The Duke of Wellington’s victory over Napoleon - funny? Our image of the week

This week’s image of the week features one of the greatest British heroes of them all, Prussian von Bluche, and Napoleon Bonaparte.

The cartoon has leaders of two European armies literally putting the lid on another failed European attempt to dominate that continent. After controlling much of Europe just a few short years before, by 1815 Napoleon’s France had been defeated. This cartoon goes some way to commemorating that.

We see Field Marshal Gebhard Leberecht von Blucher, who led Prussian forces at the 1815 Battle of Waterloo, alongside his British counter-part, Arthur Wellesley, the Duke of Wellington. In the center we see them putting the lid on top of France’s Napoleon Bonaparte. Napoleon is trying to escape but can’t. His face looks distressed in a comical way. Indeed, Napoleon was exiled to the remote Atlantic island of Saint Helena by the British after the Battle of Waterloo.

There is an article about a very significant battle involving the Duke of Wellington and Napoleon’s France in the new issue of History is Now Magazine. Click here to find out more!

George Levrier-Jones

A Love Story during The Wars of the Roses? – Part 2

We follow-up last week’s post and look at a deadly love story involving George, Elizabeth, Edward and Richard. This article follows our introduction to the Wars of the Roses available here and our article on Edward III’s descendants and the causes of the Wars of the Roses available here. Later were the battles of the war from 1455-1464 and the Kingmaker. The most recent article was on Prince George’s treachery.

George’s fate was finally sealed by the Queen.

18 February 1478 saw the legal execution of a Prince of the realm. This was the first for the Plantagenets who preferred to send their enemies to France (or murder them in the night). Thanks to Shakespeare we now think George was drowned in a barrel of wine as punishment for challenging Queen Elizabeth. On general principle, most historians disagree with anything Shakespeare said, but could there be some truth to this story? Royals in the tower were known to bath in the barrels. Could an executioner have come up behind the Duke mid-bath and drowned him? History tells us nothing.

Anthony Woodville, Earl Rivers and William Caxton present the first printed book in English to King Edward IV of England

Richard had seen first-hand what happened to men who tangled with the Queen, so perhaps that was why he spent the remainder of his life distrusting Elizabeth and working to protect himself and England from her.

By the time Elizabeth had given Edward ten children, his mistresses had given him five. That we know of. There were probably many, many more. Edward never let his marriage vows stop him from filling his bed with the pretty maids at court. And there was no end to pretty maids. There was an end to Elizabeth’s youth though. By the time she was middle-aged, something new was happening in England. A new mistress named Elizabeth Shore saw Edward more than the Queen did and the King’s favorite brother, Richard, had won a battle against the Scots making him the most popular man at court. So popular in fact, that Edward seemed to be ignoring Elizabeth and only listening to Richard. Was Elizabeth finally losing control of her husband?

And then Edward died in April 1483.

The official story is that Edward died of either pneumonia or typhoid, although this has been frequently brought into question. Edward had in no way taken care of his health. He had more than let himself go in the peaceful years of his reign. But he was merely unhealthy, not sickly. For him to suddenly take ill and die within days and for his physicians to be utterly clueless as to what was wrong is highly suspicious. Despite what Hollywood would have us believe, the medical professionals of the past weren’t as utterly useless as they are portrayed. Pneumonia and typhoid were known illnesses. Had Edward had one of those, his physicians would have said so. Heart attacks and strokes were also a known affliction. If Edward had had one of those, his physicians would have said so. The fact that his medical records state that he died of a mysterious illness suggests that something was quite wrong. Was he poisoned? And if so, by whom?

We know that Elizabeth is famous for her “quick action” after her husband’s death. This quick action being the arrangements of an army of 2,000 men escorting her son back to London. The sweet, newly widowed Queen should have been in mourning, not organizing an army. How sweet of her to sacrifice. Although one needs to wonder why she was organizing an army to bring the Prince to London. What was she fearing? And how did she rustle up 2,000 soldiers in a matter of days? And why then did she run into hiding when Richard and 200 mourners began their journey south? Could it be that the soldiers were arranged before the King’s death because the King’s death was actually planned? Did the Prince need an army to escort him because Elizabeth feared that the English would rise up against this Prince who would now be King but controlled by the highly unpopular Woodvilles? Did she go into hiding because she feared Richard? Why did she fear Richard? Plantagenet women, even unpopular ones, were never harmed. The worst that would have happened to Elizabeth had she been caught was exile. But people often don’t see things as they truly are. Did Elizabeth run because she assumed that Richard would have killed her, as she would have killed him if roles were reversed? History refuses to tell us what happened to Edward or why Elizabeth ran when Richard posed no obvious threat - we can only speculate and assume.

