Annotations and comments

Phil Gyford has posted 737 annotations/comments since 27 December 2002.

The most recent…


Comments

About Richard Pepys (cousin)

Phil Gyford  •  Link

No, the Richard Pepys who was Lord Chief Justice of Ireland isn't mentioned in the diary; Wheatley was correct. This Richard is his son, as the 1893 text describes.

About Friday 3 January 1661/62

Phil Gyford  •  Link

I've corrected the Lord Crew link and added some more explanations to his page and a few relations, in an effort to clarify things in future!

About Sunday 29 March 1663

Phil Gyford  •  Link

Nine years later I've changed the "my man William" link from Will Howe to Will Hewer. Better late than never!

About Sunday 30 June 1667

Phil Gyford  •  Link

L&M's index says it's the James Douglas, the 2nd Marquess of Douglas, so I'll leave the link as it is. Which isn't to say they're infallible!

About A new design

Phil Gyford  •  Link

Simon - is there any particular text that's hard to read, or is it all of it? Even the lighter text looks pretty dark to me, but these things can vary quite a bit depending on display and computer settings, never mind individuals' eyesight. Let me know, as I'd like to make sure it's easy to read for everyone!

About A new design

Phil Gyford  •  Link

Sorry for the slow reply; it's been a busy week. Many thanks for the kind comments. It's difficult to change anything on a site that people visit frequently and are fond of because, understandably, it's very easy to disrupt habits.

john: I'd have to ask Dean, the designer, why he chose the green. I think we tried a couple of other colours too, although that was nearly 18 months ago. Green seems to work -- there's something of the leather-bound book or luxurious wallpaper about it I think!

William: I don't use Facebook much myself. Any suggestions for what format Pepys would be most suited to on Facebook? (No promises though; there's always so much to get done!)

About London (ship)

Phil Gyford  •  Link

As of May 2014 there are plans to excavate the remains of the London, whose final resting place was only confirmed in 2005: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/may/16/... The article says:

"The vessel was fitted for war when she blew up. The women on board were possibly officers' relatives. Perhaps they would have disembarked as the ship would have been fully prepared for war, Dunkley suggests. 'Pepys talks of ladies being on board. We don't know whether they were guests masquerading as crew members, which happened in Admiral Nelson's time. Or whether they were guests of the lower decks.'

"Although she blew up, the ship seems to be pretty complete, lying in two sections. She was once 37 metres long by 12 metres wide."