also consented to return to the frontiers of the Peace of Westphalia, giving up all the territories he had acquired over sixty years of his reign. He could not speak for his grandson, however, and could not promise that Philip V would accept these terms. Thus, the Allies demanded that Louis single-handedly attack his own grandson to force these terms on him. If he could not achieve this within the year, the war would resume. Louis could not accept these terms.[63]
Turning point
The final phases of the War of the Spanish Succession demonstrated that the Allies could not maintain the Archduke Charles in Spain just as surely as France could not retain the entire Spanish inheritance for King Philip V. The Allies were definitively expelled from central Spain by the Franco-Spanish victories at the Battles of Villaviciosa and Brihuega in 1710. French forces elsewhere remained obdurate despite their defeats. The Allies suffered a Pyrrhic victory at the Battle of Malplaquet with 21,000 casualties, twice that of the French.[64] Eventually, France recovered its military pride with the decisive victory at Denain in 1712.
Map of France after the death of Louis XIV
French military successes near the end of the war took place against the background of a changed political situation in Austria. In 1705, the Emperor Leopold I died. His elder son and successor, Joseph I, followed him in 1711. His heir was none other than the Archduke Charles, who secured control of all of his brother's Austrian land holdings. If the Spanish empire then fell to him, it would have resurrected a domain as vast as that of Holy Roman Emperor Charles V in the sixteenth century. To the maritime powers of Great Britain and the Dutch Republic, this would have been as undesirable as a Franco-Spanish union.[65]
Conclusion of peace
As a result of the fresh British perspective on the European balance of power, Anglo-French talks began that culminated in the 1713 Treaty of Utrecht between France, Spain, Britain, and the Dutch Republic. In 1714, after losing Landau and Freiburg, the Holy Roman Emperor also made peace with France in the Treaties of Rastatt and Baden.
In the general settlement, Philip V retained Spain and its colonies, whereas Austria received the Spanish Netherlands and divided Spanish Italy with Savoy. Britain kept Gibraltar and Minorca. Louis agreed to withdraw his support for James Stuart, son of James II and pretender to the throne of Great Britain, and ceded Newfoundland, Rupert's Land, and Acadia in the Americas to Britain. Britain gained more from the Treaty of Utrecht than France did, but the final terms were much more favourable to France than what was being discussed in peace negotiations in 1709 and 1710. France retained Île-Saint-Jean and Île Royale and was returned most of the lands on the continent that were captured by the Allies. As a result, France largely preserved its pre-war boundaries. Louis even acquired additional territories, such as the Principality of Orange and the Ubaye Valley, which covered transalpine passes into Italy. Thanks to Louis, his allies the Electors of Bavaria and Cologne were restored to their pre-war status and returned their lands.[66]
Death
Louis XIV (seated) with his son le Grand Dauphin (to the left), his grandson Louis, Duke of Burgundy (to the right), his great-grandson Louis Duke of Anjou, and Madame de Ventadour, Anjou's governess, who commissioned this painting; busts of Henry IV and Louis XIII are in the background.[35]
October 15, 1770: Norborne Berkeley, 4th Baron Botetourt
The Lord Botetourt
Colonial Governor of Virginia
In office
1768–1770
Preceded by
Francis Fauquier
Succeeded by
John Murray, 4th earl of Dunmore
Personal details
Born
c. 1717
Stoke Gifford, Gloucestershire, England
Died
October 15, 1770
Governor's Palace, Williamsburg, Virginia
Spouse(s)
never married
Stoke Park in 2011, viewed from south, as visible from the northbound carriageway of the M32 motorway which now cuts across the former parkland. Now known as "The Dower House" and split into private apartments. Rebuilt by Norborne Berkeley in 1750 it eventually became used as a dower house by the Dukes of Beaufort at nearby Badminton House
Norborne Berkeley, 4th Baron Botetourt (c. 1717 – October 15, 1770), was a courtier, member of parliament, and royal governor of the colony of Virginia from 1768 until his death in 1770.
