Bonfire boys

and I'll go to bed at noon

"the DFLs, awkwardly attempting to enter into the spirit of the thing, recently founded their own society"

In other words, they're doing their best to join in and become part of the community despite your casual contempt for them. I think that speaks far better for them than it does for you.

M42

To - and I'll go to bed .

How exactly does a non DFL local gain access to this society ? Although I doubt very much that many would want to.

Peter From Maidstone

I find the way that you speak about Catholicism to be bigoted, historically inaccurate and hate-filled.

Edward Sutherland

Have your fun if you will, Mr Jones, but your knowledge of English Reformation history strikes me as somewhat limited. It might have spoilt a good story to have pointed out that the "alien creed"
espoused by Guy Fawkes was that of the majority of the English people until probably at least 1570; and that the Catholic plotters were reacting-in a grieviously wrong manner- to a persecution in their own country by their own countrymen that would lead Muslim immigrants to this country complaining of discrimination agape with amazement- if they bothered to study English history.

Noa.

I concur with Peter from Maidstone's objections.

David Lindsay

Most Catholics had no idea, and would have disapproved in the strongest possible terms. They, of course, paid the price.

daniel maris

PfM -

The Catholic establishment made numerous attempts to subvert or overthrow out nascent democracy in these isles - with a view to re-establishing totalitarian rule.

Fortunately they were all seen off.

I think we should certainly celebrate the defeat of the totalitarian plot of 5th November. In fact, I have often thought that 5th November should be made a Bank Holiday and celebrated as Democracy Day.

Heartless P.

Anything, - ANYTHING! - that recounts another spike being driven into the tyres of the 'elf 'n safety bandwagon is a pleasure to read.

SJH

I'm with Peter from Maidstone too.

I also think Nige is a bit too full of himself.

Crash

Taking exagerrated offence ought to be an olympic sport - I thought Muslims were the favourites to win but it would appear there is a strong showing from a chippy Catholic set.

Enjoyable article.

callingallcomets

I suspect Edward Sutherland and Peter from Maidstone saw the title and didn't bother to read the full piece - classic knee jerk reaction from catholic apologists.
Why don't these people accept that during this period of history terrible crimes were committed by both sides of the religious divide throughout Europe.
Persecution never was a protestant monopoly.

Simon Peter

I do feel that dressing the festival up as some anarchic, disestablishment, cheeky bit of fun is as much bowing to Political Correctness as anything else. The festival IS sectarian and racist. That's its history. By all means, observe it, but at least be honest about it!

Adam Nixon

Peter from Maidstone, Noa:

Ah you're offended? Well, please don't bother explaining your position. Just state that you're miffed and assume everyone will agree you are right to be. And that someone, somewhere, will care.

This behaviour is learned from the Politically Correct brigade.

Amanda

Well, I don't concur with Peter of Maidstone's conclusions.

In fact, I find his conclusions to be kneejerk, inattentive, and a case of projecting onto the text.

And while we're at it, it's not the writer's fault if Catholics did things in the past that you find embarrassing, compromising, sinful or ghastly. Don't expect others to whitewash your history for you: they won't.

Amanda

Ah, I see that Callingall agrees with me (the appearance of posts at least from America is usually exceedingly slow -- I wish the Spectator could speed things up a bit).

I'd just like to add that we ought to be careful about casually slurring Mississippi, while we're at it. The last time I was there, a couple of years ago, I met pleasant decent citizens of a modern liberal democracy; there were no lynchers and no people in white cloths.

fergus pickering

My daughter, in her time at the University of Brighton, used to go down to Lewes with her (green, lefty, arty, often gay) friends. She thought it was the best fireworks show she had ever been to. Burning the Pope, a white, male reactionary person, seemed lots of fun. I rather concur with her. I have not noticed that Catholics are persecuted in this country now and think they can just put up with this rather wacky show.Better burn the Pope in effigy than an immigrant surely. Not Down from London so much as Down from Brighton really

paulnewman

No I don`t accept the sanitised version that is described above. Although sectarian bigotry is absent, the political meaning of the events is very much present in what is a celebration of National independence from foreign despots and Catholicism

Malfleur

'...they parade around the town, oblivious to the Health and Safety risks...'

Bravo!

Lighten up, Peter and Noa - and defend the constitution - it is in as much danger as in 1605. This time though the Guys are on the inside pissing out.

