bookmark_borderOf Travel (Resolves LXXXVII, Owen Feltman)

A speech which often came from Alexander was; that he had discovered more with his eye than other kings did comprehend in their thoughts. And he spake of his Travel. For indeed, men can but guess at places by relation only.

There is no map like the view of the country. Experience is [the] best informer. And one journey will show a man more than any description can.

Some would not allow a man to move from the shell of his own country. And Claudian mentions it as a happiness, for birth, life and burial, to be all in a [single] Parish.

But surely, travel fulleth the Man; he hath lived but locked up in a larger Chest, which hath never seen but one land. A Kingom to the World is like a corporation to a kingdom, a man may live in it like an unbred man. He that searcheth foreign nations is becoming a gentleman of the world. One that is learned, honest and travelled is the best compound of man; and so corrects the vices of one country with the virtues of another, that like Mithridate, he grows a perfect mixture, and an antidote.

Italy, England, France and Spain are the court of the World; Germany, Denmark and China are the city. The rest are most of them country and barbarism: who has not seen the best of these is a little lame in knowledge.

Yet I think it not fit that every man should travel. It makes a wise man better and a fool worse. This gains nothing but the gay fights, vices, exotic gestures, and the Apery of a country. A travelling fool is the shame of all nations. He shames his own by his weakness abroad: he shames others by bringing their follies alone. They only blab about domestic vices, and import them that are transmarine.

That a man may better himself by travel, he ought to observe and comment: noticing as well the bad, to avoid it; as taking the good into use. And without registring these things by the pen, they will slide away unprofitably. A man would not think, how much the Characterizing of a thought in paper fastens it. Litera script a mane has a large sense. He, that does this, may, when he pleaseth rejourney all his voyage, in his closet.

Grave natures are the best proficients by travel: they are not too apt to take a soil: and they observe more: but then they must put on an outward freedom, with an Inquisition seemingly careless. It were an excellent thing in a state, to have a select number of youth, of the Nobility and Gentry; and at years of some maturity, to send abroad for education. Their parents could not better dispose of them, than to dedicate them to the Republick. They themselves could not be in a fairer way of preferment, and no question but they might prove mightily servicable to the state at home; when they shall return verified in the world, languaged and well read in men; which for policy and negotiation is much better than book learning, though never so deep and knowing.

Being abroad, the best is to converse with the best, and not to ch{oo}se by the eye, but by Fame. For the State instruction is to be had at the Court; for Traffic, among merchants. For Religious Rites, the Clergy; for Government, the Lawyers, and for Country and Rural knowledge, the Boors and Peasantry can best help you.

All rarities are to be seen, especially Antiquities, for these show us the ingenuity of elder times in Act; and are in one both example and precept. By these, comparing them with modern invention, we may see how the world thrives in ability and brain. But above all, see real men. There is no monument like a worthy man alive. We shall be sure to find something in him, to kindle our spirits, and inlarge our minds with a worthy emulation of his virtues. Parts of extraordinary note cannot so lie hid, but that they will shine forth through the tongue, and behavior, to the inlightening of the ravisht beholder. And because there is less in this, to take the sense of the eye, and things are more readily from a living pattern; the soul shall more easily draw in his excellencies, and improve itself with greater profit.

But unless a man has judgement to order them aright, in himself, at his return, all is in vain, and lost labor. Some men, by travel, will be changed in nothing; and some again, will change too much.

Indeed, the moral outside, whosoever we be, may seem best, when something fitted to the nation we are in: but wheresoever I should go, or stay, I would ever keep my God, and Friends, unchangeably. Howsoever he returns, he makes an ill voyage, that changeth his Faith with his Tongue and Garments.

(written around 1620. Some adjustments have been made for readability. Adjustments copyright 2025).

bookmark_borderIt wasn’t Franklin’s basement

If you live somewhere, does that make it yours? I guess you could say, “my town” or “my country” without owning it. But, if you are a foreigner, say in Paramus, New Jersey (where the end of the world happens, according to Ghostbusters), San Dimas, California (where Bill and Ted had their excellent Adventure), or Cluj-Napoca (where the greatest king of Hungary was born, and where Romania’s great Black Sea Bubble started), then you might hesitate to say, “my.”