Life
Norborne Berkeley was born about 1717. He was of the family of Berkeley of Stoke Gifford in Gloucestershire, descended from Maurice de Berkeley (d. 1347), who had acquired the manor of Stoke Gifford in 1337, the second son of Maurice de Berkeley, 2nd Baron Berkeley (1271–1326). In 1726, Berkeley was admitted to Westminster School. His political career began in 1741 when he was elected to the House of Commons as a knight of the shire for Gloucestershire, a seat he held until 1763. Considered a staunch Tory, Berkeley's fortunes were boosted considerably on the accession of George III in 1760. In 1764, he successfully claimed the title of Baron Botetourt as the lineal descendant of Maurice de Berkeley (d. 1361) and his wife Catherine de Botetourt, sister & co-heir of John Botetourt, son and heir of Sir John de Botetourt (d. 1324), baron by writ 1309-15. Maurice (d. 1361) was the son and heir of Maurice de Berkeley (d. 1347 at the Siege of Calais), who had acquired the manor of Stoke Gifford, Gloucestershire, in 1337, the second son of Maurice de Berkeley, 2nd Baron Berkeley (1271–1326). He thus took a seat in the House of Lords as the 4th Baron de Botetourt, and in 1768 was appointed governor of Virginia. He died in Williamsburg on October 15, 1770, after an illness lasting several weeks. Botetourt never married and left no direct heirs.[1][2][3][4]
[edit] Statues
A statue of Botetourt was placed in the Capitol in Williamsburg in 1773. The Capital of Colonial Virginia was located in Williamsburg from 1699 until 1780, but at the urging of Governor Thomas Jefferson was moved to Richmond for security reasons during the American Revolution. In 1801 the statue of Botetourt was acquired by the College of William and Mary and moved to the campus from the former Capitol building. Barring a brief period during the Civil War when it was moved to the Public Asylum for safety, it stood in the College Yard until 1958 when it was removed for protection from the elements, and then in 1966 was installed in the new Earl Gregg Swem Library, in the new Botetourt Gallery. In 1993, as the College celebrated its tercentenary, a new bronze statue of Botetourt by the William and Mary alumnus Gordon Kray was installed in the College Yard in front of the Wren Building, in the place occupied for generations by the original.[5]
Legacy
Botetourt County, Virginia, was named in Botetourt's honour. Historians also believe that Berkeley County, West Virginia, and the town of Berkeley Springs, both now in West Virginia, were also named in his honour, or possibly that of another popular colonial governor, Sir William Berkeley.[6]
Lord Botetourt High School in the unincorporated town of Daleville in Botetourt County, Virginia, is also named for him, as is the Botetourt Dorm Complex at The College of William and Mary. Two statues also adorn the campus of The College of William and Mary. Gloucester County, Virginia has an elementary school named for governor. Both Richmond, Virginia and Norfolk, Virginia have streets named in his honour.[36]
October 15, 1770: (GW) Rid to see the Land[37] he got for me & my Brother’s.
October 15th.—(GW) Went to view some land which Captain Crawford had taken up for me near the Youghiogeny, distant about twelve miles. This tract which contains about one thousand six hundred acres, (1) includes some as fine land as ever I saw, and a great deal of rich meadow ; it is well watered, and has a valuable mill-seat, except that the stream is rather too slight, and, it is said, not constant more than seven or eight months in the year; hut on account of the fall and other conveniences, no place can exceed it. In going to this land. I passed through two other tracts which Captain Crawford had tiken up for my brothers Samuel and John. I intended to have visited the land which Crawford had procured for Lund Washington this day also, but time falling short, I was obliged to postpone it. Night came on before I got back to Crawford’s, where I found Colonel Stephen. The lands which I passed over to-day, were generally hilly, and the growth chiefly white oak, but very good notwithstanding; and what is extraordinary and contrary to the property of all other lands I ever saw before, the hills are the richest land; the soil upon the sides and sunimits of them being as black as coal, and the growth walnut and cherry. The flats are not so rich, and a good deal more mixed with stone.[38]
October 15, 1771; (GW) Dr. Rumney came in the afternoon.[39]
October 15, 1777
[40]
October 15, 1817
Wednesday, October 15, 1817.
Vincennes, IN.
[Thomas Lincoln enters at government land office at Vincennes farm upon which he is living. (S.W. ¼ of Sec. 32, T. 4 S., R. 5 W. of 2 P.M.) He pays preliminary installment of $16.Beveridge, Abraham Lincoln, 1:47; Land Entry Book, Carter Township, Spencer County, 296.]