James Thatcher

There are as many opinions of Bonfire in Lewes as there are people involved. I would like to make it clear that the 'DFL's haven't formed their own society, awkwardly or otherwise. Saying that, Lewes has seen great changes in its demographic over the last 15 years (as so many places have)- it's not surprising that many of the people marching these days don't come from generations of Bonfire families.

Cogito Ergosum

We have a never-ending battle between Merrie England and the Puritans. The detailed arguments change from one century to the next, but the underlying philosophy does not.

Merrie England would be a free people, respecting a few time-honoured laws but not subject to petty regulations. The Puritans want to impose a million regulations, all for our own good, of course.

At one time the Puritans imposed religious requirements. Nowadays it is health and safety, or green issues. Their aim is to turn England into a vast no-smoking area infested with radar traps and wheelie-bin police.

Who on earth can feel patriotism for that?

Santorum

Very funny. Is it a Craig Brown parody of a Daily Mail reading blowhard. All the lazy cliches are there: health and safety, PC, Guardianista. And some old style sectarian bigotry. Alan Partridge has a rival.

Sam

Please note, that the money collected in the tins is actually for whichever charity that particular Bonfire Society is collecting for. Money for putting on the 5th is raised by year-long fundraising and membership costs, and in some instances entrance fees to the firesites (not all are able to charge it)

Peter From Maidstone

I have read Nigel's piece. I find it hate-filled, bigoted and ignorant.

That says nothing at all about my views on Guy Fawkes, democracy or the constitution. Most of which are known by those who post here regularly.

I find it odd that many of those objecting to my post are people who have not apparently posted here before, and only have first names - usually a sign of a Labour troll.

It seems to me that the Catholic community is being placed under great pressure presently, as the attempts to spoil the visit of His Holiness revealed. They manifestly failed, but there is a still a leftist constituency which wishes harm to the Catholic Church. When I attended the service at Westminister Abbet I was struck by both the small-mindedness of those trying to spoil the event, and the genuine pleasure which so many Catholics and others were feeling.

So yes, there is a continuing effort to undermine Catholicism in this country. Nigel's attitude illustrates this. As for me, though not a Catholic, I would be very glad to see Catholicism restored to the position of majority Christian community, as it in reality already is.

Noa.

I'm surprised that some of the Spectator's supposedly intelligent and educated posters abjure Peter from Maidstone and I to provide supporting evidence and to 'lighten up',(is that supposed to be a humourous allusion to Bonefire Night?) on the distasteful anti-catholic aspects of an otherwise inconsequential but occasionally amusing post.
In the information age the full gamut of viewpoints on everything is googleable. But for an alternative view of this fun packed annual event those who wish may care to consider the following extract of the historical background to the Lewes festivities:-

"... On November 1, 1605... The cellar under Westminster was searched, cords of firewood to ignite the blast were discovered, and Fawkes, found skulking about, was arrested. The rest of the conspirators fled. The Gunpowder Plot was foiled. The core conspirators were tracked down and a number were killed in an ambush. The survivors were arrested.
It was at this point that Cecil began his campaign to recast the Gunpowder Plot as a Jesuit conspiracy, though the Jesuits in England had been outspoken against violence. Taking advantage of the paranoia after the plot was revealed, Cecil made certain that the Gunpowder Plot was not viewed as a conspiracy by a handful of fanatical Catholics. Instead, it became a vast Catholic intrigue against the throne and English Protestantism caused by "the perfidious and cursed doctrine of Rome." The Venetian ambassador described the anti-Catholic talk that was everywhere in London: "Here they attend to nothing else but great preparation for the annihilation of the Catholic religion."
After the original plotters were executed, a virtual pogrom against Catholics began, focusing on the Jesuits. ….The impact of the Gunpowder Plot on English thinking was so great that not until 1828 would Catholics be finally "emancipated" in England and allowed a full range of common English rights, including the right to vote. As a point of comparison, in America that number of years would have denied Catholics the ballot from 1776 to the incumbent candidacy of the second George Bush.

Adam Nixon

Peter from Maidstone

"I find it hate-filled, bigoted and ignorant." - Yes, we know you do. But why? Identify the hate words. Pinpoint the bigotry. Tell us what facts are wrong.

"It seems to me that the Catholic community is being placed under great pressure presently" - In what way? Apart from our last PM converting, apart from the guaranteed role of RC parties in Northern Ireland, apart from RC schools existing and often flourishing all over the country?

"The attempts to spoil the visit of His Holiness" He was invited as head of a foreign state, not head of any church.

