Wednesday 20 March 1660/61

At the office all the morning, dined at home and Mr. Creed and Mr. Shepley with me, and after dinner we did a good deal of business in my study about my Lord’s accounts to be made up and presented to our office. That done to White Hall to Mr. Coventry, where I did some business with him, and so with Sir W. Pen (who I found with Mr. Coventry teaching of him upon the map to understand Jamaica).1 By water in the dark home, and so to my Lady Batten’s where my wife was, and there we sat and eat and drank till very late, and so home to bed.

The great talk of the town is the strange election that the City of London made yesterday for Parliament-men; viz. Fowke, Love, Jones, and … , men that are so far from being episcopall that they are thought to be Anabaptists; and chosen with a great deal of zeal, in spite of the other party that thought themselves very strong, calling out in the Hall, “No Bishops! no Lord Bishops!” It do make people to fear it may come to worse, by being an example to the country to do the same. And indeed the Bishops are so high, that very few do love them.

  1. Sir William Penn was well fitted to give this information, as it was he who took the island from the Spaniards in 1655.

19 Annotations

The Bishop   Link to this

"chosen with a great deal of zeal, in spite of the other party that thought themselves very strong, calling out in the Hall, “No Bishops! no Lord Bishops!” "

In case it's not clear, it was the pro-Fowke, Love and Jones party that called out "no bisops", not "the other party".

Episcopal just means 'pro-bishop' in this context, but I don't know when that particular word became common to describe the establishment party.

Anabaptists was often applied loosely to any radical dissenters. I doubt Pepys or most of the people he knew could have explained precisely what set anabaptists apart from other dissenters.

Louis Anthony Scarsdale   Link to this

"Parliament-men; viz. Fowke, Love, Jones, and . . . , "

"The Shorter Pepys" includes in square brackets the omitted name "Thompson." More from L&M holders?

vincent   Link to this

One could be the former lord mayor in 1652 John FOWKE [explains the comment]
http://www.steeljam.dircon.co.uk/lordmayorchron...

There was a Jones, sir Frances lord mayer in 1620, could be a relation[a son or nephew] they like to keep the job in the family. Where possible and the third [Love, Ald. William] was an alderman naturally.

Mary   Link to this

L&M supply Alderman Sir William Thompson.

They also note that Thompson and Love were Presbyterians and the others independents. This resurgence of Puritans was alarming, coming so soon after Venner's attempted rising.

Xjy   Link to this

Bishops so high, that few do love them.

Sam in a nutshell. Trimmer extraordinary. Finger in the air to check the General Line emanating from the centre(s) of power, or anything that might affect it.

First the respectable horror at the Puritan zeal ("They were thrown out, why don't they respect developments and lie down dead?”). Then the acknowledgement that the City is important and very energetic in its recalcitrance. Oops, maybe things will swing back — “oh dear, those Bishops aren't behaving very well or responsibly, are they?” So if they get turfed out, they will have deserved it in Sam’s eyes and his conscience will be assuaged, and he will be ready to serve the new masters.
What we’re seeing here voting in the City is the social force that will build up to the Glorious Compromise of 1688 when the bourgeoisie will take over with a minimum of royalist camouflage, after the failure of the gungho old-style royalists to find and develop on any viable social power base during the Restoration.

JWB   Link to this

Fowlke,Love and Jones...
Could you choose more apt names for Anabaptists?

JWB   Link to this

"By water in the dark home,.."
Poetic phrase gave me pause. That's life in six words.

JWB   Link to this

Sects-
Here's short list from Geo. Fox:" but we had reasonings with all the other sects, Presbyterians, Independents, Seekers, Baptists, Episcopal men, Socinians, Brownists, Lutherans, Calvinists, Arminians, Fifth-monarchy men, Familists, Muggletonians, and Ranters; " What a cross to bear, to give witness as a 'Muggletonian".

David A. Smith   Link to this

"It do make people to fear it may come to worse"
Sam's a politician, and a politican's principal aide. We are barely 18 months removed from a despotic theocracy established after a bloody civil war. It's his job to have his finger in the wind, and it's in his nature to worry, for the nation, his boss, and himself. But he consoles himself with the warm-milk thought "that very few do love them."

