Followers

Friday, 29 July 2016

Sampson Gideon, 18th-century financier



Sampson Gideon was a Jewish financier who gave valuable service to the British Government during the 18th century and helped to break through the anti-Jewish glass ceiling prevailing at the time.

He was born in London in February 1699, a descendant on his father’s side of Portuguese immigrants. Jews had been prevented from living in England for 300 years before they were allowed back by Oliver Cromwell in 1656 but by the mid-18th century there were still only around 8,000 Jews in the country.

Sampson made his early fortune through wise investment and lucky speculation; for example, he was one of the relatively small number of people who profited from owning shares in the South Sea Company. He then directed his attention towards foreign funds and marine insurance and came to the notice of Horace Walpole and Henry Pelham (respectively Britain’s first and third Prime Ministers).

His main service to the Government was given during the War of the Austrian Succession (1740-48) and the Seven Years’ War (1756-63). This was in the form of raising loans from his fellow wealthy Jewish financiers. In this he was extremely successful – it is estimated that during a single year (1759) he raised as much as £350,000, which was a staggeringly large amount at that time. Given that the latter war laid the foundations of Britain’s overseas empire, the money was well spent, and Sampson Gideon’s contribution should therefore not be overlooked.

Gideon could have expected the highest rewards that his country had to offer, but this was not to be. The problem was his Jewishness at a time when Jews were not entitled to British citizenship.

He had been active in the campaign for a law entitling Jews to apply for citizenship, which led to the passing of a Jewish Naturalization Act in 1753. However, public pressure forced the Government to repeal the Act the following year and Jewish emancipation would have to wait for another 100 years to come and go.

Sampson Gideon could only obtain preferment by becoming a Christian, and this is what he did. He bought a large mansion in Kent, had estates in several counties, and was granted a coat of arms. He was, however, refused a peerage because he was still seen as a Jew by most people. He died on 17th October 1762 at the age of 63.

Sampson Gideon married a Christian and had a son who was also called Sampson. The younger Sampson was educated in a thoroughly “establishment” way at Eton and Oxford and was an evangelical Christian. He found it much easier than his father to get ahead in Society and was granted the baronetcy that his father had been refused. It is from the younger Sampson Gideon that the Gideons International Bible Society takes its name, this being the organization that leaves Bibles in hotel bedrooms.


© John Welford

Thursday, 16 June 2016

The disappearance of Don Carlos, 1568



19th January 1568 was the last day on which anyone saw Don Carlos, the son of King Philip II of Spain, alive. It is possible that he died on this day, although his death was only announced officially on 24th July. There is a lot about the story of Don Carlos that lies shrouded in mystery.

It is known that he was born on 8th July 1545, and that his mother died shortly after his birth, aged only 17. There are stories that he was mentally unbalanced from childhood, but a more likely explanation for his later mental state is that he hit his head after an accidental fall when aged 18.

There is a story that his life was despaired of until somebody had the bright idea of moving the mummified corpse of a long-dead saint to lie alongside him in bed. This sounds not only bizarre but grotesque, but it appears to have done the trick as far as saving his life. However, the powers of the saint do not appear to have extended to mending Don Carlos’s brain as well as his body, because his behaviour after his recovery was extremely odd.

Again, there are stories that can be believed or not, but Don Carlos does seem to have been subject to fits of murderous fury that expressed themselves in sadistic acts performed on people and animals. It seems true that he developed a hatred of his father, possibly because Philip had married 14-year-old Elizabeth of Valois in 1559, and Elizabeth had originally been intended as Don Carlos’s bride.

Whatever the cause of Don Carlos’s anger, Philip took the view that he was far too dangerous to be allowed out in public and his palace rooms became his prison. On 19th January 1568 Philip personally supervised the arrangements, making sure that all doors and windows were nailed shut. The only people allowed to make contact with Don Carlos, then aged 22, were his jailers.

What caused Don Carlos’s death is another focus for conjecture. Philip clearly had a motive for wanting him dead, which was to exclude an obviously deranged man from his position as heir to the throne. It is entirely possible that Philip had his son poisoned.

The story received considerable embellishment in the play “Don Carlos”, written by Friedrich Schiller, which was first performed in 1787. This formed the basis for several operas, most notably that of Giuseppe Verdi which was premiered in 1867. In these works dramatic reality probably took precedence over historical truth and the actual facts of what happened are still uncertain to this day.