Officially Edward died of pneumonia or typhoid, but the circumstances are suspicious. Elizabeth’s actions are suspicious. Did the Queen finally lose control of the King and so poisoned him? Did she plan to rule through her son? He was only 12; he needed a protector to rule until he was 16. Edward ordered Richard to be this protector. Why not his wife and her brother? Did he know something we didn’t?

As ever, there are few answers, but many questions. All we know is that 1483 was one frantic year.

By M.L King, a history enthusiast and part-time blogger. You can connect with her on Facebook here.

Click here to read the next in the series - how a baby ended The Wars of the Roses.

Do you want to try your hand at some history writing? If so, click here for more information and then get in touch!

Selected references

• www.thewarsoftheroses.com
• British History by Miles Kelly
• www.britannica.com
• www.battlefieldstrust.com

The release of Nelson Mandela - Our image of the week

A day after his passing, our image of the week commemorates Nelson Mandela.

Nelson Mandela is one of the great leaders. Born in 1918, he went on to play a major role in the anti-apartheid movement within South Africa during the era in which blacks were massively discriminated against by the white minority. Mandela was caught by the authorities in 1962 and would not see freedom again until 1990. 18 of those years were spent in the infamous Robben Island prison.

Nelson was eventually released on February 11, 1990. Our image of the week captures that moment. In the photo he is beaming following his release, as well he might. He is also triumphantly raising his fist with his wife Winnie by his side. One can but imagine his emotions. Decades in prison in exchange for a basic human right. Of course he eventually got what he wanted as blacks were given political equality; he then went on to lead South Africa. And despite the pain he had suffered over his years in jail, he preached forgiveness and brought his country together.

A lesson to us all.

To find out more about the site and to get your hands on some exclusive podcasts, why not join us? Click here.

George Levrier-Jones

What would your last words be if you knew you were about to die? Last Words of the Executed

In the article, we tell you about a very interesting book, Last Words of the Executed. The book documents the final words of people killed in America following crimes they committed. We also pick up some last words and stories from the book.

“I killed the president because he was an enemy of the good people—of the working people. I am not sorry for my crime. I’m awfully sorry I could not see my father.”

Leon Frank Czolgosz (aka Leon Frans Czolgosz), convicted of murder, electrocution, New York, October 29, 1901.

Czolgosz assassinated President William McKinley after waiting in line to shake his hand in Buffalo. Czolgosz’s reasons for doing so were not entirely clear, though he did express grievances against the U.S. and claim that the American dream was a lie. Eight weeks after the murder, Czolgosz was electrocuted and his body was dissolved in acid as it was buried.

Leon Frank Czolgosz, the assassin of President William McKinley, behind bars

This book is a fascinating read that I stumbled upon recently. The Last Words of the Executed by Robert K Elder is a great historical document that pulls together the last words of those people who were killed by the state for their crimes in America from the 17th century onwards. It starts by discussing why we would want to know the last words of those who have committed the most heinous crimes possible in society, and briefly looks at the history of the death penalty. For example:

"The ritual recording of last words exists in a largely Christian framework. In early Christian history, the last words were taken as a show of spiritual mercy, a last chance to repent and save one’s soul. From the Fifteenth to the Nineteenth centuries, speeches from the scaffold were mass-produced in pamphlets and prayer books that served as guides to dignified religious dying. The ritual also performed a legal function. In many countries, a “dying declaration” enjoyed a legal precedent as evidence."

The Noose

The book then moves on to look at each major way that people have been killed in America, and records their final words. First up is the noose. Below are the words and the story of the last words of one person who was hung:

“No, I am ready at any time; but do not keep me needlessly waiting.”

John Brown, convicted of treason, hanging, Virginia, December 2, 1859.

