| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
 |
|
| Margery Kempe (c. 1373 – after 1438) was an English Christian mystic, known for writing through dictation The Book of Margery Kempe, a work considered by some to be the first autobiography in the English language. |
So, pretty important then. What a shame it was written by William Butler-Bowdon in the 1930's. Got anything else for us, Bill?
| The Butler-Bowdon Cope is a cope in the collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum. It derives its name from the family who owned it for several centuries. It dates from 1330 to 1350 and shows scenes from the Life of the Virgin with Apostles and saints, embroidered with silver, silver-gilt thread and silk, on a rich crimson velvet. |
Coming right up
| The V&A first expressed interest in acquiring the cope in 1938 when Lt. Colonel W. E. I. Butler Bowdon (of Dapsland, Mayfield, Sussex) intimated that he would be offering it for sale via Christies. |
As worn by Margery Kempe?
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
The cope is apparently made up of assorted bits of material, then re-sorted by V&A staff
| The cope was formerly in the possession of the Butler-Bowdon family and their ancestors (King says 'from time immemorial'): it is now in the Victoria and Albert museum (see London: Victoria and Albert museum). It had at some date before 1721 been cut up to make other vestments -- a chasuble, stole, maniple -- and an altar frontal or dossal. It was re-assembled in 1854, when the missing sections were replaced with painted linen; and it was remounted after its acquisition by the museum in 1955 with these insertions removed. | |
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
| “Our dig has shown that within the confines of this monastery, exquisite pieces of jewelry including rings and brooches were being produced. The discovery of intricate motif pieces, which are generally found in Ireland, also demonstrates the close connection between Lismore and Ireland in the 7th and 8th centuries AD.†|
You have to admire the local companies that drum up fake excitement, and excavate these sites by every year encouraging unpaid volunteers to dig. It's just I also feel a bit sorry for the folks that are digging, it is tough old work, and they don't get paid. I guess they go in the expectation of finding treasure but rarely do, it's a bit like trafficked labour really, the expectation does not quite meet the reality.
There was a bit of production going on here as there was in Ireland.
Still, there is always another year.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
Still looking into Roman London, there has been tons and tons of "rescue archaeology" mostly not written up, mainly as, I would suspect, not a lot was actually found. Despite this, you have a number of new weighty tomes on Roman and Anglo Saxon London, which are generally thought of as "a brilliant piecing together" of the paltry evidence. This might well be as there is a lot of scope for inference and creativity when you don't discover stuff, the less you find the more you can speculate. Given the scriptocentric nature of current discourse, it's a bit embarrassing for historians that there are no contemporary references to London as capital, so there is a lot of describing how it's the premier civitas within Britannia, or Saxon citadel, etc. It's blimming obvious, only it isn't, just because you are the major port, doesn't mean that you will be capital or your citizens rich or influential. Think Rotterdam, the port is many times the size of Amsterdam's, but its inhabitants are overwhemingly poor, like that of many ports. Amsterdam is where the real power lies. London becoming capital had bugger all to do with it being a port.
No, life and trade carried on much as before when the Romans came, Londonis remained a poor but thriving port, almost certainly much lower in status than, say, Colchester and that is the way it remained for a long while.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
| There is a lot of scope for inference and creativity when you don't discover stuff, the less you find the more you can speculate. |
I refer to the general principle in the book without ever reducing it to this brilliant aperçu.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
Talking about being creative, it seems strange to Wiles that Thorney Island was naturally formed (it was surely man made). We are led to believe that Father Time helpfully creates an island and so called well-off Anglo-Saxons living by the site of present-day Downing Street happen to build a small AS church on it. As this church is located to the west of Anglo-Saxon Lundenwic, Thorney's church became known as 'west minster'.
To Wiley this is AS myth making.
https://thethorneyislandsociety.org.uk/ttis/index.php/29-blog/56-what-is-thorney-island
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
|
Why would there be much left of Roman London? Anything above ground left by the Romans would have been used by those who came later. And those who came later would have been numerous and desperate for stone
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Well... yes, but in swampy London clay a capital city still ought to leave archaeology on a fairly major scale. One of the problems though (or get-outs, depending how you look at it) is that London will not be like a known Roman capital e.g. Rome because it suffered a lengthy period of abandonment.
Generally, academics operate a closed loop system when it comes to these kinds of Big Questions. "Whatever we find is a fair reflection of whatever we teach." Whenever it isn't, it is a matter of 'More research is needed'. Since every Roman capital city is the preserve of its own modern national archaeologists, and because archaeologists are collectively stupid, there is nobody available to draw up a model of 'what is to be expected' of Roman capital cities.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
| Grant wrote: | | Why would there be much left of Roman London? Anything above ground left by the Romans would have been used by those who came later. And those who came later would have been numerous and desperate for stone |
Correct, there was a lot of remodelling and rebuilding of the port. You have to keep in mind there is no Anglo Saxon archaeology, ask the expert to show you King Alfred's famous repairs to the walls...... they will be unable to.
| Mick wrote: | | Well... yes, but in swampy London clay a capital city still ought to leave archaeology on a fairly major scale. One of the problems though (or get-outs, depending how you look at it) is that London will not be like a known Roman capital e.g. Rome because it suffered a lengthy period of abandonment. |
Did it? Ludenwic is just a bog standard Roman vicus to Londinium, just as Hamwic (Southampton) was to Venta Belgarum (Winchester). The Romans built and rebuilt ports. You have to because of sediment.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not disputing this. (Not agreeing with it either, it's not something I've gone into.) I'm just saying that archaeologists don't have a standard for judging what is a bog standard Roman vicus.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
For Wiley's purposes a Vicus is:
| The word "vicus" was also applied to the smallest administrative unit of a provincial town within the Roman Empire. It is also notably used today to refer to an ad hoc provincial civilian settlement that sprang up close to and because of a nearby military fort or state-owned mining operation. |
It's the dirty, grubby, unfortified area, without administrative buildings, eg no basillica. It's the working bit of the London entrepôt. It's the market, manufacturing warehouse bit. Do not expect posh finds. Expect barbarous finds, and coins that are mistakenly classified as Anglo Saxon or Viking (sic).
You are not finding the buildings of a Colonia, or Municipium.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
Still, the real genius was the man-made construction of Thorney Island to control the tides and create better conditions for the thriving entrepôt.
This was down to the Christians who built a church on this area and St Peter, who appeared on the bank of the Thames and called upon a fisherman to take him across. It appears that St Peter was much more sucessful than Canute when it came to controlling tides. Or maybe Canute has been written out?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
|
The three areas, Thorney Island, the Wic/Vik and Londinum, are simply part of the same entrepôt project, and laid the foundations of the city's future success.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
| in Huntingdon's account, Canute set his throne by the sea shore and commanded the incoming tide to halt and not wet his feet and robes. Yet "continuing to rise as usual [the tide] dashed over his feet and legs without respect to his royal person. Then the king leapt backwards, saying: 'Let all men know how empty and worthless is the power of kings, for there is none worthy of the name, but He whom heaven, earth, and sea obey by eternal laws.'" He then hung his gold crown on a crucifix, and never wore it again "to the honour of God the almighty King".[2] |
| The site of the episode is often identified as Thorney Island (now known as Westminster), where Canute set up a royal palace during his reign over London. |
Canute was written out.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
I've never even heard of Thorney Island. (They must have written it out.) Let's have some maps.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