© John Welford

Friday, 10 June 2016

Spencer Compton, 1st Earl of Wilmington



Spencer Compton, 1st Earl of Wilmington, was the second person to be recognised as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, the first being Sir Robert Walpole. However, Wilmington’s time in office was much shorter and less distinguished than that of his predecessor.

He was the sixth son of James Compton, 3rd Earl of Northampton.  Strangely enough for a member of the aristocracy, his date of birth is unknown and could have been in either 1673 or 1674.

He was educated at St Paul’s School, London, began a legal career by enrolling at the Middle Temple in 1687 and entered Trinity College, Oxford, in 1690.

He became a member of the House of Commons after winning a by-election at Eye, Suffolk, in 1695. Although he came from a Tory family he joined the Whig faction in the Commons, mainly due to a violent disagreement with his elder brother George. He failed to impress as a debater or speechmaker but found a talent for mastering the details of Parliamentary procedure. He also became friendly with Robert Walpole.

In 1707 Spencer Compton was given the extra-Parliamentary job of treasurer to Prince George, the husband of Queen Anne. This was a good move, because he had fallen out with the patron of his Commons seat and was not allowed to continue as MP for Eye after 1710. He had also been appointed Paymaster of Pensions while in the House of Commons and was allowed to keep this job until 1713, possibly because no-one else wanted it.

He re-entered Parliament in 1713 as a member for East Grinstead, Sussex. In 1715 he became treasurer to the Prince of Wales (who later became King George II) and Speaker of the House of Commons, a position that he held for the next 12 years.

The job of Speaker was one that suited him perfectly, given his talent for mastering detail and his general lack of flair and dynamism.

Politics during the early 18th century depended greatly on personal favouritism and dislike, not only between politicians but between the latter and the monarch. The largest fish in the political pond was Robert Walpole, to whom Compton originally offered complete loyalty but this did not last. The problem was caused by the Prince of Wales, who made it perfectly clear to Walpole that he would not be his choice of chief minister when he became king. Spencer Compton would be the man to have this honour, given that Prince George knew all about Compton’s efficiency as a financial manager.

Walpole therefore did all he could he keep Compton out of front-line politics. He made sure that Compton retained his position as Speaker and also that he became Paymaster General, which was a post from which a greedy man like Spencer Compton could make a great deal of money. During his time as Paymaster General – from 1722 to 1730 – it is estimated that he enriched himself to the tune of £100,000.

When King George I died in May 1727 and Prince George became King George II, the latter promptly acted on his promise to dismiss Walpole and appoint Compton in his place as First Lord of the Treasury (the official name of the office of Prime Minister that had evolved under Walpole’s leadership).

However, it soon became clear that Compton was not up to the job and could not do anything without calling on Walpole for assistance. He was forced to admit this to the King, with Walpole present at the meeting, and he thereafter regarded Walpole as having humiliated him by declining to come to his defence.

Walpole therefore resumed his role as Prime Minister, but Compton was still in the King’s favour and was therefore allowed to retain the post of Paymaster General.

Walpole had ceased to be popular with many Whigs and Tories, and Compton was widely believed to be behind much of the anti-Walpole feeling. Walpole came to see Compton as his chief rival and did everything he could to remove the threat. Thus, when Compton was appointed Lord Privy Seal in 1730 – probably due to the King’s influence – Walpole immediately had him removed from the House of Commons by conferring on him the title of Earl of Wilmington, which meant that he would henceforth have to sit in the House of Lords.

Wilmington’s performance in the Lords was no more distinguished than it had been in the Commons. He subsided into the background as he performed his duties without exciting any attention although the suspicion of constant plotting against Walpole was always there.

In 1741 he became more vocal in his opposition and even suggested that there should not be a Prime Minister at all. He was of the view that the King should be allowed to rule without too much interference from Parliamentary factions, of which that led by Walpole was the most objectionable. This opinion was clearly favoured by King George, who in February 1742 removed Walpole from office and appointed Wilmington in his place.