Yes, there are people who feel affinity to somewhere without being a citizen. But, when I say, “in my country,” people do not expect me to say a place where I lived for a few years as a boarder. Hey, I spent some time in Bulgaria, is that “my country?”

Now, some people say that bones were found, “in the basement of Benjamin Franklin’s house.” This implies that Franklin had something to do with those bones. However, Franklin was a boarder in that house. That means, he had a housesit there. Like a student might rent a “bed sit” in modern Britain.

The house is now called the Ben Franklin house to capitalise on tourism. Just like the house where Matthais Corvin, the great King of Hungary, was born, is marketed as the Matthais house. But, just as the baby Matthais had no idea what was going on in that quiet little house in Cluj-Napoca, so Ben Franklin likely didn’t know what was happening beneath his feet in London.

But he was “a curious man” you say? (Or the Smithsonian says.) The Smithsonian claims that the “curious man that he was,” Franklin probably knew what was going on and would, “sneak down and check out the proceedings at least once or twice.”

Franklin’s curiosity did not, in other areas, include spying on private affairs. There seems to have been an illegal anatomy workshop underneath him. Franklin might have thought something else was happening there, perhaps something of an intimate matter that he didn’t want to see. Or, perhaps something political that he didn’t want to know about. It might have been an illegal gambling den for all he knew. And, I would bet that he didn’t want to know.

Franklin’s curiosity usually extended only to things he could write about. As Franklin once wrote, “three can keep a secret if two of them are dead.” He loved reading books and talking to people. But spying and keeping secrets was not his thing.

Now, the Smithsonian goes on to defend the other occupant of the house who the skeletons might have belonged to. William Hewson is said to have run an illegal anatomy school while Ben Franklin was a lodger, boarder, bed-sitter at the house.

Sure, Ben Franklin stayed there. But calling it “his house” is misleading. It assumes that he had control of what happened in the basement, and access to it. In reality, it wasn’t his, he merely rented a small part of it. If I eat at a restaurant, that doesn’t make me the chef.

That doesn’t mean it’s not a nice place to visit. The idea that you could be in proximity to where a great mind once contemplated things is great. However, don’t blame Franklin for what he had no control over, and probably didn’t know.

bookmark_borderWhy didn’t Portugal join the allies?

I was going to title this, “sympathy for the devil,” after reading all the condolences for a recently departed head of state. Countries who strongly condemned Iran’s regime have been lamenting the loss of that country’s president, and it reminds me of a similar incident almost eighty years ago. (It happened oong before I was born, but I read about it, maybe eight years ago.)

I don’t know as much about Iran as I do Portugal. I have read about the protests, the stories of prison, including “white torture”, the stories of repression, the stories of capitivity, and the accusations of terrorism.

Now, with the condolences sent by the European Union and Nato for the death of the president of Iran, can we really say that mere condolences show any alliance or aligned ideals?

Some of the accusations have been made against various opposing regimes. There was the sinking of a tanker that is sometimes blamed on Gadaffi, sometimes on the Iranian regime, sometimes perhaps even on MEK or some other organisation entirely. The accusations can sound like the angry kid who lost his pen and blames as many people as he can find rather than looking in his bag. But even among Iranians, you might hear things.

Continue reading “Why didn’t Portugal join the allies?”

bookmark_borderArtificial Stupidity, a threat to history?

You might not know much about Chester A Arthur, one of the more obscure presidents of the USA. But if you are a history nut, or you even read a long article about the guy, then you probably know more than the AI does.

A lot of articles about Artificial Intelligence talk about how computer intelligence is a threat to writers (which may include historians). After a test drive of one popular engine, I do not feel the least bit intimidated by the engine’s “intelligence.” The bigger threat might be its popularity, and the possible impact it has on finding the facts.

Continue reading “Artificial Stupidity, a threat to history?”

bookmark_borderBeaumarchais and the first writers’ strike

You may have heard of Beaumarchais. He was a watchmaker, a publisher of Voltaire’s works, a gun runner for the rebels in the American Revolution, but most notably a playwright of works such as The Barber of Seville (which Mozart adapted into an opera.)

In Beaumarchais’s time, writers were not well paid. The theatres of Paris held a kind of monopoly, or cartel.  They colluded together to keep writers’ fees down.

