<Edit> Which of course resounds in the further irony that New York is the town's second name, the first being New Amsterdam named by the original Dutch merchantmen who established the settlement and in some way are related to said King Billy of Orange if not by blood at least by nationality ... well before the Duke became King, of course.

We have some old Dutch hold-overs in place names up and down the Hudson River Valley. Bronx (County and Borough) is named after a prominent Dutch settler whose name was Bronck and who apparently hosted quite a few get togethers so that it was fairly regular for Nieuw Amsterdamers to refer to going up to the Bronck's as a matter of course.





Edited by - Indy11 on 11/5/2006 4:01:59 PM

the name is Manhatten lol

wasn't that the Indian name for the island, not the settlement? Mana-hata, or summat like that?

anyhoo, getting back to the point, I recently ran across the full rhyme of "Remember, remember" which I hadn't heard since I was little (and I had never heard the later verses, as I was brought up a Catholic so naturally it was conveniently dropped from my upbringing and education!)

Remember, remember, the 5th of November,
The Gunpowder, Treason and Plot,
I know of no reason, why the gunpowder treason
should ever be forgot.

Guy Fawkes, Guy Fawkes, 'twas his intent
to blow up the King, and the Parliament.
Three score barrels of powder below,
Poor old England to overthrow:
By God's providence he was catch'd
With a dark lantern and burning match.

Holloa boys, holloa boys, make the bells ring.
Holloa boys, holloa boys, God save the King!
Hip hip hoorah!

A penny loaf to feed the Pope.
A farthing o' cheese to choke him.
A pint of beer to rinse it down.
A faggot of sticks to burn him.
Burn him in a tub of tar.
Burn him like a blazing star.
Burn his body from his head.
Then we'll say ol' Pope is dead.

Hip hip huzzah!
Hip hip huzzah!

bloodthirsty fellows our ancestors, weren't they?

I understand that Guy Fawkes Night was very popular in Aus and NZ until the sale of fireworks and the lighting of bonfires was banned in the 1980s. You children don't know what you're missing. We still have most of the traditional trappings, guys being dragged through the towns, treacle toffee, parkin, toffee apples, baked potatoes cooked in the embers, fun fairs and carnivals, and of course vast numbers of fireworks.

The Govt wants to seriously restrict the night's activities and ban firework sales outright if they could, but it's such an intrinsic part of our culture there'd be uproar; another Gunpowder Plot, perhaps? oo wot a luvverly thort.... like V for Vendetta all over again!



Edited by - Tawakalna on 11/6/2006 1:55:09 AM

Well, clearly someone enjoyed their weekend. Call me a miserable old git but I didn't get to sleep 'til three on Saturday and midnight on Sunday.

You can't blame the government for wanting to ban fireworks. If the sale of gunpowder, semtex and trinitrotoluene is heavily restricted, why shouldn't they be too? But I'm not going to start Cold_Void off so I'll leave it at that.

You're right Taw. I remember attending one or two night bonfires when I was a young'un, but I haven't seen one since. It's really quite disturbing now that I think about it . As for fireworks, they cannot be used by individuals unless they are professionallly accredited, but you can still by them in Melbourne's "China Town"... or you could, back in the late 1980's. It's the same with flares. *Sigh* They won't let ye have any fun *sniff*.

Manhattan, name of island.

Nieuw Amsterdam, first name of the settlement.

I still think it odd that the man was caught about to light but not able to put fire to the powder.

How convenient was that? Seems to me he was found out well before he got all the explosives in place.