"a leftist constituency which wishes harm to the Catholic Church" There is a rightist one, too, as you know. But then, since the RC Church threatens everlasting agony for those who disagree with it, that is not terribly surprising. Why on earth would anyone not personally convinced by such an organisation, feel warm towards it?

"... Catholicism restored to the position of majority Christian community, as it in reality already is" - I don't get this bit. If it is already the majority, how can it be resotred to the majority?

Edward Sutherland

callingallcomets: I'm surprised you felt I'd not read Mr Jones's full piece. Having passed last year the Reformation History module for my London University (not noted as a hotbed of Catholic apologetics) BD degree, I take it as given that one at least does the author the courtesy of reading his article before commenting on it. By the way, I'm a Catholic who thinks Guy Fawkes was utterly wrong in what he did, as my earlier post made clear. Catholics were subject to sustained persecution in 1605 and had been misled by the newly-crowned James I that he would alleviate their position. Once safely ensconced as king following Elizabeth I's death, he conveniently forgot this assurance. A small minority of Catholics were so angered by this that they took the terrible, misguided and indefensible steps to blow up Parliament. Irony of ironies: it was a Catholic peer, warned by an anonymous letter writer not to attend Parliament, who passed on this information to Robert Cecil, the king's chief minister. And my Catholicism has no difficulty honouring the brave Lewes Martyrs who died excruciating deaths for their deeply-held beliefs.

Nigel Jones

Thanx to all who commented on this piece - even or especially the critics.

I thought I'd reply to some points you raised. Peter from Maidstone found my 'comments about Catholicism' 'hate-filled and historically inaccurate'. But signally -as Adam Nixon points out, - failed to say why. For the record, I was trying to explain Bonfire rather then my own attitude to the Catholic Faith. I find murderous 16th century religious tolerance - involving the torture and burning of human flesh - by both Catholics and Protestants abhorrent.
Protestants were certainly guilty, but so were Catholics, and if Guy Fawkes and his ilk had not been stopped English Protestants would have shared the same fate as France's Cathars and Huguenots ie. extermination.

Edward Sutherland points out that until about 1570 England was predominantly Catholic. True, but then the Reformation took place and thereafter the majority were Protestant. (Today of course the majority are noting very much thank you). Thereafter Catholics were rightly seen as 'the enemy within ' - rather like Communists in the 1950s or Islamists today, and it is hardly surprising that there was popular fear and hatred for those who wished to subveryt their country and impose their minority views.

James Thatcher says that Lewes DFLs have not recently formed their own society. I was referring to the recently revived Southover society, which is largely composed of recent arrivals in Lewes rather than native inhabitants.

El Sid

a popular, almost pagan, folk festival which today has entirely shed its sectarian, indeed bigoted, religious roots.

Surely like all these kinds of celebratory fires at this time of year - from Hallowe'en lanterns to the torch processions in Kent and the burning tar barrels of Ottery St Mary - this is yet another example of a pagan tradition being coopted by the new religion? It's just Samhain by another name, the roots are pagan not Christian.

The Celts regarded this time of year as the start of the "dark time", when they would put out all their hearths and make a single bonfire, from which each household would start a new fire as a symbol of their togetherness as a community. So this business of DFLs having their own bonfire is nothing new, it is part of a tradition that has been going on for millennia.

Amanda

Nice to hear from Nigel Jones. I love it when writers respond to their readers. Makes us feel special! Maybe we're not, but there you are.

Interesting thing about that word 'bigoted' (used not by Mr Jones but a commenter). When you actually get it in the light it disintegrates. What, really, does it mean? Or, more specifically, does its meaning, which looks so obvious at first, tend to run away under examination?

Fire, Water, Burn

I'm a member of the Beaker people and I I find you all to be hateful, bigoted and badly dressed. I demand:
that the Beaker be restored to the majority, as in reality we already are;

as a first step the Beazer Homes League is henceforth to be known as the Beaker Homes League - human sacrifices are to take place at half time and the goalposts are to be made of welsh rock.

Peter From Maidstone

Amanda, Nigel did use the word 'bigot' which is why I used it in response. Why doesn't Nigel get his use of the word 'out in the open'?

Noa.