Brown, a controversial figure in American history, has been called both a mass murderer and “the man who killed slavery.” Brown, a stalwart abolitionist, was brought to trial for his raid on Harper’s Ferry, a town in what is now West Virginia, then a federal arsenal. His attack resulted in the deaths of five pro-slavery men.

A popular marching tune of the time was set to lyrics, which included the line “John Brown’s body lies a-mouldering in the grave. His soul is marching on!” This song became “John Brown’s Body” and was later adapted into the “Glory, glory Hallelujah” of the “Battle Hymn of the Republic.”

Though these are Brown’s last words (another variation is record as: “No, but don’t keep me waiting longer than necessary.”), he is better remembered for his final speech to the court which sentenced him. Though it contradicts Brown’s own tactics and his advocating of violent insurrection to bring an end to slavery, Ralph Waldo Emerson paired it with the Gettysburg Address and named them the two greatest American speeches. Brown said:

“I have, may it please the court, a few words to say.

In the first place, I deny everything but what I have all along admitted: of a design on my part to free the slaves. I intended certainly to have made a clean thing of that matter, as I did last winter, when I went into Missouri and there took slaves without the snapping of a gun on either side, moving through the country, and finally leaving them in Canada. I designed to have done the same thing on a larger scale. That was all I intended. I never did intend murder, or treason, or the destruction of property, or to excite or incite slaves to rebellion, or to make insurrection.

I have another objection, and that it is unjust that I should suffer such a penalty. Had I interfered in the manner which I admit, and which I admit has been fairly proved—for I admire the truthfulness and candor of the greater portion of the witnesses who have testified in this case—had I so interfered in behalf of the rich, the powerful, the intelligent, the so-called great, or in behalf of any of their friends, whether father, mother, brother, sister, wife or children, or any of that class, and suffered and sacrificed what I have in this interference, it would have been all right. Every man in this Court would have deemed it an act worthy of reward rather than punishment.

This Court acknowledges, too, as I suppose, the validity of the law of God. I see a book kissed, which I suppose to be the Bible, or at least the New Testament, which teaches me that all things whatsoever I would that men should do to me, I should do even to them. It teaches me, further, to remember them that are in bonds, as bound with them. I endeavored to act up to that instruction. I am yet too young to understand that God is any respecter of persons. I believe that to have interfered as I have done, in behalf of his despised poor, I did no wrong, but right. Now, if it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel and unjust enactments, I say, let it be done.”

The Firing Squad

The second method of execution considered is the firing squad. It has most recently been associated with the state of Utah, but that state too recently ended it. Here are a very few more last words:

“So long, fellows.”

Frank Rose, convicted of murder, firing squad, Utah, April 22, 1904

The bravado of Frank Rose was well documented in Utah publications during his trial. On the day of his execution Rose walked with “almost a swagger to the death chair.” Rose shot his wife on Christmas day and left his 2-year-old son in the room with the dead mother for two days without food or water. Rose refused to enter a plea to the court, and when a “not guilty” plea was entered for him, he refused to offer any evidence on his behalf. In a statement released the day before his death, Rose confessed to many murders and burglaries throughout the West. Officials doubted whether he was speaking truthfully.

Electrocution and the Gas Chamber

After the second method of execution is looked at, electrocution and the gas chamber are considered. There were hopes that both would result in more humane deaths, although neither method is used much anymore. One slightly more comical selection of last words comes from this prisoner:

“You can be a king or a street sweeper, but everyone dances with the Grim Reaper.”

Robert Alton Harris, convicted of murder, gas chamber, California, April 21, 1992.

Harris was the first person to receive the death penalty after the state of California reinstated it in 1976. Harris went to the gas chamber for two 1978 murders when he and his brother abducted two 16-year-old boys from a fast food establishment, drove them to a remote location, shot, and killed them. Harris’ brother testified against him, received a six-year sentence and was discharged in 1983. Harris’ last words are paraphrased from the comedic portrayal of the character Death in the 1991 film Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey.

Lethal Injection

The final method of execution considered is lethal injection, the dominant method of execution today. What is interesting is that over time there have been more calls for those on death row to end the death penalty. The book itself tries to steer away from the politics of the death penalty, but the quotes from prisoners inevitably mean that it is briefly discussed in the book. One notable example is this:

“I have news for you—there is not going to be an execution. This is premeditated murder by the state of Texas. I hope in my death I’m that little bitty snowball that starts to bury the death penalty.