Alan Bedford   Link to this

"What a cross to bear, to give witness as a "Muggletonian".”

Excerpted from the 1911 Encyclopedia: Lodowicke Muggleton (1609-1698) “…In 1651 he began to have revelations, and to proclaim himself and his cousin John Reeve, whose journeyman he was, as the two witnesses mentioned in Rev. xi. 3…. An exposition of their doctrines was published in 1656 under the title of The Divine Looking-Glass. Among other views (besides the doctrine of the divine mission of the authors) this work taught that the distinction of the three persons in the Trinity is merely nominal, that God has a real human body, and that He left Elijah as His vicegerent in heaven when He Himself descended to die on the cross. Muggleton’s opinions gained some notable adherents, but also called forth much opposition. In 1653 he was imprisoned for blasphemy, and twice (1660 and 1670) his own followers temporarily repudiated him….”

The entire article is at: http://18.1911encyclopedia.org/M/MU/MUGGLETON_L...

vincent   Link to this

JWB "By water in the dark home,.."
Poetic phrase gave me pause. That's life in six words. there is this poem
“A Walk through the Dark Blue Night”
by Mary Lambert
http://www.alharris.com/grasses/mldkblue.htm

vincent   Link to this

The Ranters, Seekers,Levellers,Quakers all shaken up, all try to explain who should be at first base. In the end 'tis money that talks. Then there are the Agrarians,Anabaptists, Baptists, the Anti- Clerics, Antinominians,Arians, Arminianians,Atheists,Agnostics,Astrologers,Barrowists, Behmentists, Brownists, Calvanists, Cavaliers, Royalists, Clubmen, Comenians, Diggers, Familists, Fifth-Monarchists, etc. They are now just keeping their own counsel.

Josh   Link to this

Trying to "place" Pepys under this or that rubric: perhaps he lived less by "theory" than "practice"?

Glyn   Link to this

Just like David Smith says, Sam's a politician's aide and has to be able to predict what's likely to happen.

I think the key here is that this was an *unexpected* (strange) election victory. Their equivalent of opinion pollsters didn't see it coming (which is a little odd, seeing how small the electorate was). These are not the people that Charles II and the Government would have chosen; and since the City was always strongly anti-Royalist before the Restoration is this a prediction of things to come? For instance, will the City be hostile to the King's and the Government's future policies (especially money-raising?).

Sam is the most important political aide to one of the country's leading statesmen: he has to keep on top of situations like these, and be able to give a political briefing to Montagu whenever so asked. (We saw a similar situation a few days ago when Montagu asked him what people knew of the King's marriage plans.)

Rex Gordon   Link to this

"...his finger in the wind ..."
This is not an unexpected trait of Sam's. Remember when he was made uncomfortable by an old school friend who remarked, in company just after the Restoration, that Sam had been "quite the Roundhead" at school?

JonTom Kittredge   Link to this

Why the Ellipsis?
I am wondering why Wheatly omits Thompson's name from the list of City members-elect. In the past, he has used an ellipsis only to edit passages that he thought were scatalogical or obscene. Maybe he found Thompson's name illegible in the original? Any other theories?

Emilio   Link to this

In this one case, Wheatley omits the word because Sam did.

The L&M version has a blank there instead of an ellipsis. I guess Sam couldn't think of the fourth name and left a blank so he could come back and fill it in later; by the time later came he had forgotten about it. That sort of thing happens to me all the time.

Pedro.   Link to this

Sam and the Bishops.
Sam has twice listened to sermons by Bishops and states in the Diary:
8/7/1660.
"The Bishop of Chichester preached before the King, and made a great flattering sermon, which I did not like that Clergy should meddle with matters of state."
29/7/1660.
"I with my Lord to White Hall Chappell, where I heard a cold sermon of the Bishop of Salisbury's, and the ceremonies did not please me, they do so overdo them.”

Bill   Link to this

William Thompson, the M.P. for London omitted from Sam's list, has an encyclopedia page:
http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclopedia/10413/

Log in to post an annotation.

If you don't have an account, then register here.