[41]
Fall 1817:
John Hutchings died; his five-year-old son Andrew Jackson Hutchings was named Jackson's ward and came to live at the Hermitage [42]
October 15, 1821: Jacob Godlove, born October 15, 1821; died October 06, 1889. He married Louisa Smartt 1843; born 1822. [43]
October 15, 1824: Andrew Jackson attended a Nashville dinner honoring John H. Eaton. [44]
October 15, 1837: B.B. Cannon, Conductor; overland; 355 persons (15 deaths); left October 15, 1837; arrived December 29, 1837; included James Starr. [45]
October 15, 1839: Albert and Victoria felt mutual affection and the Queen proposed to him on October 15, 1839, just five days after he had arrived at Windsor.[55] [46]
1839
October 14, 1839
- October 15, 1841
Age 43
James K. Polk started working at Tennessee as 11th Governor
Tennessee
[47]
October 15, 1845: The Prime Minister Robert Peel was prompted to act,[12] and on 15 October he decided to summon an emergency meeting of his Cabinet for October 31. The remedy he decided was to repeal the Corn Laws.[13] Peel then decided to set up a Scientific Commission to go to Ireland and investigate the potato blight and report on conditions.[14][15] [48]
October 15, 1846
William M. Goodlove, born October 15, 1846, in Clarke Co., Ohio near Springfield, and also near Pleasant Hill Church, where all the deceased relatives of the late John Goodlove are interred[49]
October 15, 1862: Samuel Godlove of the Iowa 24th Infantry Regiment, D Co., Battle on October 15 1862.[50]
October 15, 1862: the regiment paraded and drilled with wooden swords and guns until the middle of October, when it was armed with new Enfield rifles. During our stay here the citizens of Muscatine ministered in various ways to our physical wants. Our patients in the hospital received every attention from the kind and hospitable ladies of that place that could be expected.
Our neighbors of the 35th joined us in all our sports, which were generally of manly character and tended to strengthen our muscles for the endurance of hardships soon to come. The water at this camp was extremely bad. It must have been an oversight on the part of those selecting the site of the camp! A species of quicksand mingled with it and was productive of much sickness principally that scourge of all new soldiers, diarrhea. But the most fatal scourge of our camp here was measles. Had the small-pox visited the regiment it could hardly have been more destructive in its effects. In some of the companies nearly one-fourth were suffering from it at the same time. Its severity made many who were spectators to the scene rejoice that they had passed through that ordeal in childhood's years; still those that had it bore it cheerfully, and thought they would soon be well again. But in this hope we were all disappointed. Could they have received the careful nursing of home, they might have recovered entirely. Not so, however, with the great majority of those taking the chance nursing of the camp. There were about fifty cases in all. More than forty of that number either died of diseases having their origin in the measles or were soon afterwards discharged for disability. But seven so far recovered as to be of further benefit to the service. There were a few cases of typhus fever at this camp, two of which proved fatal. [51]
Sat. October 15, 1864
Detailed to gard forage train went out
7 miles got corn & hay got some nice
Apples 4 miles north of Middletown
(William Harrison Goodlove Civil War Diary)[52]
October 15, 1873: Eleanor Agnes Lee (Agnes); 1841 – October 15, 1873; died of tuberculosis, unmarried.[53]
October 15, 1913:
Braddock Monument. US 40 2.5 miles NW of Farmington (east of Uniontown) at Braddock Park in Fayette County. Photos by compiler with Joyce Chandler. Enlarged monument photo and Enlarged photo of plaque
"This Monument was erected and dedicated to the memory of Major General Edward Braddock by the Braddock Memorial Park Association of Fayette County, Penna. October 15, 1913." [54]
July 23-October 15, 1941: Einsatzgruppe A commanding officer, Franz W. Stahlecker, sent a detailed report about activities in the Baltic and White Russian countries. It stated that between July 23 and October 15, 1941, 135,567 Jews were killed. Eichmann sent out a letter making official the conclusions of the Wannsee Conference, "The evacuation of the Jews . . . is the beginning of the final solution of the Jewish problem."[55]
October 15, 1941: Jews are deported from Austria and Germany to Kovno (Lithuania), Lodz, Minsk, and Riga.[56]
October 15, 1941
The Soviet army evacuates Odessa after holding out for several weeks behind lines.[57]
October 15, 1942: Luisa Gottliebova, born December 6, 1869. Bv- October 15, 1942
OSVOBOZENI SE DOZILI[58]
October 15, 1946
Former German Fikeld Marchal, Hermann Goering, commits suicide before his scheduled execution in Nuremberg, Germany.[59]