Wilmington was by this time in his late 60s and not in the best of health. As Prime Minister he did not show much in the way of enthusiasm or energy, although he wanted to appoint ministers with a broad range of political views, including Tories as well as Whigs. However, some ministers were chosen with royal approval but without consultation with himself. Chief among these was Lord Carteret as Secretary of State – he was the real controlling force in the government of which Wilmington was little more than a figurehead.

Wilmington’s term of office was ended with his death on 2nd July 1743. He was buried at Compton Wynyates in Warwickshire, thus joining many of his ancestors. He never married, so his estate was inherited by his nephew James Compton.

It had already been understood that Wilmington would hand over the reins of office later that year, so the political succession – to Henry Pelham – was merely brought forward by a few months.

Wilmington must therefore be regarded as one of the footnotes of history. He was not a man of any great talent; he achieved little but was not responsible for any great harm either.


© John Welford

Saturday, 28 May 2016

Thomas Cranmer



Thomas Cranmer is believed to have been born on 2nd July 1489 at Aslockton, Nottinghamshire, into a family of minor gentry. His father died when he was only 12, after which he was sent to a grammar school, possibly at Southwell. At the age of 14 he was admitted to Jesus College, Cambridge, although he took eight years to gain his BA degree. His MA took less time, being awarded in 1515.

He married shortly after graduating, although little is known about his wife except that her name was Joan and that she died in childbirth. By marrying, he had to give up his fellowship at Jesus, but this was restored to him after her death.

By 1520 Cranmer had taken holy orders and was awarded the degree of Doctor of Divinity in 1526. This was a time when the Protestant Reformation was getting into full swing, and clerics were faced with the dilemma of whether to ally themselves with the reformers or the traditionalists. Cranmer shows every sign of having resisted the call of the evangelicals in his early years as a priest, even writing in condemnation of Luther and in support of the papacy.

King Henry and Queen Catherine

In 1517 Cranmer was recruited by Cardinal Wolsey, the Lord Chancellor, to undergo a diplomatic mission to Spain, and on his return he was granted a half-hour audience with the king, Henry VIII. Henry was anxious to have his marriage to Queen Catherine annulled, and it is significant that, following this meeting, Cranmer began to advocate this outcome among his colleagues at Cambridge.

Henry’s efforts at persuading the Pope to allow an annulment became bogged down in all sorts of legal difficulties, but it was Cranmer who, in 1529, came up with the idea of approaching matters differently, namely by canvassing the views of theologians throughout Europe and building a consensus view in Henry’s favour, although this plan was not particularly original. However, when it was brought to King Henry’s attention it received royal approval and Cranmer was now seen by the king as a valuable ally. Cranmer was also in high favour with the family of Anne Boleyn, sometimes lodging at the home of her father.

Cranmer’s efforts in support of the king’s “great matter” were extensive and occupied him for several years. They included many diplomatic missions to Rome and elsewhere, and the translation and editing into plain English of documents that supported the cause. These focused on two main issues, namely whether it was lawful for a man to marry his brother’s widow (which is what Henry had done) and whether the Pope had the right to declaim on this matter.

For Cranmer personally, two important things were happening. One was that he was developing a remarkable skill in writing plain and effective English, and another was that he was gradually losing his theological conservatism. As he began questioning papal authority he made new contacts with the religious reformers.

In 1532 Cranmer was sent on a lengthy mission to Germany where he met some important Lutheran reformers and married a relative of one of them, thus showing his conversion to the Protestant view that priests need not be celibate. He left his wife behind in Nuremberg to travel to Italy, and while there he learned that King Henry had, much to his surprise and alarm, chosen him to be the next Archbishop of Canterbury. Cranmer returned to England in January 1533.

Anne Boleyn, who was already pregnant, married Henry in a secret ceremony shortly after Cranmer’s return, although the latter was not involved.

Archbishop of Canterbury

Thomas Cranmer was duly appointed as Archbishop by the Pope, but he immediately stated that his first loyalty was to the king. As Archbishop, he set in train the legal process by which the annulment could be ratified. Everything was pushed through at speed so that Queen Anne could be crowned and her baby, when born, would be both legitimate and unchallenged as Henry’s heir, should it be a boy (which was not the case, the baby being the future Queen Elizabeth I).

Cranmer then got to work to put in place the institutions that signalled the split from Rome and the creation of the Church of England. There were all sorts of legal and political difficulties to be overcome, as well as theological ones, but Cranmer was happy to concentrate on the latter and leave the former to Thomas Cromwell, who had succeeded Wolsey as the king’s chief minister.