 I have committed lots of sin in my life but I am not guilty of this crime. I would like to tell my son, daughter and wife that I love them—Eden, if they want proof, give it to them. Thanks for being my friend.”

Jesse DeWayne Jacobs, convicted of murder, lethal injection, Texas, January 4, 1995

Jacobs and his sister, Bobbie Jean Hogan, were convicted of the shooting death of Etta Ann Urdiales, ex-wife of Hogan’s boyfriend. Jacobs confessed that his sister offered him $500 and a room if he would kill Urdiales, who allegedly was pestering Hogan’s boyfriend about child support and custody. Jacobs later recanted and said Hogan actually pulled the trigger. Hogan was convicted of manslaughter then released.

In conclusion

Just knowing that you are going to die at an appointed hour, something that the vast majority of us are of course unaware of, must lead you to think about what your final words would be and really reflect on life. And that same logic seems to apply to some terrible criminals too. This book provides an insightful collection of such last words.

George Levrier-Jones

You can buy the Last Words of the Executed by Robert K Elder by clicking here: Amazon US | Amazon UK

If you enjoyed this article, why not take a look at our blog page? Click here.

What happened after slavery in America? History is Now – Issue 2

What happened to freed slaves after they were liberated in Southern America?

Our lead story in the new edition of History is Now looks at how they overcame prejudice and got their voices heard in a most traditional fashion.

So come and try read, History is Now, our interactive digital magazine for the iPad and iPhone!

Click here for more information!

So what is this edition about? Here is what our editor says…

Since our last issue, we’ve been busy developing some great articles. And the result? A more varied, more interactive magazine. Here’s what we have for you this month…

Our cover story is a fascinating look at how oral culture, the use of words, helped largely illiterate, freed slaves in 1860s America become more politically aware and assert their rights. This article also features some great sketches from the time. A second intriguing article that we have for you is about the links that Communists developed with the African-American community in Harlem, while on a different note, we look at the difficult and daring world of female Victorian mountaineers in the Alps.

We’ve also created articles on some major battles. In particular, on its 200th anniversary, we look at the Battle of the Nive, a key battle in the Peninsular War. And as we approach its 70th anniversary, we tell the story of the Battle of Monte Cassino. We’re particularly excited by this article as we really start to make use of digital features. In the article, we mix written text with embedded video interviews from Polish veterans of the battle. And finally, we again make great use of the digital format in our first ever interactive essay, an essay that features an introductory text alongside images and video so giving you a more 21st century magazine experience. And what’s the essay about? Well, to get you in the festive spirit, it’s on the great World War I Christmas Truce.

Click here for more information

With all that and more, come and join us inside…

Just click here for more information!

Alternatively search for History is Now on the app store.

George Levrier-Jones

PS – you will get at least one month free and over 25% off the cover price by taking out a monthly subscription!!

A Love Story during The Wars of the Roses? – Part 1

In the next in our series on the Wars of the Roses, this article looks at the marriage between the naïve Edward IV and the very smart Elizabeth Woodville. And its very serious consequences for one of Edward’s brothers.

It follows our introduction to the Wars of the Roses available here and our article on Edward III’s descendants and the causes of the Wars of the Roses available here. Later were the battles of the war from 1455-1464 and the Kingmaker. The most recent article was on Prince George’s treachery.

Do you know those romantic love stories where boy meets girl, they fall in love, the heavens and the earth move for them, and they live happily ever after?

Well, this isn’t one of them.

Elizabeth Woodville, Edward IV's very powerful Queen

Elizabeth Woodville was a twenty-seven year old widow and mother of two small boys when the lecherous Edward IV came upon her in the woods one day. There is no hard evidence to tell us what had happened to make this womanizer stop and promise marriage to this commoner. Myths about her beauty beguiling him as well as her unholy spells bewitching him have survived the centuries.  Personally I think that Edward was young and silly and far too full of lust. Elizabeth, older and wiser and trained from puberty to deal with silly medieval men, used that against him. She refused to be his mistress so he had no choice but to wed her if he wanted to bed her - Anne Boleyn would pull the exact same stunt on Edward’s grandson, Henry VIII, half a century later; the men in that family never learn. Edward, therefore, married Elizabeth and crowned her his Queen in May 1465, a year after their secret wedding.

