is worth a read.
This one expecially.
William Grigg at Pro Libertate on the doctrine of Interposition.

The Director's Blog – Rob Shearer, Francis Schaeffer Study Center, Mt. Juliet, TN
You are currently browsing the archive for the English History category.
is worth a read.
This one expecially.
William Grigg at Pro Libertate on the doctrine of Interposition.
It’s done! Finished, edited, proofed and approved. And we have copies on the shelves!
The sequel to Famous Men of the Renaissance and Reformation.
Rather than reprinting Famous Men of Modern Times (which is a bit uneven in both tone and selection), we have made the decision to complete the Famous Men biography series with four new books:
The 17th century was an age of religious wars and revolutions. The French had seven civil wars of religion from 1570-1590. The German Empire had a religious civil war from 1618-1648. The English had a civil war from 1642-1649. It was also the century in which the English and French settlements were founding colonies in North America at Jamestown, Plymouth, Boston, & Quebec. But learning the wars will not convey to students what the times were like. Biographies will. Twenty-eight key individuals are profiled in chronological order:
Birth Crowned Death
| 1519 |
1547 |
1589 |
Catherine de’ Medici |
| 1553 |
1589 |
1610 |
Henry of Navarre (Henry IV) |
| 1533 |
1558 |
1603 |
Elizabeth I |
| 1540 |
1595 |
Sir Francis Drake | |
| 1552 |
1618 |
Sir Walter Raleigh | |
| 1566 |
1603 |
1625 |
James I |
| 1552 |
1610 |
Matteo Ricci | |
| 1564 |
1616 |
William Shakespeare | |
| 1580 |
1631 |
John Smith | |
| 1583 |
1634 |
Wallenstein | |
| 1594 |
1611 |
1632 |
Gustavus Adolphus |
| 1575 |
1635 |
Samuel de Champlain | |
| 1564 |
1642 |
Galileo | |
| 1585 |
1642 |
Cardinal Richelieu | |
| 1600 |
1625 |
1649 |
Charles I |
| 1599 |
1658 |
Oliver Cromwell | |
| 1590 |
1620 |
1657 |
William Bradford |
| 1588 |
1629 |
1649 |
John Winthrop |
| 1623 |
1662 |
Blaise Pascal | |
| 1606 |
1669 |
Rembrandt | |
| 1608 |
1674 |
John Milton | |
| 1632 |
1675 |
Johannes Vermeer | |
| 1630 |
1660 |
1685 |
Charles II |
| 1629 |
1674 |
1696 |
Jan Sobieski |
| 1650 |
1688 |
1702 |
William of Orange (William III) |
| 1632 |
1704 |
John Locke | |
| 1653 |
1706 |
Johan Pachelbel | |
| 1638 |
1643 |
1715 |
Louis XIV |
I am particularly pleased with how the chapters on the colonial founders turned out. John Smith (Jamestown), Samuel de Champlain (Quebec), William Bradford (Plymouth), and John Winthrop (Boston) all have incredible and fascinating stories. A simple comparison of their backgrounds and their reasons for leaving England and France will give students far more understanding about the founding of the colonies than any textbook can.
I also enjoyed greatly retelling the events of the English Civil War, the Restoration, and the Glorious Revolution of 1688. These events (with a number of larger-than-life characters) were critical in shaping the political ideas of America’s Founding Fathers – whose stories I am looking forward to telling in Famous Men of the 18th Century.
I’ve also included accounts of the lives of artists (Rembrandt, Vermeer), a musician (Johan Pachelbel), and writers (Shakespeare & Milton) so that students will become acquainted with more than just the political history of the times.
The reading level is targeted on upper elementary/jr. high, but even older students and adults will find much here that gets left out of the textbook accounts.
Famous Men of the 16th & 17th Century is 28 chapters, 228 pages and retails for $17.95, directly from Greenleaf Press.
Get ‘em while they’re hot off the press!
- Rob Shearer, (author and) Publisher
I’ve just finished drafting a short biography of John Winthrop for my next book, Famous Men of the 16th & 17th Century. The biographies begin with Queen Elizabeth and will end with the death of Louis XIV in 1715.