Cranmer was shocked when Anne Boleyn was arrested and sent to the Tower of London, especially as he had heard her confession and had no reason to suspect her of being guilty of anything, and he was personally on very good terms with the Boleyn family.  However, he had no choice but to go through the motions of declaring her marriage invalid and Elizabeth a bastard.

Cranmer’s relationship with the king was always an uneasy one, given that Henry had declared himself to be head of the Church of England but was, of course, not a theologian. Henry was surprisingly conservative in his religious views, which at times led to difficulties. One problem was over Henry’s “Act of Six Articles” of 1539, one of which re-affirmed that clergymen should be celibate. This led to Cranmer’s wife being forced to flee the country.

After the execution of Thomas Cromwell, Cranmer was thrust into the political maelstrom, and he had the unpleasant duty of informing the king that his fifth wife, Catherine Howard, had been unfaithful to him. Whereas the charges against Anne Boleyn had almost certainly been false, those against Queen Catherine seemed to be much more justified, and it was Cranmer who obtained her eventual confession.

During the rest of Henry’s reign, Cranmer was in almost constant conflict with the conservatives in the Church, with various plots being hatched against him. However, when Henry died, on 28th January 1547, Cranmer was there to ensure that no Romish last rites were performed.

King Edward VI

Cranmer was closely allied with Edward Seymour, Duke of Somerset, who now became the real power in the land as Lord Protector of the boy king, Edward VI. Cranmer was now able to push ahead with reforming the Church of England without fear of royal opposition. He also needed to ensure that the Anglican Church did not follow the Lutheran pattern. He had already worked on producing elements of a new liturgy during Henry’s reign, but he now felt free to develop a complete “Book of Common Prayer”, first issued in March 1549 and revised in 1552, that would set the seal on the shape of Anglicanism for centuries to come. Apart from its religious importance, the Book is a masterpiece of English literature, containing many passages of great beauty that are clearly derived from Cranmer’s skill as a writer of prose.

Cranmer also worked hard to establish the principles of canon law, resulting in the publication of the “forty-two articles” of Anglican belief in 1553 (later amended, in 1563, to the “thirty-nine articles” that still apply today).

Needless to say, he also attracted much opposition, both from those of the Catholic persuasion and those who wanted the reforms to go much further. These latter included some Anabaptists and Unitarians whom Cranmer condemned as heretics and who were burned at the stake.

Queen Mary I

Edward VI only reigned for six years, dying on 6th July 1553 at the age of 15. Cranmer was involved in the plot to prevent his Catholic sister, Mary, from becoming queen, the plan being for the protestant Lady Jane Grey to be declared queen. However, on Edward’s death the people rallied behind Mary, and the protestant reformation was halted, at least for the time being.

Cranmer was soon arrested, and a long period of imprisonment and trial followed, with Cranmer at first refusing to recant his protestant views, then doing so. His trial for heresy took place at Oxford, alongside those of fellow bishops Nicholas Ridley and Hugh Latimer. On 16th October 1555 Cranmer was forced to watch the execution, by burning, of Ridley and Latimer.

His own execution took place on 21st March 1556, after he had been forced to sign a recantation of all his protestant beliefs. However, it was clear that he was deeply troubled by this, and one of his final acts was to declare that his recantation was false and that his right hand, which had signed the document, would be the first part of him to burn. Witnesses stated that this was what actually happened.

Thomas Cranmer is one of the three “martyrs” commemorated by the Martyrs’ Memorial in Oxford, but his lasting legacy is the Church of England that was largely his design, and the Book of Common Prayer which, whatever one’s beliefs, is still one of the abiding treasures of 16th century writing in English.


© John Welford

Thursday, 26 May 2016

Sir Henry Bessemer



Henry Bessemer was a Victorian engineer who made important discoveries in the production of steel, and who therefore laid the foundation for much of Great Britain’s later success in industry and manufacturing.

He was born on 19th January 1813 at Charlton, a village near Hitchin in Hertfordshire. His father Anthony had been trained in engineering and operated a typefounding business.

Henry only had an elementary education and spent much of his childhood watching his father at work and carrying out experiments of his own. When he was 17 his father moved his business to London and Henry found himself in the capital with no trade or profession but an inventive turn of mind that he hoped to put to productive use.