The Barber of Seville was one of the hits of 1775 and it continued bringing in audiences after that.  But, despite the money that the theatres got from Beaumarchais’s popular play, his remuneration wasn’t very high.

So, in 1777, Beaumarchais led the other French writers in a strike. If they didn’t get paid more for their successful plays, they wouldn’t write at all.

This led to a scarcity of plays and forced theatre owners into negotiations.

Theatre owners now paid royalties, instead of just a flat fee for plays.

bookmark_borderThe use of Flashback in Amazing Grace

Amazing Grace (dir. Michael Apted, written by Steven Knight) seems to be the first major film to depict the life and activism of Wilfred Wilberforce. I was reluctant to write any review because I’m not sure of the historical accuracy of Wilberforce’s life. However, from a creative point of view, I find the use of flashbacks interesting.

Many biopics, from made-for-tv movies to big-budget blockbusters, use flashbacks as a creative device. At one extreme you have The Iron Lady, where almost every other scene is the elderly Thatcher remembering her rise and fall. Then there’s the TV movie like Coco Chanel, where flashbacks are used intermittently to show a character still in her prime remembering how she got where she was while preparing a show.

The classic, however, is a film like Gandhi (Dir: David Attenborough, writer: John Briley, 1982), where we start at the death of the main character, then tell the story in sequence, introducing the protagonist just before that fateful first decision is made. But, all these devices open a story toward the end of the story, not in the middle. Continue reading “The use of Flashback in Amazing Grace”

bookmark_borderIt takes more than 100 days

2 years ago, I witnessed the re-enactment of the battle of Waterloo.  Thousands of talented volunteers from around the world walked through the footsteps of Napoleon, Wellington, Blücher, and their allies and armies.

Although we didn’t have the best seats on the field, it was wonderful that so many dedicated re-enactors, or living historians, brought history to life for us.  If you missed it, you should have been there. Continue reading “It takes more than 100 days”

bookmark_borderThe papers were wrong! Clinton is the loser!

In a letter to the British press, an American Federalist was sure of victory over Madison’s “Democrats.”

“De Witt Clinton will be president; Mr Monroe will go out; his successor is not named.”

He continued that “our secretary of treasury is going down as fast as possible. His budget will, no doubt, be the laughing stock of all foreign nations, as well as this.”

Continue reading “The papers were wrong! Clinton is the loser!”

bookmark_borderHappy 104th Father’s Day

“A mischievous youngster named Wood
Declared that he wouldn’t be good
Till his father one day
With a shingle they say[…]”

Fill in the last line.

Back in 1910, the Los Angeles Herald held a contest to finish that limerick.  Before you read the results, I’d challenge you to finish it yourself.

The winning boy’s last line was given by a young man in Inglewood [sic] Colorado named Milton Basham.

“Interviewed him since then has stood.”

Hmm.  They say taste is fickle.

The winners of the girls finished the limerick with the following line:

“Effected a change in his mood.”

At least the fits the rhythm.
Some of the funnier poems didn’t get any prizes, but had a few honorable mentions.  Ruby May Hill didn’t even get an honorable mention for hers.

“Spanked him as hard as he could.”

Sure, that’s not the ideal father, but it’s funny and it fits the rhythm.

Esther Audrey Irene Varley was thinking along the same lines as Miss Hill when she added:

“Whipped him as hard as he could.”

Oh dear, those girls really want poor Wood to be punished for being naughty.

Ester seemed to have another entry (unless there were two girls entering from that town at the same address with the same first and last name.)

“Whipped him into a different mood.”

And again, the same girl at the same address:

“Paddled him, until he promised he would.”

Blossom Ferris had this solution for the father of the mischievous youngster:

“Took away his hood.”

What do you know, they had hoodies 104 years ago!

I won’t go into all the solutions, most involved spanking of some sort or other.  Maude Edwards had this to say:

“Just thrashed him as all fathers should.”

No wonder, after reading all these violent solutions to bad behavior, the judges picked the following as an honorable mention:

“Impressed on his mind that he should.”(1)

Now, you may find the spanking poems funny, when there are one or two, but there were duplicate, even triplicate entries of the same last line.