Elizabeth’s beauty and piety were known across the land – she was the commoner who had enchanted a King and now she was Queen. But just how much had she enchanted the King? In almost record time, her sisters were married off to the most eligible men in the kingdom. Her brothers and father were put in positions of power. And estates reserved for the victorious Yorkists were suddenly in Woodville control. The insult there being that the Woodvilles had, of course, fought for the Lancasters. It seemed as though Edward was not working in the favor of England, but to better the name of Woodville. It seemed as though Elizabeth had the King wrapped around her little finger. The Queen was in charge of England and doing her best to strip the land of its riches and bestow it on her siblings.

The Woodvilles created many enemies on their short ladder to the top. Most famously, the Earl of Warwick and the Duke of Clarence. A little less famously was the King’s mother, the Duchess Cecily. Everyone has mother-in-law horror stories, but Elizabeth definitely has one of the worst. Medieval historian Dominic Mancini wrote, “Even his mother fell into such a frenzy that she offered to submit to a public enquiry and asserted that Edward was not the offspring of her husband, the Duke of York, but was conceived in adultery, and therefore in no ways worthy of the honor of kingship.” The woman disapproved of Elizabeth to such a point that she was willing to debate Edward’s paternity and right to be King. Of course, Mancini was writing on hearsay so we will never know if that actually happened. But it is very clear that Elizabeth and this marriage were neither liked nor wanted.

Cecily offered even more insults years later when she formed great friendships with the wives of her other sons – Isabelle and Anne Neville. The Neville girls were the daughters of the Earl of Warwick – Elizabeth’s greatest enemy and the murderer of her father. Battle took care of Warwick; the shrewd Queen didn’t have to bother herself with him. But Warwick’s one-time ally, the Duke of Clarence, was not so easy to dispose of.

The Duke of Clarence, Prince George, was a troublemaker and most believe he deserved what he got. But his story just highlights how unbelievably powerful Elizabeth was. The trouble started with the death of George’s wife, Isabelle. As heiress to the massive Warwick fortune, her death left George one of the richest men in England. It is unknown whether that fortune caused George the belief that he was untouchable or if he truly was just a tyrant. But his first stunt after Isabelle’s death was to accuse her handmaid of poisoning the duchess. Without trial or evidence, George convicted the handmaid and executed her. He had no right to do this. He then used his fortune to present himself as a prospective husband to Mary of Burgundy. He had no right to do this. He accused Elizabeth of witchcraft. He employed soothsayers to predict the King’s death. He resurrected the rumor of Cecily’s infidelity and Edward’s questionable paternity. He even brought up a new notion of Edward being pre-contracted to another woman named Eleanor Talbot, therefore making Elizabeth a mistress instead of a wife and Queen.

This, Elizabeth could not allow.

In 1477 George was convicted of treason. Not even Edward’s council were prepared for this, nor could they understand the King’s want to execute his own brother. The youngest Plantagenet hero, Richard, a man who had always backed his beloved brother Edward in everything, was so disgusted that he refused to come to court, refused to have anything to do with Edward’s murder of George.

But did Edward really want to execute his brother or was he simply in the habit of acting on orders from his wife? After all, Edward had forgiven George for many, many betrayals in the past - why would a smear campaign from the Queen suddenly warrant the death penalty?

18 February 1478 would see the outcome of this infighting. But that’s for next time.

By M.L King, a history enthusiast and part-time blogger. You can connect with her on Facebook here.

To read part 2 of A Love Story during The Wars of the Roses, click here!

Have you heard our audio podcasts about an equally fascinating civil war? Click here to go to our Spanish Civil War page.

Selected references

• www.thewarsoftheroses.com
• British History by Miles Kelly
• www.britannica.com
• www.battlefieldstrust.com

The classic Thanksgiving painting - Our image of the week

On Thanksgiving, we look at the classic Thanksgiving painting.

Thanksgiving started as a tradition many centuries ago. In fact, it began almost as far back as European colonization of the American Colonies began. The widely-recognized first Thanksgiving is 1621, where settlers at the Plymouth Plantation held a celebration after the crops were delivered successfully that year. It later became a formal holiday in the US Civil War year of 1863 after Abraham Lincoln wanted to give thanks to the Lord.