He carried out a range of experiments in several fields, including electroplating and the development of a machine for sugar refining.

In 1833 he developed a die stamp that could be used on official documents to prevent fraud. The idea was that the stamp perforated the document with hundreds of tiny holes, thus making the document virtually impossible to counterfeit. Although this invention was enthusiastically taken up by the Government Stamp Office, Bessemer was never rewarded for it.

He had more success with his development of bronze powder which was used to give the appearance of gold in the decoration of various objects. He devised a manufacturing process that was much more efficient than what had previously been available, and set up a workshop for its production. This venture was highly successful and gave him the funds he needed for his later work, such that he was never dependent on bank loans to pay for the many patents that he would register during his career.

He was also able to buy a house in Highgate and an office in the City of London, as well as maintaining his factory. In April 1834 he got married, his wife Ann being the daughter of a friend.

The Bessemer Converter

The Crimean War turned Bessemer’s attention to the work for which he is best known, namely a way of producing a metal that was strong enough to withstand the forces involved in artillery weapons. He had already developed the idea of a revolving shot, which could be fired with greater accuracy, but existing gun barrels were too weak to take the pressure.

Bessemer’s solution was to blow air through molten iron within an egg-shaped furnace – the “Bessemer Converter”. This had the effect of reducing the carbon content and creating mild steel that was far stronger than wrought iron and was also cheap to produce.

Bessemer clearly felt that he had solved all the problems involved in steel production and he delivered a paper (entitled “On the Manufacture of Iron and Steel without Fuel”) at a meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in August 1856, confident that his fortune was made and that other manufacturers would also grow rich from using his method.

However, problems soon arose due to Bessemer’s lack of basic metallurgical knowledge. He had failed to appreciate that not all samples of wrought iron would react in the same way to his conversion process, due to their chemical composition. For example, a high phosphorous content led to steel that was brittle at low temperatures.

Improvements to the conversion process were made thanks to the work of Robert Mushet, who suggested the use of a compound of iron, carbon and manganese to prevent over-oxidation, and a Swede, Göran Göransson, who redesigned the airflow system of the converter. After these refinements were made it became possible to manufacture high-grade steel reliably and in bulk.

The Bessemer Steel Works

In 1858 Henry Bessemer opened the Bessemer Steel Works in Sheffield, together with three partners. Other Sheffield steelmakers came to appreciate the value of the Bessemer process and applied for licences to adopt it in their own factories.

Steel production now increased by leaps and bounds. By 1870 some 200,000 tons of Bessemer steel were being produced annually by fifteen Sheffield companies. However, by 1880 the tonnage had increased to one million and by 1890 to two million, this being two-thirds of all steel production in the United Kingdom. Much of this steel was used in the rapidly growing railway system and in shipbuilding, with large quantities being exported for use in Britain’s overseas colonies.

The Bessemer process also proved highly popular in the United States, where production reached six million tons a year by 1900.

One black mark against Henry Bessemer was his reluctance to acknowledge his debts to fellow inventors, particularly Robert Mushet and Göran Göransson. He granted Mushet a small pension for his contribution, but only after personal pleas from Mushet’s daughter and friends, and his autobiography (published posthumously in 1905) never mentioned Göransson at all. Bessemer was the sort of man who was happy to claim credit for all the success that came his way but to overlook his mistakes, of which there many throughout his career.

Bessemer was knighted in 1879, having retired from active business in 1873. He died at his London home in 1898 at the age of 85. His wife had died the previous year, and he was survived by two sons and a daughter.

© John Welford

Monday, 16 May 2016

Hereward the Wake



England after the Norman Conquest

After his victory at the Battle of Hastings in 1066, Duke William of Normandy knew that he would not be a popular King of England. He had no real claim to the throne other than by force, so he could hardly have expected to be welcomed with open arms.

At first, William did try to win hearts and minds by conciliation and by appointing Anglo-Saxons to important offices of state, but as soon as his back was turned – he went across to Normandy in 1067 to deal with matters back home – large areas of the country rose in revolt.

It was then “no more Mr Nice Guy” as William responded with a show of considerable force. Villages that had risen in opposition were burned to the ground and their inhabitants killed or driven into starvation. Fields were laid waste and rendered unproductive for years to come. Many thousands of people died in the ethnic cleansing that became known as “the harrowing of the north”.