"I tried to get out, but they just keep pullin me back in!"

nyah, i'll leave my opinion on fireworks out - i don't really care either way what you do to your own freedoms

i think the whole thing is weird- for americans, particularly right now when congress has a 15% approval rating, the idea of celebrating the capture of someone who was about to blow the whole thing to smitherines seems totally alien. hell, we'd probably give guy fawkes a medal for attempting to save our democracy by expediting the removal of those gerrymandering incumbents

of course the whole catholic/protestant divide is a complete mystery to us, ya know, cause ahhhh...whats that thing we've got....ahhh...geez what is it....ah! religious tolerance

"What country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms...The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Jefferson

"I had rather believe all the Fables in the Legend, and the Talmud, and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a Mind."
Francis Bacon

Kind of like April 11 Patriots Day, also known as The Shot Heard Around the World.

CONCORD and the BRITISH RETREAT

Due to a false report about the possible arrival of British troops at Lexington ten days earlier, one of Concord's leading citizens and commander of the Middlesex militia, Colonel James Barrett, had been busy transporting munitions and arms (and what they could) by wagon to the towns of Acton, Stow (north and west of Concord), and Sudbury (south and west of Concord). He even disassembled some of the cannon and buried them in furrows on his own farm. It made no difference. Concord remained a considerable arsenal by any military standards. They had hidden a lot. According to the notebooks of Barrett, 20,000 pounds of musket balls and cartridges, 50 reams of cartridge paper, 318 barrels of flour, 17,000 pounds of salt fish and 35,000 pounds of rice lay hidden throughout the community. There is no doubt that Massachusetts was getting ready to wage war.

Dr. Samuel Prescott, a dedicated Son of Liberty, rode into Concord at approximately 2:30am, April 19th, with the news that the regulars were marching from Boston, and were bound for Concord. Only Lexington stood in their path. Barrett knew he would most likely have to lead his men into battle, or give up everything hidden among a score of houses and farms, including his own.

Meanwhile, the British continued the 6 miles to Concord.

Concord's two minuteman companies and two militia companies were mustered in front of Wright's Tavern. From nearby Lincoln, another comapny of minutemen who brought rumor of gunfire at Lexington, joined in as well. A horseman by the name of Reuben Brown ( a Concord saddlemaker ) returned from Lexington with an eyewitness account of the first British volley, which had sent him galloping back to Concord. He reported to Barrett that the regulars were probabaly firing ball, although he was not really sure. It was a momentous report. Powder would have frightened, but ball was intended to kill.

Barrett decided to seize the high ground and sent most of his men onto a long ridge that commanded the road leading into Concord. Hoping to give the approaching British a show of force, he sent another company down the road toward Lexington, hoping this might persuade the British to turn back to Boston. However, Colonel Smith was in no mood to be intimidated. He had his orders from General Gage, and he meant to carry them out.

By 8am Colonel Smith and his regulars were in the center of Concord. He ordered his grenadiers to begin seaching houses and barns for gunpowder and other munitions. He sent one company to guard the South Bridge, and seven companies to guard the North Bridge that crossed over the Concord River. Four of these companies then proceeded on to Colonel Barrett's farm two miles away. Analyzing the scene before him, Barrett saw no reason to attack. The British would find no arsenal of powder and arms. They would soon disengage and proceed back to Boston. Besides, the Brisith commander was surely aware that he would soon be surrounded by 6,000 minutemen and militia in a wide circle between Concord and Boston.

British Retreat Back to Boston from Concord

In the courthouse, the grenadiers finally made one of their few finds - some cannon mounts and other equipment which they set ablaze. Looking from the ridge above the town, a pale column of smoke rose over the trees caught the eyes of Lieutenant Joseph Hosmer, Colonel Barrett's second in command and acting adjutant of the Concord regiment. Turning to Barrett he exclaimed, "Will you let them burn the town down?" The militia loaded their muskets.

The move would require them to cross the North Bridge, which at the time was being guarded by three companies of regulars totaling 120 men. Barrett had 400 militia behind him and thought that by advancing on the bridge, the regulars, facing such an overwhelming force, would turn and fall back to allow the Americans to proceed on into Concord. Under the current rules of engagement, the British would not fire unless the Americans fired first.

