Sunday 23 November 1662

(Lord’s day). Up, after some talk with my wife, soberly, upon yesterday’s difference, and made good friends, and to church to hear Mr. Mills, and so home, and Mr. Moore and my brother Tom dined with me. My wife not being well to-day did not rise. In the afternoon to church again, and heard drowsy Mr. Graves, and so to see Sir W. Pen, who continues ill in bed, but grows better and better every day. Thence to Sir W. Batten’s, and there staid awhile and heard how Sir R. Ford’s daughter is married to a fellow without friends’ consent, and the match carried on and made up at Will Griffin’s, our doorkeeper’s. So to my office and did a little business, and so home and to bed.

I talked to my brother to-day, who desires me to give him leave to look after his mistress still; and he will not have me put to any trouble or obligation in it, which I did give him leave to do.

I hear to-day how old rich Audley is lately dead, and left a very great estate, and made a great many poor familys rich, not all to one. Among others, one Davis, my old schoolfellow at Paul’s, and since a bookseller in Paul’s Church Yard: and it seems do forgive one man 60,000l. which he had wronged him of, but names not his name; but it is well known to be the scrivener in Fleet Street, at whose house he lodged. There is also this week dead a poulterer, in Gracious Street, which was thought rich, but not so rich, that hath left 800l. per annum, taken in other men’s names, and 40,000 Jacobs in gold.

22 Annotations

First Reading

Terry F  •  Link

"Sir R. Ford’s daughter is married to a fellow without friends’ consent"

L&M note: "This is probably the match between Rebecca Ford and John Oviat, merchant, of St Olave's; they were not married in the parish church. Parents' consent was not required by law until the Marriage Act of 1753. Oviat was a beneficiary under his mother-in-law's will of 1681, so that any estrangement which may have occurred was temporary."

"I hear to-day how old rich Audley is lately dead...the scrivener in Fleet Street, at whose house he lodged."

L&M note: "Hugh Audley, Scrivener, usurer, and the last of the Clerks of the Court of Wards, d. 15 Nov. 1662, 'infinitely rich': Richard Smyth, *Obituary*, p. 56. He is said to have been worth £400,000 at his death: see ‘The way to be rich, according to the practice of the great Audley’(1662). Pepys's schoolfellow was Thomas Davies, a grandson of Audley's sister, Elizabeth Peacock, and heir to the residuary estate, together with his younger brother Alexander Davies, through whom it later descended to the Grosvenor family.... The Scrivener of Fleet Street was John Ray (Rea), with whom Audley had lodged near Temple Bar since c.1654 and against whom he had brought an action in Chancery in 1661-2...."

Jeannine  •  Link

"to see Sir W. Pen" and to also see a few of Sam's other naval friends.. the following url has an assortment of maritime portraits by Lely.…

P.S. Robert--I agree about Tom

A. De Araujo  •  Link

"This week dead a poulterer in Gracious Street which was thought rich"
I can't see how a poulterer could get rich unless he had some other business;
anyway rich is relative, maybe Sarah or Wayneman thought him rich.

Paul Chapin  •  Link

" I can’t see how a poulterer could get rich unless he had some other business"
I dunno. Frank Perdue left quite a few shekels behind when he passed on.

in Aqua Scripto  •  Link

Poulterer,"... taken in other men’s names, and 40,000 Jacobs in gold...."
plucking old hens be his front business, but he dothe pluck others [?mens names sold to the powers to be?]
Money never be made, by straight trading, one must sell the feathers for pillows, or palliassses. Then, there be the gizzard, and then the claws for those that need an item to ward off the evil eye.
Has another skill wringing necks, useful skill too.

Terry F  •  Link

"Audley...left a very great estate, and made a great many poor familys rich, not all to one."

The sense is plain, that Audley did not leave his estate all to one family, which would have made only them rich -- but Pepys's construction of the moral contrast of what might have been is striking, methinks, and gives some clue to his values...., unless it concerns Uncle Robert's Will.

Dave Bell  •  Link

One thing to remember is that some things balanced differently in the past. A sum of 800l. per annum doesn't necessarily stand in the same relation to capital as it would today, with the whole structure of stocks and shares and interest rates which has evolved since Sam's time. And if the source of that income was property, the relationship between property and chickens would be different.

From my own knowledge, the value of wheat, measured against houses, has dropped at least 8-fold in my adult life.

Even so, 800l. per annum is certainly rich, however acquired, and the turmoil of past decades certainly provided opportunities.