1947: The apparatus of the National Security State, largely established in the National Security Act of 1947, laid the foundations for the extension of American hegemony around the globe. In short, the Act laid the foundations for the apparatus of the American Empire. The National Security Act created the National Security Council (NSC) and position of National Security Adviser, as well as the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JSC) as the Pentagon high command of military leaders, and of course, the CIA.[60]
Between 1947 and 1956
Between 1947 and 1956 another momentuous discovery occurred. Manuscripts now known to the world as the Dead Sea Scrolls were unearthed over a number of years from caves near the ruins of Khirbet Qumran, a tiny hamlet on the shores of the Dead Sea. Around 900 items were recovered, including virtually the only surviving copies of biblical documents written before 100 C.E. Most importantly, shey showed that Christian sects remained essentially Jewish long after the death of Jesus. As a result, in the past 40 years, there has been a new area of study concerning exactly how Jewish the early Christians, and Jesus really were.[61]
October 15, 1962: Photos taken by the CIA spy plane are taken to the CIA’s National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC). They realize they are looking at missiles that are 65 feet long and they may be Soviet made SS4’s. The Soviets seem to be secretly deploying dozens of medium range Nuclear missiles. It’s a direct threat to the security of the American nation. [62] McGeorge Bundy is hosting a dinner party as his home tonight when he receives a phone call from Ray Cline. The deputy director of intelligence at the CIA cryptically informs Bundy, “Those things we’ve been worrying about in Cuba are there.” Bundy asks, “Are you sure?” Cline assures him that he is. Just yesterday, Bundy issued a firm denial of the allegation that there are medium-range missile sites in Cuba. [63]YMCA records show that an Lee Harvey Oswald stays there during Oct. 15 - 19. [64]
October 15, 1949: Jack Junior Lorence (John Anthony, Frank, Frantisek Lorence) was born February 4, 1927 in Cedar Rapids, Ia. He married Jean LaRose Goodlove October 15, 1949 in Center Point, Ia., daughter of Covert Goodlove and Berneita Kruse. She was born April 13, 1931 in Linn Cnty, IA. Jack Junior Lorence graduated 1944 from McKinley H.S. bet 1944-1946 was in the Navy. Jean Larose Goodlove was a school secretary at Linn Mar in Marion.
Jack and Jean (my aunt and uncle) were instrumental in the transcription of the original William Harrison Goodlove diary and visited many of the battle grounds that William Harrison Goodlove was at. This information of their visits should be in the edition of the diary.
Hope this answers some of your questions.
Jeff Goodlove
October 15, 1963 A Personal Ad appears in the Dallas Morning News reading: “Running
man, Please call me. Please. Please. Lee” This ad will eventually pique the interest of at least two
Warren Commission Staffers, Leon Hubert and Burt Griffin.
This morning, Oswald goes to the Texas School Book Depository Building to see Roy S.
Truly about a job. He gets it. His hours are from 8 in the morning until 4:45 in the afternoon.
His lunch period is from 12:00 to 12:45. His pay is $1.25 an hour. [65]
October 15, 1966: Arlington House, The Robert E. Lee Memorial
Arlington House, The Robert E. Lee Memorial
U.S. National Register of Historic Places
U.S. National Memorial
Location
Arlington, Virginia, USA
Coordinates
38°52′52.2″N 77°4′21.54″W / 38.881167°N 77.0726500°W / 38.881167; -77.0726500Coordinates: 38°52′52.2″N 77°4′21.54″W / 38.881167°N 77.0726500°W / 38.881167; -77.0726500
Area
28.08 acres (11.36 ha)[1]
Built
1803
Architect
George Hadfield
Architectural style
Greek Revival
Visitation
576,816 (2011)[2]
Governing body
National Park Service
NRHP Reference #
66000040
Added to NRHP
October 15, 1966[3][4] [66]
October 15, 1966: Serpent Mound
Serpent Mound
U.S. National Register of Historic Places
U.S. National Historic Landmark
Serpent Mound - an ancient Native American ceremonial structure
Nearest city:
Peebles, Ohio
Coordinates:
39°1′33.09″N 83°25′49.60″W / 39.0258583°N 83.4304444°W / 39.0258583; -83.4304444Coordinates: 39°1′33.09″N 83°25′49.60″W / 39.0258583°N 83.4304444°W / 39.0258583; -83.4304444
Governing body:
State
NRHP Reference#:
66000602[1]
Added to NRHP:
October 15, 1966
[67]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] http://www.historyorb.com/events/date/533
[2] Wikipedia
[3] References[edit]
Carroll, Gerald L. and Joseph B. Murray. The Yale Edition of the Complete Works of St. Thomas More. Vol. 7. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990.
Daniell, David. William Tyndale: A Biography. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994. 219-220.