Barrett ordered the Acton militia, under the command of Captain Isaac Davis and along with Major Buttrick, to advance his company to the bridge in a long, snaking column, two men abreast. Barrett cautioned them to be sure not to fire first. As the Americans approached the bridge, the stunned British at first did nothing. When their commanding officer, Captain Walter Laurie, realized the situation, he had his men retreat to the opposite side of the river and massed them around a narrow span. They had to hold the bridge or the four companies that had marched to Barrett's farm would be cut off.

The Americans advanced. The British raised their muskets. The Americans marched onto the bridge.

With their guns pointed down and toward the river, several British soldiers fired warning shots.

The Americans kept marching.

Suddenly, an instant later, a full volley was fired at the head of the American column. Captain Issac Davis was killed instantly with a bullet in his heart. Beside him, Abner Hosmer went down with a bullet to the head. Four other men were wounded. The Americans stared in disbelief. "Goddamn it," one man shouted, "they're firing ball!"

Major Buttrick shouted, "Fire fellow soldiers, for God's sake fire!"

As they returned to Boston, the British were under constant assault from Massachusetts militiamen, who inflicted 273 casualties.

The curtains had finally opened . . . The stage was set . . .

The American Revolution had begun April 11,1775

"It doesn’t matter what universe you’re from. That’s got to hurt!"


Edited by - FlyByU on 11/6/2006 8:57:47 PM

ooo, "gerrymandering" - such a good word! It does bring a rozey glowwe to my Phizz to behold such a mot on the Interwebbe.

don't forget "rotten boroughs" too!

Insurance Fella - the authorities were tipped off. One of the conspirators wrote a warning note to a prominent Catholic noble, Lord Monteagle, brother-in-law of plotter Francis Tresham, not to attend Parliament that day. Lord Monteagel showed the letter to Robert Cecil, Lord Salisbury, then Secretary of State, who ordered a search to be made of the House and its underworks, in the process discovering one Mr Guy Fawkes and an unfeasibly large amount of gunpowder for which he could offer no plausible explanation.

It was actually a really rubbish plot; for a start the conspirators, being all Catholics, had confessed their regicidal intent to their confessorial priests. Also, since the plot was not simply to blow up Parliament and the King but to foment a revolt across the country (esp the Midlands) immediately thereafter, far too many people knew of the plot or certain aspects of the preparations for the ill-starred revolt. The workings under Parliament were stopped and restarted many times, the actual day was postponed more than once, and the conspirators were so lax about their supplies and base of operations it's incredible that they weren't discovered sooner.

All the rest had b*ggered off to their homes in anticipation of the intended revolt, leaving poor ol' Guy holding the match when set upon by Thomas Knyvet, JP, and the men of the Watch.

Edited by - Tawakalna on 11/7/2006 2:31:30 AM

sounds like you misunderestimated us you could use a little edumacation

"Holy Christ that's depressing!"

---

of course the whole catholic/protestant divide is a complete mystery to us, ya know, cause ahhhh...whats that thing we've got....ahhh...geez what is it....ah! religious tolerance

---

Shirley, you jest. Or are you just being sarcastic. I hope just sarcastic.

Throughout the 19th and going through most of the 20th Century, the C/P divide loomed very large in US politics. That JFK was Catholic was one of the big issues against voting for him. Before JFK and WWII, Al Smith's political aspirations in for the Democratic nomination for president were pretty much blunted by his faith, Catholic (and also his Irish background).