This has been a difficult chapter for me to write, and taken longer than I expected. I have developed an admiration for Winthrop, even if I have not been able to muster a great deal of affection. If I had known him, I might have liked him – but on the whole he seems to have had a very serious bent. Luther did too, but Luther had a playful, mischievous side to him that I greatly appreciate. I can find no hint of mischief in all of Winthrop’s writings.
Still, he is a man to be admired.
Part of the difficulty in writing about him is having to explain the culture and institutions within whose bounds he operated. He is an Englishman of the 1600s. Further, he is Puritan in his religious convictions. Further, he is from a moderately well-off, connected family from the Stour Valley in Suffolk. And he was a lawyer. I hope you get my drift.
Reasons to admire him? There are many.
His family – when he died, he had six surviving sons. The oldest was 48, the youngest barely a year old. Winthrop was widowed three times, twice before he was 30. He and his third wife were married for 29 years and had raised four sons together when she died. Winthrop, a widower at 59, married for a fourth time, and had a son who was just a year old when he died.
His leadership / perseverance – He joined the Puritan company who were planning to plant a colony in the new world in 1629 and was almost immediately elected governor. He organized a fleet of 11 ships and 700 colonists who sailed for Massachusetts just six months later.
His moderation – As governor he sought to reconcile embittered parties who came before him with legal disputes. He knew what a great freedom the Puritans had achieved by being granted a charter that allowed the colony to govern itself – without a royal, appointed governor.
His resolve – The life of the colonists was harsh, and challenging. Mortality was quite high – over 50% for many years. Threatened by disease, starvation, Indian attacks, and on occasion by internal quarrels, Winthrop persevered in seeing the colony grow and prosper. It had a population of over 15,000 when he died in 1649 – nineteen years after the first 700 had crossed the Atlantic in the Winthrop fleet.
Some may think the cases of Roger Williams and Anne Hutchinson are damaging to Winthrop’s reputation, but the original sources do not reflect badly on him. I would argue that Williams’ banishment from Massachusetts was not so harsh as later historians wish to portray it. In fact, after settling in Rhode Island, Williams and Winthrop maintained a friendly correspondence and sent each other gifts from time to time.
Anne Hutchinson is another matter altogether. I believe that the popular story of Hutchinson as an early feminist and a martyr for toleration and religious freedom can only be described as a great historical fraud. She has been adopted by those pursuing modern ideologies for their own reasons. In the record, it is clear that she was as intolerant (if not more so) as the Puritans of Boston. She was, in fact, agitating and organizing a faction in the church at Boston in an attempt to have one of the ministers dismissed and her brother-in-law appointed in his place. She claimed to know “by direct revelation of the Holy Spirit” who were truly elect and who were not. She charged that only Rev. Cotton and Rev. Wheelwright (her brother-in-law) were true ministers of the gospel and that all the other ministers of Massachusetts were preaching a false “covenant of works.” Had she succeeded, she would have gladly seen Winthrop banished from the colony.
Well.. chapter 18 is now drafted. The page count stands at 163. I have to finnish finding illustrations for these last few chapters. I have seven more to draft myself, and three to edit from the original Famous Men of Modern Times. Time to push on. . .
Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of Great Britain holds that office by succession to the head of his party when Tony Blair retired from politics. He has never led his party through an election and has no mandate of his own as Prime Minister. And it looks as though he never will have.
He’s also, increasingly had to juggle things to keep his cabinet under control.
Today, Tory MP William Hague (who will become the new Foreign Secretary when the Tories win the next election) mocked Prime Minister Brown’s actions in keeping one, LordMandelson in his cabinet:
“The unelected Prime Minister has managed to produce the most powerful unelected deputy since Henry VIII appointed Cardinal Wolsey, except Cardinal Wolsey was more sensitive in handling his colleagues that the noble Lord Mandelson…
“The Prime Minister, who lectures us all on democratic renewal, is appointing peers to positions of power on a scale unknown for decades. There are now more peers attending the Cabinet than at any time since the days of Harold Macmillan…
“And the Lord Mandelson, denied the opportunity to become the Foreign Secretary… has gone around instead collecting titles and even whole government departments to add to his name, now adding up to
The Right Honourable the Baron Mandelson of Foy in the County of Herefordshire and Hartlepool in the County of Durham, First Secretary of State and Lord President of the Privy Council and Secretary of State for Business and Secretary of State for Innovation and Skills.