“Whipped him as hard as he could” was far from original, and it’s sad to see young children thinking that was the normal way a father should behave.

It makes you wonder. Did they think Wood a bully who got away with everything, and was so spoilt that he hurt others with impunity?  Or, did they find a regular thrashing a normal thing for a father to do?  Probably it just followed a bunch of folk tales and other rhymes the kids heard.

This poetry contest came on the year that was supposedly the first father’s day.

The call for a Father’s Day apparently originated a little north of those spank-happy youngsters, in Washington State, Spokane to be exact.

Yup, that’s right, the same state that gave us Microsoft and Bezos Books and Grunge Music first advocated father’s day.  Well, perhaps someone somewhere might have said it first, but if they did they did, then it was before the 6th of June 1910.

Here’s the story in its original glory.

“Spokane People want a Father’s Day Now.”

“Father’s Day!”

Some time ago, there was a day set aside throughout the land to be known as Mother’s Day and to be celebrated the first Sabbath in May.  This holiday was given birth to in the East, but the West has gone them one better.  Mrs J.B. Dodd of Spokane heads the petition approved by the ministerial alliance of this city to set aside the first Sabbath in June to be known as Father’s Day.

 

She wishes the idea to take root and to sprout in the hearts of the people of our country.  The object of this day, she says, is to bring [together] father and child, and to give the head of the house and earner of daily bread for his brood all respect and honor due him.  It is also the aim of this day to instill the same love and reverence for the father as is the mother’s portion.  The petition has been signed thus far by the following men of Spokane:

Mark H. Wheeler, Y.M.C.A. [which stands for Young Men\’s Christian Association]; George H. Forbes, secretary Y.M.C.A.;  Mills E. Pettibone, secretary Ministerial Alliance.

The name of Mrs. J.B. Dodd heads the list. (2)

That was front page news back in the day.

So there you have it.  Californians thought the role of fathers was to spank their kids, while in Washington State the idea of a dad was a breadwinner and head of the household who was due respect without having to lash out at anybody.

The religious origins of Father’s Day are often forgotten.  It seems that “Sundays” were “Sabbaths” to the people who invented the day, and many of the first signatories to the day were pretty high up in well known Christian organizations.  Father’s Day could be called a Protestant holiday.

The next month, the State Governor
Marion E. Hay made Father’s Day a state holiday.  Being on a Sunday, no one really got an extra day off, it was just a nice sentiment to keep the protesters quiet and get the press off his back.  Did it work?  And would the ploy of Father’s Day work for other politicians?

Well, Marion E. Hay not only instituted Father’s Day, he also brought some measure towards women’s suffrage and Workman’s compensation.  So, he could be called a reformer of sorts.  But he was never elected.  He came in as lieutenant governor, and only took over when the acting governor died.  And, Hay lost re-election.  So, Father’s Day didn’t help his political career.

Well, eventually Father’s Day was brought into law by two “popular” Presidents, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon.  Why isn’t it the first Sunday in June?  Perhaps the separation by a week or two has something to do with the separation of church and state.  Or, maybe the old Presidents were just a bit late in declaring the day.

Most countries don’t have an official Father’s Day.  Catholics have their own Father’s Day tradition, going back to the feast of Saint Joseph on March 19th.  Russians also have a kind of Father’s Day, going back to some communist patriotic thing.  And a country here or there has its own tradition, going back to monarchy or whatever else.

But most nations of the world, including Britain and even many Catholic countries, follow the American Father’s Day.  That’s when the greeting cards come out.

Anyway, in 1972 it was an official day in the USA, and that day is here to stay.  Sure, it didn’t seem to help anyone’s career, other than the makers of greeting cards and ties.  (That’s probably why other countries don’t declare it, just look at what it did for Johnson and Nixon.)  But, some tacky greeting cards are actually funny, occasionally.  So, just relax and enjoy.  Happy Father’s Day from Chinny McGringo and the Ptara.

(1)”Herald Juniors demonstrate skill in rhyming contest.”  Los Angeles Herald, junior section. (Los Angeles [Calif.]), 16 Oct. 1910. page 5.

(2)”Spokane People Want a “Father’s Day” Now.” The Spokane press. (Spokane, Wash.), 06 June 1910. page 1.