.... I hope you voted today.

just think how much better off you mutinous colonials would be if you hadn't rebelled against your lawful King!

i certainly don't - what i meant by religious tolerance is that we haven't spent the last millennium sorting out our sectarian problems at the ends of muskets and torches and don't call me shirley!

i see a lot i like in the UK's parliamentary system, one example being questions for the prime minister. somehow i doubt our shubbery could handle the same treatment for very long. also, i have far more respect for blair than bush- blair speaks English, ties his own Windsor knots, and has never dropped a dog, choked on a pretzel, or made a joke out of a monumentally bad decision that killed people.

i like this proportional representation thing ya got over on the continent - 3rd parties are valid alternatives, and have an actual role in the system as mediators... The whole EU thing stinks of world government to me tho - a lot of americans are waking up to the fact that the same free marketeers are planning to duplicate their success in europe with a new continental-sized merger in north america with canada, america, and mexico forming one cohesive economic engine. to hell with the monetary benefits, what about sovereignty?

fyi Indy i voted a week ago. i've been contemplating the strengths of this new statewide mail-in balloting system, and i really like it. for starters, political campaigns in the state are now TWICE as long, which means voters are aware of issues several months in advance (if they care at all) and as a bonus, it means politicians are wasting twice as much corporate and special interest money to try influencing an election thats taking place over the entire span of a month. what this means is that if Bob Anyjoe gets smeared on Nov 6th for some real or imaginary wrong-doing it has no practical effect on the outcome of the election - voters have to decide based on the merit of policy, and not so much on what happens between a politician and his intern. this should mean less dirt digging, more policy - in theory anyway.

P.S. I didn't vote incumbent on ANYTHING but the state supreme court - i am an independent voter, in the sense that i hate democan'ts and repuglicans for having no discernable principles (platitudes they have aplenty) - watching them strategize raises bile in my throat and hate in my idealist's soul.

i threw away my senatorial vote - i don't care if maria cantwell loses and republicans dominate. whats the difference anyways, if she didn't have the spine to stand up against a war party and say 'wait! why do we want to knock off another tinhorn dictator when we're not done digesting the main course? we're gonna get some massive indigestion!' what should make me think she'll have any more of a backbone when it comes to questioning her own party than she did when it came to the opposition?

dems don't need to be afraid of wanting peace- they need to embrace it. stand up and tell the truth, shout it from the rooftops: we've got 20,000 nuclear warheads(that our grandparents taxes bought) in the air, under the waves, under the earth, and perhaps even in space! we have nothing to fear but fear, and bad policy, itself! if i were a dem i would make my campaign backdrop a mushroom cloud over the pakistani border; that terrorist-harboring, nuclear-ICBM selling "ally" of ours (at least the Dems actually read the DoD's reports, and more importantly they know where pakistan, afghanistan, iraq, and iran are relative to each other)

america's quite a strange country, even if you've lived here your whole life. there are so many things right and wrong about it, good and bad and in between....ahg.


"While the storm clouds gather far across the sea,
Let us swear allegiance to a land that's free,
Let us all be grateful for a land so fair,
As we raise our voices in a solemn prayer. "

God Bless America,
Land that I love.
Stand beside her, and guide her
Thru the night with a light from above.
From the mountains, to the prairies,
To the oceans, white with foam
God bless America, My home sweet home.

Edited by - Cold_Void on 11/7/2006 9:18:49 AM

I'm laughing at the delightful thought of the former Gvnr of Texas standing at the despatch box being heckled by the Opposition benches, having papers and cups thrown at him, with the bewigged Speaker desperately trying to restore order. I actually met Blair a few times at conference years ago, when he was a junior back-bencher, and I must say he is an excellent Parliamentary performer and public speaker ( to my eternal shame I was a Labour Party member from age 16 - 1980 - to 1997)

Rowdy fun though the Commons is esp at Question Time, by contrast the Lords is frightfully dull, with nary a Peer of the Realm to be seen unless there's a televised debate over some desperately important issue like "foxhunting" (yes, they turned out in force for that one!) I remember once going to the Lords and old Hailsham was fast asleep on the Woolsack; Black Rod had to wake him up at division time!

American politics is no fun at all, in comparison; they all stand there graven faced and serious when the Speaker says "Ladies and Gentlemen, the President of the United States!" - no-one boos or laughs or throws anything - very boring.



Edited by - Tawakalna on 11/7/2006 9:18:07 AM