Fish, Simon. Supplycacion for the Beggar. 1529 in Carroll, Gerald L. and Joseph B. Murray. The Yale Edition of the Complete Works of St. Thomas More. Vol. 7. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990).
Helt, J.S.W., 'Fish,Simon (d.1531),' Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford University Press, 2004 [1], accessed 1 April 2007.
Levin, Carole. “A Good Prince: King John and Early Tudor Propaganda.” Sixteenth Century Journal, Vol. 11, No. 4. (Winter, 1980), 23-32.
Marti, Oscar A. “Revolt of the Reformation Parliament against Ecclesiastical Exactions in England, 1529-36.” The Journal of Religion, Vol. 9, No. 2. (Apr., 1929), 257-280.
More, Thomas. Supplycacyon of Soulys. 1529 in Carroll, Gerald L. and Joseph B. Murray. The Yale Edition of the Complete Works of St. Thomas More. Vol. 7. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990.
Pineas, Rainer. “Thomas More’s Controversy with Simon Fish.” Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900, Vol. 7, No. 1, The English Renaissance, Winter, 1967.
Stephen, Leslie. Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford and New York : Oxford University Press, 2004.
Footnotes[edit]
1.^ Fish, Simon. Supplycacion for the Beggar. 1529 in Carroll, Gerald L. and Joseph B. Murray. The Yale Edition of the Complete Works of St. Thomas More. Vol. 7. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990),1.
2.^ Fish, Simon. Supplycacion for the Beggar. 1529 in Carroll, Gerald L. and Joseph B. Murray. The Yale Edition of the Complete Works of St. Thomas More. Vol. 7. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990),8.
3.^ Fish, Simon. Supplycacion for the Beggar. 1529 in Carroll, Gerald L. and Joseph B. Murray. The Yale Edition of the Complete Works of St. Thomas More. Vol. 7. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990),5.
4.^ Fish, Simon. Supplycacion for the Beggar. 1529 in Carroll, Gerald L. and Joseph B. Murray. The Yale Edition of the Complete Works of St. Thomas More. Vol. 7. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990),5-6.
5.^ Fish, Simon. Supplycacion for the Beggar. 1529 in Carroll, Gerald L. and Joseph B. Murray. The Yale Edition of the Complete Works of St. Thomas More. Vol. 7. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990),7. See also Pineas, Rainer. “Thomas More’s Controversy with Simon Fish.” Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900, Vol. 7, No. 1, The English Renaissance, Winter, 1967, 13-14.
6.^ Fish, Simon. Supplycacion for the Beggar. 1529 in Carroll, Gerald L. and Joseph B. Murray. The Yale Edition of the Complete Works of St. Thomas More. Vol. 7. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990),9.
7.^ a b c Fish, Simon. Supplycacion for the Beggar. 1529 in Carroll, Gerald L. and Joseph B. Murray. The Yale Edition of the Complete Works of St. Thomas More. Vol. 7. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990),3.
8.^ Fish, Simon. Supplycacion for the Beggar. 1529 in Carroll, Gerald L. and Joseph B. Murray. The Yale Edition of the Complete Works of St. Thomas More. Vol. 7. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990),10.
[4] Wikipedia
[5]
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lady_Jane_Grey&oldid=564113422"
Categories:
[6] Wikipedia
[7] Wikipedia
[8] Wikipedia
[9] http://archive.org/stream/lettersofmarystu00mary/lettersofmarystu00mary_djvu.txt
[10] References[edit]
1. ^ Wood, Marguerite, ed., Balcarres Papers: The French Correspondence of Marie de Lorraine, vol. 1, Scottish History Society (1923), p. 228, c. 1542.
2. ^ Marshall, R. K., Mary of Guise, Collins, (1977), 36–39: Wood, Marguerite, ed., Balcarres Papers, vol. 1, SHS (1923), 1.
3. ^ Wood, Marguerite, ed., Balcarres Papers, vol. 1, SHS (1923), 110 from Joinville, 145 from Fontainebleau.
4. ^ Strickland, Agnes, Lives of the Queens of Scotland, vol. 1, Edinburgh (1850), 337–339, quoting William Drummond of Hawthornden, Works, (1711) 104.
5. ^ Seward, Denis, Prince of the Renaissance, (1973), 193–6; cited Marshall (1977), 38, Rosalind Marshall does not repeat Hawthornden's story.