This policy of extreme violence seemed to do the trick, and only a few pockets of resistance remained. One of these was in the fenland around Peterborough in the east of England, led by a mysterious figure who is known to history as Hereward the Wake.


Who was Hereward?

Hereward had been a landowner before the conquest, but he lost his lands to the Normans. Rather than knuckle under to the new regime, Hereward gathered a band of fellow outlaws and retreated to the Fens, an area of swamps and lagoons in which it was easy to get lost if you did not know your way around. Hereward relied on his superior knowledge of the area to outwit the Normans and carry out a series of guerrilla raids on their strongholds.


Hereward’s campaign

Hereward joined forces with local Danish raiders to attack the abbey at Peterborough and plunder its treasure, but then had to go it alone after the Normans bought the Danes off. The sacrilege of attacking an abbey did not endear Hereward to all his fellow Englishmen, but enough stayed loyal to create a formidable guerrilla unit.

William’s response was to hunt Hereward down in the Fens, using enforced labour to build causeways that allowed troops to move in and flush out the rebels. Remains of these earthworks can still be seen to this day.

Although the Normans were able to capture most of Hereward’s men, there is no evidence that they ever found Hereward himself, and what happened to him is a mystery. He may have been betrayed and met a grisly end, or he could simply have withdrawn from combat and lived out his days in peace, possibly with a changed identity.


The legacy of Hereward

It is no surprise that all sorts of stories arose about Hereward’s deeds, most of them probably having little basis in truth. There were so many such stories that a book of them appeared with the title “The Exploits of Hereward the Celebrated Outlaw and Soldier”. He was therefore a latter-day King Arthur and a prototype for Robin Hood - an icon for anyone who wanted a hero-figure to give hope to people under oppression.

The name “Wake” is part of the myth. This was a man who was constantly alert and ready to strike when and where the opportunity arose. The cause of Anglo-Saxon resistance needed a hero who never slept, but it was always going to be a lost cause. The heavy hand of Norman domination was not going to be removed by a few fighters hiding in the Fens, however charismatic their leader.


© John Welford

Sunday, 15 May 2016

Sigeric the Serious, Archbishop of Canterbury



Sigeric, who was the 27th person to be elevated to the Archbishopric of Canterbury, has gone down in history as “Sigeric the Serious”, which suggests that there might have been another Sigeric around at the time who deserved the nickname “Sigeric the Barrel of Laughs” or something similar. However, there is no evidence that this was the case, and “Serious” probably means nothing more in this case than that he was a particularly learned man or even that his name could be transliterated in Latin as “Serio”.

Little is known about his early life, including when he was born, but it is known that he was a monk at Glastonbury Abbey and became abbot of St Augustine’s Abbey, Canterbury, in 980. He was consecrated as Bishop of Ramsbury in 985 and Archbishop of Canterbury in 990.

A new Catholic Archbishop can only exercise his full authority after he has received his pallium from the Pope. This is a narrow band of cloth that is worn across the shoulders and down the chest, forming a Y shape (this was the shape in Sigeric’s time but it has since changed). It was expected that the new Archbishop would journey to Rome in person to meet the pope and receive the pallium.

Sigeric kept a meticulous record of his journey to Rome and back, his route being the traditional pilgrim route that passes through France, Switzerland and Italy and is known as the Via Francigena (see map, above). His journal included details of each of the 79 stages between Calais and Rome and the 23 churches that he visited en route.

Sigeric’s time as Archbishop coincided with the struggle for control of England between Anglo-Saxons and Danes, which generally meant that the Danes had to be paid off in order to prevent them from causing trouble. There is a record of Sigeric being one of the group of advisers who persuaded King Ethelred to buy off the Danes in 991, and there is also evidence that Sigeric had to take similar action himself in 994 to prevent Canterbury Cathedral from being burned down.

Another record states that Sigeric installed monks in Christ Church Priory (which was an addition to the Cathedral proper), having dismissed the secular clerks who had lived there previously.

He died in 994 at an advanced age and was buried in the crypt of Christ Church. His devotion to “serious” scholarship can be deduced from the fact that he left a valuable collection of books to Canterbury Cathedral.


© John Welford