PJK  •  Link

There is also this week dead a poulterer...
I was not sure what point Sam was making here. I think this rewrite makes sense to me but I could be wrong.
There is also this week dead a poulterer, in Gracious Street, which was thought (might be) rich but not so rich (as it actually turned out), that hath left 800l. per annum, taken in other men's names (and so secretly), and 40,000 Jacobs in gold (50000l !).

Alternatively, the 'but not so rich' comment may refer back to Audley, as in, 'but not so rich as Audley.'

A. Hamilton  •  Link

There is also this week dead a poulterer

Avian flu strikes again. I like the reference back to Audley (not so rich as Audley) since this fowl plucker seems to have been pretty well off. What a window into history the little link to Gracious Street provides. My goodness! And to think a Mistress Ford's daughter was up to some
rebellion! Was the family from Windsor?

Xjy  •  Link

Today's obsession - the family as the vehicle of inheritance, and its social legitimacy...
Sam has two examples of non-authorized "romantic" love (potential family) - daughter Ford and his brother.
And two examples of dead rich people bequeathing large sums to their relatives - ie legitimate inheritance. No wonder he obsesses about the way the king regulates his non-authorized family droppings.
Hatches, matches, dispatches...

A. Hamilton  •  Link

Today’s obsession

Well done. Bang on target.

stolzi  •  Link

Poor Tom indeed.

Just a few crumbs from the table of the rich men might enable him to marry his mistress, but he's not in any of the wills.

A number of interesting things today.

This is the second time I've noticed Sam not unwilling to work on a Sunday. Would he have done so back when he was a Puritan?

Nice to see the careful steps to reconcile his quarrel with Elizabeth.

And poor Sir Wm Pen! Seems like he's been in bed forever.

in Aqua Scripto  •  Link

" non-authorized “romantic” love " Xjy, don't forget Sam's own nuptials be kept quiet from people of statue for a few years.

Robert Gertz  •  Link

1645...Charles Sr. is taken...Again...

"Up with ye arms or die!"

"Prithee sir, spare me and save yourself from gravest sin. For be it known to you that I am your King."

Uh-huh...Grim look.

"Knave, this is your King. And as his servant, I, Hyde of Clarendon, offer you this purse."

Whoa...Some purse.

"All right. Be off with ye!"

Knew this would fetch more than the poultry business ever could.

Terry F  •  Link

"And poor Sir Wm Pen! Seems like he’s been in bed forever."

Monday 27 October 1662, Sam records "visited both Sir Williams, who are both sick, but like to be well again"…

Aye, stolzi, a month abed; just a minute "sick" and I imagine I would "like to be well again"! (the verb > adverb migration)

A. De Araujo  •  Link

"seems like he's been in bed forever"
Maybe the cure,bleeding,was worse than the disease!!!

Xjy  •  Link

Today's obsession and "Sam's own nuptials"
Well, exactly - the basso continuo behind the whole diary. Nagging at him all the time. Maybe the childlessness is felt by him as punishment for not following form, for self-indulgence and flouting the iron laws of society. So he overcompensates in other areas. So we see the seesawing between joyful self-indulgence and grim duty. And the grimness with which he officially regards his joys, and the joy with which he officially regards his duties.

Terry F  •  Link

Concerning Pepys's use of "like to", the 17c and after.

My response to Stolzi was a play on how the standard usage of the phrase has evolved over time. The last phrase "(the verb > adverb migration)" was intended to call attention to the migration of the verbal "like to" in the 17c to the adverbial "likely to" by the 20th. The former is still used in some regional dialectal phrases, as Stolzi observed in an email to me; concerning which see…

One thing is clear, its meaning is [,] like [,] fluid: q.v.

Terry F  •  Link

"This is the second time I’ve noticed Sam not unwilling to work on a Sunday."

This has troubled us before, A. Hamilton -- Saturday 12 July, Nix asked "When was the weekend invented?"… and there was an extensive discusssion of the "work week," the rise of the weekend, and the Sabbath, etc.

Second Reading

Terry Foreman  •  Link

A little spoiler.

Two months from today (23 January 1663) Pepys will buy Audley's "The way to be rich according to the practice of the great Audley who begun with two hundred pound in the year 1605, and dyed worth four hundred thousand pound this instant November, 1662."…

Chris Squire UK  •  Link

Audley is reported to have multiplied his wealth 2,000-fold in in 57 years, implying he doubled it every 5 years = 14 % p.a. average compound interest.

I don’t believe it.

Log in to post an annotation.

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