6. ^ Letters & Papers Henry VIII, vol. 12, part 2 (1891) no. 1285, (Louis de Perreau, Sieur de Castillon to François Ier)
7. ^ Fraser, Antonia, Mary Queen of Scots, Weidenfield & Nicholson, (1969), 7.
8. ^ Teulet, Alexandre, Relations Politiques de la France et de l'Espagne avec l'Ecosse, vol. 1, Paris (1862) 115, (the surviving draft calls Mary, 'Marguerite').
9. ^ Wood, Marguerite, Balcarres Papers, vol. 1, SHS (1923), ix, 3 & fn., "mervyleusement estrange."
10. ^ Marshall (1977), 51–3, but see fn. 15.
11. ^ Marshall (1977), 268–269 (fn. 15), the letter first appeared in Stefan Zweig, Mary Queen of Scots, London (1935), 1–2.
12. ^ Letters & Papers Henry VIII, vol. 12, part 2 (1891) no. 962: Lang, Andrew, 'Letters of Cardinal Beaton, SHR (1909), 156: Marshall (1977), 45, (which suggests he thought the couple had not met)
13. ^ Hay, Denys, ed., The Letters of James V, HMSO (1954), 340-341. The same offer was made to Madeleine of Valois and Mary of Bourbon. See also; Bapst, E., Les Mariages de Jacques V, 324; Teulet, Alexandre, Relations Politiques de la France et de l'Espagne avec l'Ecosse, vol. 1, Paris (1862), 115-118.
14. ^ State Papers Henry VIII, vol. 5 part 4. (1836), 135, Margaret to Henry, July 31, 1538.
15. ^ Thomas, Andrea, Princelie Majestie,(2006): Wood, Marguerite, Balcarres Papers, vol. 1 (1923).
16. ^ Edington, Carol, Court and Culture in Renaissance Scotland, Tuckwell, (1994), 111, citing ALTS vol. 7.
17. ^ Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 7 (1907), 347 (gun-chambers), 357 (fireworks).
18. ^ Wood, Marguerite, Balcarres Papers, vol. 1, STS (1923), 60–61.
19. ^ Strickland, Agnes, Lives of the Queens of Scotland, vol. 2 (1851), 39-41: Clifford, Arthur, ed., Sadler State Papers, vol.1, (1809), 134-5, Sadler to Henry VIII, April 9, 1543; p.86
20. ^ Clifford, Arthur ed., Sadler State Papers, vol. 1 (1809), 249–253, Sadler to Henry VIII, 10 August 1543.
21. ^ Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 9 (1911), 195.
22. ^ Calendar of State Papers Spain, vol. 9 (1912), 569: Teulet, A., ed., Relations politiques de la France et de l'Espagne avec l'Écosse au XVIe siècle, vol. 1 (1862), 220-221
23. ^ Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 9 (1911), 226.
24. ^ Records of the Parliaments of Scotland to 1707 Haddington Abbey, July 7, 1548
25. ^ Calendar State Papers Scotland, vol. 1 (1898), 155, Ruthven to Grey.
26. ^ Marshall, Rosalind K., Mary of Guise, Collins (1977), 175.
27. ^ Murray, James AH. ed.,The Complaynt of Scotland, 1549, EETS (1872), 2.
28. ^ Michaud & Poujoulat, Nouvelle Collection des memoirs pour server a l’histoire de France, vol. 6 (1839) 6–7.
29. ^ Marcus, Merriman, The Rough Wooings, Tuckwell (2002), 337–339, 344–345, "ny ont laisse que la peste derriere eulx."
30. ^ Merriman, Marcus, The Rough Wooings, Tuckwell (2000), 346.
31. ^ Jordan, W.K., Chronicle of Edward VI, London (1966), 22, 24, 26, 27, 29.
32. ^ Lodge, Edmund, Illustrations of British History, vol. 1 (1791), 137, Lambeth Palace Talbot Mss. vol. B, f.205, Lodge assumes it was Francis, not Claude.
33. ^ Michaud & Poujoulat, Nouvelle Collection des Memoires pour servir a l'histoire de France, vol. 6, (1839), 39.
34. ^ British Library festival books website "C'est la Deduction du Sumpteaux Spectacles, ... Rouen (1551)". , 8.
35. ^ Tytler, Patrick Fraser, England under Edward & Mary, vol. 1 (1839), 329.
36. ^ Ritchie, Pamela, Mary of Guise, Tuckwell (2002), 69–71, 81–5, 250–255.
37. ^ Calendar State Papers Foreign Edward, (1861) 97, no. 332, John Mason to PC, April 29, 1551.