The image above, The First Thanksgiving at Plymouth, depicts that first celebration. It is a painting by Jennie Augusta Brownscombe from 1914, and was made famous after appearing in Life magazine.

In the picture we see the recent settlers mixing with the local Native American tribes, while thanks is given to the Lord. We are also drawn to the small children to the left of the picture.

We wish you a Happy Thanksgiving!

To find out more about the site and to get your hands on some exclusive podcasts, why not join us? Click here.

George Levrier-Jones

Spooky goings on. Sir William Crookes - Nineteenth Century Physicist and... Ghost Hunter?

Sir William Crookes (1832-1919) was a well-regarded chemist and physicist with numerous awards and recognitions to his credit. Perhaps more intriguingly, he was the first to bring the "scientific method" to bear on the question of psychic powers.

Crookes spent many years testing various aspects of psychic phenomena. Early in his quest to find answers in the sub-culture of psychics and mediums, a culture rife with fraud in the 19th century, Crookes was duped several times.  To fall prey to this avaricious intent significantly irked Crookes, and caused him to refine where his experiments were run.  Crookes had a laboratory in his home which he utilized for all his later experiments, testing the veracity of automatic writing, movement of heavy items with light contact or no contact, percussive sounds, alteration of the weight of objects, levitation of objects and humans, luminous appearances, appearance of hands both luminous and solid, appearance of forms and faces, and many other uncategorized oddities. 

Caricature of Sir William Crookes. Circa 1903. The caption read "ubi Crookes ibi lux", which is roughly translated as, "Where there is Crookes, there is light."

Like many big names of the Victorian era, including Sir Arthur Conan Doyle of Sherlock Holmes fame, Crookes believed in the afterlife. Crookes cites a Professor Morgan when he describes his attitude toward the subject in his ‘Spiritualism viewed by the Light of Modern Science’ (1874):

"I have both seen and heard, in a manner which would make disbelief impossible, things called spiritual, which cannot be taken by a rational being to be capable of explanation by imposture, coincidence, or mistake... The physical explanations I have seen are easy, but miserably insufficient.  The spiritual hypothesis is sufficient, but ponderously difficult."

Crookes's psychical experiments predated the founding of the Society for Psychical Research (SPR) in 1882.  The SPR went on to research the previously mentioned phenomena at an international level.

It is important to remember Crookes was not some common dabbler in science.  A brief list of his research would include, but is not limited to, meteorology, chemistry, economics, spectrometry, radiation, and cathode rays.  The cathode ray term lives on with us today in the truncated form of CRT (cathode ray tube) that many still use to view TV shows or surf the web.

Crookes is probably most famous for his "Crookes Tubes" which he developed during his studies of cathode rays, streams of electrons generated by electrical energy in a low pressure environment.   When these "rays" were found to have traits of particles they were termed corpuscles before receiving their final term of electrons.

Party tricks and spirits

Not all of Crookes’s tubes were for experimentation.  Many were made to entertain the well-heeled attendees of Victorian parties.   One can only imagine the anticipation of the guests as Crookes set up equipment that would make a Steampunk aficionado salivate.  Then, as the arcane machinery came to life with the loud spat of high voltage arcing, the tube would glow.  A darkened room lit by the stroboscopic effect of the spark gap oscillator and a glowing object of art the centerpiece - the perfect warm up for a séance. While it is not known if Crookes demonstrated his tube simultaneously with a séance, it is known that he did attend séances with a multitude of apparatus in tow.

Crooks performed many experiments and tested several spiritual mediums attempting to quantify spiritual power.  He designed many complicated testing mechanisms to record measurable changes in the physical world on paper.  Most of his experiments were carried out in his own laboratory under his terms mitigating the chance of deception.  During one of these "in house" experiments he generated a paper tape readout of Daniel Home (his most "remarkable" subject), changing the weight of an object suspended inside a glass case.

Another of his subjects was Miss Florence Cook who would call forth an entity who called herself Katie.  This was problematic for Crookes as mediums were notoriously finicky, with Miss Cook being no exception, insisting on darkness and seclusion behind a curtain.  However this did not deter Crookes who devised a different form of lighting (phosphorus lamp) and other adaptations to his home to accommodate her while meeting his experimental demands.