It would be no surprise to wake up in the morning and finding he had become an archbishop…”
hat tip to the blog of Archbishop Cranmer, who blogs pseudonymously on British political and religious topics.
The video below is worth watching. The clever soundbite comes at about 1:50 into the clip. But stay for the end, and watch how a brilliant MP deftly deals with the questions from two Labor MPs.
Taken from Captain John Smith by Arthur Granville Bradley, copyright 1905:
A colony of French Huguenots had settled on the coast of Florida in 1565. Pedro de Menendez attacked it with overwhelming numbers, and hanged every grown male in the settlement on trees to the number of a hundred and forty and on the breast of each he attached this inscription, Not as Frenchmen, but as Lutherans.
When a certain valiant De Gourgues, a Frenchman who had once been taken prisoner by the Spaniards, and hated them with a deadly hatred, heard of the catastrophe, he set about preparing to avenge it with grim deliberation, in spite of the frowns of his own government. The Spaniards had made a considerable settlement at St. Augustine in Florida, a day’s journey from the one they had so brutally destroyed, and upon this De Gourgues fixed his avenging eye. He sold his property in France, and invested the proceeds in three small ships, carrying eighty sailors and one hundred soldiers.
Having obtained a commission to sail the Guinea Coast as a slaver, he immediately crossed the Atlantic. He laid his plans, and kept his followers in hand with infinite skill and patience, surprised the Spaniards, who far outnumbered his own party, in their forts, and captured them all. He then deliberately hanged every man of them upon trees, and over each body he nailed the inscription, Not as Spaniards, but as traitors, robbers, and murderers.
This is perhaps the most appallingly dramatic episode that the story even of the Spanish Main can furnish, and in its daring almost rivalled the greatest even of Drake’s feats. The hero of it was offered high commands by foreign countries, but he died, like a later and less bloodthirsty hero, “at the moment when his fame began.”
In November of 2005, Richard Hammond of Britain’s iTV set about to find out if Guy Fawkes really could have killed King James in 1605 – in a plot that was discovered 400 years ago.
The test was constructed on a truly massive scale. iTV budgeted enough to allow a reconstruction of the original House of Parliament as it existed in 1605 (the current buildings are a Victorian creation) . . . and then blow it up. The co-operation of the British army was requested and received. Over the course of several months, a large medieval building was reconstructed, with seven foot thick walls for the undercroft and a wooden beam floor with stone walls on a weapons testing site of the British army.
One of the more interesting challenges was the task of securing 36 barrels of gunpowder (about one ton). The producers finally had to make arrangements with a Spanish factory, and for security reasons the transport of the gunpowder barrels was shrouded in secrecy.
You can avoid the 50 minute setup and just watch the following video if you want to see what would have happened to the Houses of Parliament in 1605 if Guy Fawkes had succeeded in setting off those 36 barrels of gunpowder.
Explosion comes 1:45 into the video…
The instruments the Mythbusters placed in the building were completely destroyed. Everyone in the building would certainly have been killed. The mannequins used as stand-ins for the King, Bishops, Lords, & MPs were blown apart and carried hundreds of feet in all directions by the force of the blast. The force of the explosion surprised even the explosives experts who had been hired as consultants.
It would have been the worst mass assassination in history if it had succeeded.
And it very nearly did.
The night before Parliament was to convene, Guy Fawkes was arrested in the cellar under the house of Parliament, waiting by the 36 barrels of gunpowder. A watch, slow matches, and touchpaper were found in his possession.
A sobering thought.
There’s an article about the TV re-creation from the TimesOnline here.
I stumbled on all this today while doing research on James I for the book I am drafting on Famous Men of the 16th & 17th Century.