38. ^ Calendar State Papers Spain, vol. 10 (1914): Jordan, WK ed., Chronicle of Edward VI, (1966), 62.
39. ^ Calendar State Papers Foreign Edward, (1861), 103.
40. ^ Ritchie, Pamela, Mary of Guise, Tuckwell, (2002), 66, 86–90
41. ^ Calendar State Papers Foreign Edward, London (1861), 190–1, (PRO SP68/9/85)
42. ^ Strype, John, Ecclesiastical Memorials, vol.2 part 2, Oxford (1822), 255 & vol. 2 part 1, 501, citing treasury warrant April 1553.
43. ^ Starkey, David, The Inventory of Henry VIII, Society of Antiquaries, (1998), no. 3504, p94, notes Edward's warrant March 24, 1553.
44. ^ Calendar State Papers Spanish, vol. 10 (1914), 391.
45. ^ Aylmer, John, An Harborowe for Faithfull and Trewe Subjectes agaynst the Late Blowne Blaste, concerninge the Government of Wemen, Strasborg (1559): quoted by Strickland, Agnes, Lives of the Queens of England, vol.6 (1844), p.59.
46. ^ Strype, John, Ecclesiastical Memorials, vol. 2 part 1, Oxford (1822), 502–3.
47. ^ Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 10, (1913), xvi, 32–34.
48. ^ Calendar State Papers Spanish, vol. 10 (1914), 608–609, Queen Dowager to Mary of Guise 23 December 1552.
49. ^ Calendar State Papers Spanish, vol. 11, (1916), 41–42.
50. ^ Ritchie, Pamela, Mary of Guise, (2002), 94.
51. ^ Reports on various collections: Manuscripts of Robert Mordaunt Hay at Duns Castle, vol.5, HMC (1909), p.90-1.
52. ^ Michaud & Poujoulat, Nouvelles collection, vol. 6, (1839), letters from Mary of Guise to her brothers: Wood, Marguerite, (1923), letters to Mary of Guise
53. ^ Ritchie, Pamela, (2002), 127–128
54. ^ CSP Scotland, vol. 1 (1898), p.203 no.426, 21 January 1558.
55. ^ Ritchie, Pamela, Mary of Guise, Tuckwell (2002), pp.126-9; 153–155; 163–7; 182–187, citing Lambeth Talbot Ms. 3195.
56. ^ Ritchie, Pamela, Mary of Guise, Tuckwell (2002), 205–207.
57. ^ CSP Scotland, vol. 1 (1898); p.221, Croft to Cecil, July 3, 1559; 212–3, 215, Croft to English council, May 19 & 22 & June 5, 1559; no. 500, 'Articles of Leith'
58. ^ Knox, John, History of the Reformation, book 3, various editions.
59. ^ CSP Scotland, vol. 1 (1898), 266–7, Randolph to Sadler & Croft, 11 November 1559.
60. ^ Dickinson, Gladys, ed., Two Missions od de la Brosse, SHS (1942), pp.151-157.
61. ^ CSP Scotland, vol. i (1898), 389.
62. ^ Dickinson, Gladys, Two Missions of de la Brosse, SHS (1942), 171–177.
63. ^ Laing, David, ed., Works of John Knox, vol.2 (1846), p.592, citing Tytler, P.F., History of Scotland, and Pere Anselme, Histoire Genealogique, vol.3, "en bronze en habit royaux, tenant le sceptre et la main de justice."
64. ^ Dickinson, Gladys, Two Missions of de la Brosse, SHS (1942), 176–179.
65. ^ Knox, John, History of the Reformation, vol. 2, 68.
66. ^ CSP Scotland, vol. i (1898), 389 and CSP Foreign Elizabeth, vol. ii (1865), 604, April 29, 1560.
[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_I_of_England
[12] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_I_of_England
[13] Biographical sources: The Calendar of State Papers Domestic (England): Reigns of Edward VI, Mary I, and Elizabeth I (vols. XXIII-XLIII); The Calendar of State Papers (Scotland) (vols. I & II); The Calendar of State Papers Relating to English Affairs (vol. VIII); "The Complete Peerage of England, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain, & the United Kingdom, Extant, Extinct, or Dormant" (Gloucester: Alan Sutton Publishing, rep. 2000), 11: 82.