Crookes regretfully notes that he arrived in the eleventh hour of Miss Cook's career but he did spend several months working with her.  The crux of this series of tests can be boiled down to a single question: can a woman, barely 20 years old, so hoodwink a man and several hand-picked witnesses in his own home so that she appears to be in two places at once under the guise of low light conditions?  Under the scrutiny of Crookes and three or four other witnesses, Katie, Miss Cook's projection, did many things including shaking hands, exchanging embraces, holding babies, and having her photo taken.  Crookes also took great pains to measure Miss Cook’s and Katie's respective heights and builds, including face shape. Crookes's notes show them to be demonstrably different.  Miss Cook, demonized in the press of the time, was never proven a fraud by Crookes; in fact, he remained impressed by her veracity throughout his life, much to the detriment of his personal reputation.

The accordion

One of Crookes's most spectacular experiments was the testing of Daniel Home "playing" an accordion without touching it, or only lightly touching it.  The accordion was purchased that day and was brand new.  There were several witnesses including a respected fellow physicist, a police sergeant, Crookes's brother, and his chemical assistant.  The mesh cage's largest opening was less than 2 inches by 1 inch and was placed on the floor and under a table with no room for foot or hand at top or bottom.  Home, whom had been watched by Crookes since when he was picked up, sat in an easy chair with his legs athwart the cage.  With Crookes one side and another witness on the other, they each placed a foot on one of his to detect any movement.  The cage was then moved out from the table, the accordion placed inside with its keys down, and Home grasped the accordion's higher end (without the keys) between thumb and forefinger and the cage was pushed back under the table, but not so far as to hide Home's hand, his other hand resting on top of the table.  The instrument moved with no noticeable movement from Home, a few notes were tentatively played, and Home removed his hand from the cage leaving the accordion floating and undulating inside.  Home then reached back in the cage and lightly touched the instrument which obliged him by playing a cheery contemporary tune.

Many people, such as the great early 20th century magician Houdini, have dismissed Crookes and his experimental findings.  Labeled credulous, wishful, a dupe, and many other unflattering terms, they look back and poke holes in his experiments.  One detractor suggests that Crookes must have purchased a self-playing accordion (which were available at the time) or that it was operated by Home with strands of catgut, while he played melodies on a mouth organ hidden in his bushy mustache.  Crookes's notes rebut all of his critics, many who appear to have not read his writings.

"There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy", 

Said the Bard.  Sir William Crookes made one of the firmer efforts to discover what was between heaven and earth, taking it out of philosophy and dragging it into the sunlight of the real world.

Crookes will likely remain an enigma to all those that study his life.

By Kevin O’Neill

Do you want to write for us too? If so, get in touch by clicking here!

November 22, 1963. Dallas, Texas. The day that John F Kennedy was shot - Our image of the week

On the fiftieth anniversary of the day that John F Kennedy was shot, it seemed fitting that our image of the week looks at that event.

John F Kennedy was possibly the most charismatic President of the 20th century. His oratory skills can still provoke shivers down our spines today. His sense of style is timeless. But, he came to be known for the most tragic of reasons.

Having been inaugurated as President at the tender age of 43, he would leave us on November 22, 1963 after being shot in Dallas, Texas.

The first image below shows JFK with his wife Jacqueline Kennedy before the motorcade that they were traveling in that day left.

The second image shows JFK smiling at the crowds. Soon after, he was fatally shot.

Our final image shows the outcome of that day. The funeral of JFK on November 25, 1963.

To find out more about John F Kennedy, listen to our introductory podcast on him. Click here.

George Levrier-Jones

Jean Laffite - Enigma, Legend. American hero?

In this article, Cindy Vallar tells the tale of the legendary early 19th century pirate, Jean Laffite, a man who played a major role in fighting for America against Britain.

Jean Laffite first appeared in New Orleans in 1803, but where was he born?

Marseilles, Bordeaux, St. Domingue? No one knows, because he told different stories to different people. He was the son of aristocrats guillotined during the French Revolution. He fled the slave revolts on the island of Haiti. Yet his instinctive familiarity with the marshes and bayous from New Orleans to the Gulf of Mexico and his ability to converse in French, Spanish, English, or Italian suggest that he grew up in the region where he plied his trade.