[14] http://www.archontology.org/nations/uk/scotland/stuart1/darnley.php
[15] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_I_of_England
[16] http://archive.org/stream/lettersofmarystu00mary/lettersofmarystu00mary_djvu.txt
[17] http://archive.org/stream/lettersofmarystu00mary/lettersofmarystu00mary_djvu.txt
[18] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_III_of_France
[19] http://archive.org/stream/lettersofmarystu00mary/lettersofmarystu00mary_djvu.txt
[20] * The bonds of the Duke of Anjou, dated October 13 and 23, 1581, are preserved in the British Museum, MS. Cotton,
Galba, E. VI. fol. 113 and 114.
[21] http://archive.org/stream/lettersofmarystu00mary/lettersofmarystu00mary_djvu.txt
[22] Biblical Archaeology Review, September/October 2010 Vol 36 NO 5 Page 16.
[23] Secret Access: The Vatican, 12/22/2010
[24] http://archive.org/stream/lettersofmarystu00mary/lettersofmarystu00mary_djvu.txt
[25] * Of Shrewsbury. I The Spanish ambassador there.
[26] \ A volume of " Letters and Papers" relating to this most exe-
crable character was presented to the Bannatyne Club by the late
Lord Gray, in 1835. It is unnecessary to comment on an indivi-
dual so " damned to universal fame," and who occupies in profane,
the place which Judas holds in sacred history.
[27] § This is a copy in the handwriting of Archibald Douglas. For
[28] \Cotemporary Co'py.^ — From the Collection of the Marquis of
Salisbury, at Hatfield House, — Cecil Papers.^
[29] Cotemporary Decipher. — State Paper Office, London, Mary
Queen of Scots, vol. xiv.
[30] http://archive.org/stream/lettersofmarystu00mary/lettersofmarystu00mary_djvu.txt
[31] http://archive.org/stream/lettersofmarystu00mary/lettersofmarystu00mary_djvu.txt
[32] http://www.tudor-history.com/about-tudors/tudor-timeline/
[33] http://archive.org/stream/lettersofmarystu00mary/lettersofmarystu00mary_djvu.txt
[34] http://www.historyorb.com/events/date/1585
[35] Wikipedia
[36] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norborne_Berkeley,_4th_Baron_Botetourt
[37] This land, which William and Valentine Crawford had surveyed for the Washingtons in 1769, is in the vicinity of Perryopolis, Pa., in what is now Fayette County, Pa.
[38] The entry for this day in the second set of diary entries indicates that GW “Went to see a Coal Mine not far from his [William Crawford’s] house on the Banks of the River. The Coal seemd to be of the very best kind, burning freely & abundance of it.”
[39] (From River Clyde to Tymochtee and Col. William Crawford, by Grace U. Emahiser, 1969, page 119.)
[40] Valley Forge Orderly Book of General George Weedon, 1777-1778 pg. 85-92
[41] http://www.thelincolnlog.org/Calendar.aspx?date=1817-10-15
[42] http://www.wnpt.org/productions/rachel/timeline/1812_1823.html
[43]http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/d/i/d/Jan-C-Didawick-Berkeley-Springs/GENE2-0004.html
[44] The Papers of Andrew Jackson, Volume V, 1821-1824
[45] Timetable of Cherokee Removal.
[46] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_of_the_United_Kingdom
[47] http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcafee&p=how+is+george+washington+related+to+all+50+presidents
[48] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_Great_Famine
[49] History of Logan County and Ohio, O.L. Basking & Co., Chicago, 1880. page 692.
[50] http://freepages.books.rootsweb.com/~cooverfamily/album_78.html
[51] http://www.mobile96.com/cw1/Vicksburg/TFA/24Iowa-1.html
[52] Annotated by Jeffery Lee Goodlove
[53] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Lee
[54] http://www.thelittlelist.net/boatobye.htm
[55] http://thisdayinjewishhistory.blogspot.com/
• [56] Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, Israel Gutman, Editor, page 1768.
[57] On This Day in America by John Wagman.
[58] Terezinska Pametni Kniha, Zidovske Obeti Nacistickych Deportaci Z Cech A Moravy 1941-1945 Dil Druhy
[59] On This Day in America by John Wagman.
[60] http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-national-security-state-and-the-assassination-of-jfk/22071
[61] US New and World Report, Secrets of Christianity, April 2010. Page 7.
[62] Commander in Chief, Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis. MIL, October 18, 2012
[63] The Color Of Truth Dallas
[64] http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v2n1/chrono1.pdf
[65] http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v2n1/chrono1.pdf
[66] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arlington_House,_The_Robert_E._Lee_Memorial
[67] Wikipedia
No comments:
Post a Comment