A depiction of Jean Laffite

In 1803 New Orleans became part of the United States, but it was settled by the French, sold to the Spanish, and then returned to the French before Napoleon sold the territory to Thomas Jefferson. In spite of these changes, the city retained its French customs and language. Americans, including the new governor – William C. C. Claiborne – were not welcomed, partly because they considered the citizens of New Orleans to be lazy and lawless. They were aghast at the Creoles’ toleration of smuggling, which hindered merchant trade. Things came to a head between Claiborne and Laffite in 1813 when the governor issued a $500 reward for the privateer’s arrest. Within a week of the posting of those notices, new wanted posters appeared, offering $1,000 to anyone who delivered Governor Claiborne to Barataria. They were signed, Jean Laffite.

Barataria lies on the Gulf of Mexico, about 100 miles south of New Orleans. It was home to buccaneers and fishermen, but Jean Laffite organized them into a company of privateers and smugglers. He built a house, cottages, warehouses, barracoons (stockades that held slaves awaiting auction), a cafe, gambling den, and brothel. His men numbered one thousand, came from many countries, and included navigators, gunners, carpenters, cooks, sail makers, and riggers. He devised laws to protect the men and their women from lawless rampages. Retribution was swift: cast adrift for molesting a woman, hanged for murdering a Baratarian. He prized the American Constitution, believing in its freedoms. He prohibited his men from attacking American ships, naming death the penalty for violation of this rule. His ships sailed under letters of marque from Cartagena, a republic of Colombia fighting for its independence from Spain. (A letter of marque allowed privateers to legally plunder ships of the country at war with the country who issued the letter of marque. Pirates attacked any ship without this legal document.) They plundered cargoes of Spanish and English ships for slaves, silks, spices, jewels, furniture, household goods, art, food, and medicines.

Laffite and war with Britain

Two years after the United States declared war on Britain in 1812, a boat was lowered from HMS Sophia and sailed into Barataria under a white flag. Aboard were two British officers, Captain Lockyer and Captain McWilliams. They sought Laffite’s help in infiltrating the bayous and capturing New Orleans. They offered him land, gold, and a commission in the Royal Navy. Laffite told them he would give them his answer in two weeks, but once the officers returned to their ship, he forwarded the letters to Governor Claiborne. The governor believed in the authenticity of the letters and sought to postpone a planned naval assault on the smuggling enclave, but the majority of his council voted to carry out the attack as planned. While Jean waited for the governor’s response, more ships appeared off Barataria. Since they flew the American flag, the Bartarians greeted them with enthusiasm, but the Americans destroyed Laffite’s fleet and stronghold, then captured fifty of the smugglers, including Dominique Youx.

In spite of this, Laffite sought out Andrew Jackson, the Tennessee soldier who came to protect New Orleans. Although initially against any offer from the “hellish banditti,” Jackson reassessed his decision after Laffite offered him two things he desperately needed: 7,500 flints with powder and 1,000 fighting men. Although the Battle of New Orleans was fought after the treaty to end the war was signed (but not ratified), there was little doubt the British would have captured New Orleans had Laffite and his men not fought under Jackson. The two batteries manned by Baratarians cut large swathes in the enemy rank. British casualties were enormous, but Jackson lost only thirteen men. President Madison pardoned Laffite and his men for their bravery.

For the next two years, Laffite tried through legal means to regain his property and ships confiscated when the Americans attacked Barataria, but he was forced to purchase them at the auction block. New Orleanians became less accepting of smugglers plying their trade. They wondered why a hero would violate the law. Jean felt betrayed and, in 1817, he sailed from New Orleans and established a new colony on Galveston Island. The colony prospered, but Laffite failed to prevent the influx of fugitives who defied his laws. In 1821 the American Navy delivered an ultimatum: leave or be blown to bits. Under cover of darkness, Laffite slipped away after setting fire to his stronghold.

Therein lies the final mystery of Jean Laffite. What happened to him? Did he die of fever in the Yucatan? Was he killed fighting pirates while at sea? Did he retire and raise a family, then die a quiet death in Illinois? No one knows. In death Jean Laffite continued to be what he’d been all his life – a legendary enigma.

By Cindy Vallar

This article is provided by Cindy from Pirates and Privateers. Click here to see more great pirate-related articles from Cindy.

Now, why not take a look at a former image of the week from New Orleans? Click here.