7.23pm Contd

Points to consider about the Gunpowder Plot:
Prior to his accession, King James I deceived Catholics about what toleration he would allow, even misleading the pope about a possible conversion. His duplicity had its own role in generating the Gunpowder Plot.
The Gunpowder Plot, although real, was not a widespread Catholic conspiracy. Most Catholics were horrified when it was discovered, knowing that it would lead to heightened persecution. That it most assuredly did—over two centuries’ worth.
The actual conspirators were a small handful of young Catholics. While it cannot be said for certain what involvement double-agents might have had in an era where men such as Robert Cecil were creating the world’s first police state in England (aimed specifically at Catholics), there were young Catholic men willing to engage in the plot, even if they were duped.
The Jesuits in England did not devise, guide, or lead the Gunpowder Plot. In fact, they tried to deter any violence based on the limited knowledge they had of the plot. The Jesuit superior in England thought he had successfully put the plot to rest.
Cecil’s attack on the Jesuits was a calculated plot against all things Catholic. His propaganda campaign was meant to show that the enemy was not limited to the conspirators in the Gunpowder Plot, but comprised the Catholic Church itself.
The Gunpowder Plot established the climate for the infusion of anti-Catholicism into every aspect of English life.
The number of Catholic urban legends created as a result of the Gunpowder Plot is legion. Standard stereotypes and canards include the conniving Jesuit, priests seducing innocent women, the sacrament of penance as a tool to "forgive" sin before the sin has been committed, Catholic plots to overthrow states, Catholics owing a secular allegiance to the papacy, Catholics as unreliable aliens—the list goes on and on.
Shortly after the Gunpowder Plot was discovered, Parliament declared that November 5 would be celebrated annually as a day of thanksgiving. It became known as "Guy Fawkes Day" and the common practice was to have bonfires and to burn the pope in effigy—a practice that continues in parts of England to this day..."
Mary may have been "a bitter bigot" but, as a Catholic, she and her fellow Catholics - the majority of the population - were traitors under her uncle Henry VIII's Act of Supremacy of 1534 declared the English crown to be 'the only supreme head on earth of the Church in England' in place of the Pope. Any act of allegiance to the latter was considered treasonous because the papacy claimed both spiritual and political power over its followers. By doing so this serial wife murderer and grand thief, megalomaniac and despot unleashed a divisive 300 year reign of terror on his own subjects the effects of which are manifest to this day.

Peter From Maidstone

Nigel, are you aware that it is estimated that Henry VIII killed 70,000+ people? That Queen Mary authorised 284 deaths? And that Queen Elizabeth and the next few Kings killed 300+ Catholics?

On what basis do you therefore single out Mary? Why were her views 'bigoted' and not those of Henry or Elizabeth or James or Charles?

Why have you not addressed the fact that the Gunpowder Plot was deliberately linked to Catholicism and to the Jesuits in particular when it had nothing to do with the wider constituency?

You seem ignorant of the fact that the Reformation was forcefully resisted by the majority of English people but was imposed by a small metropolitan elite. The sympathy of the people remained Catholic. Have you read 'The Stripping of the Altars'?

The propaganda against and persecution of Catholics which developed in England was entirely deliberate. Here in Maidstone the local Catholic community found that every time they wanted to buy a property to create a Church it would be bought up by a Protestant. This was as the metropolitan elite wished it to be.

So your ignorance is manifest in the manner in which you present Catholicism as something foreign to English culture, when in fact it is the foundation of our Christian heritage. You do not describe at all the fact that the restoration of Catholicism under Queen Mary was welcomed by most people who had not become Protestant. And you do not illustrate the fact that many more people were killed by other monarchs, and that Catholics were still being tortured to death for a hundred years after Mary.

Noa.

Nigel Jones

I agree with Amanda's view that its good when authors reply to their critics. However some basic research would have established that the English Reformation commenced well before the 1570's!
Nor is your view that thereafter the majority of people protestant correct.
Your view that the Catholics were 'rightly seen as the enemy within' and would have exterminated all protestants is of course as risible and plain wrong as the counter-argument that the protestants would have do the same to catholics.

To compare English catholics, who were after all native and practised the single faith of the land with Islamic fundamentalist immigrants is inapt, inept and insulting.

Better perhaps in this instance if you had keep silence and let us think you were foolish rather than proving it.
You have I'm afraid, been the unwitting victim of extremely successful political spin by Robert Cecil,James I's very own Alastair Campbell.

Nigel Jones

"@Peter from Maidstone.

'Are you aware that it is estimated that Henry VIII killed 70,000+ people' you ask. Well, I'm a historian, so I ought to be. I am also aware that Henry died - as he lived - a Catholic. (Difficult for you to get your head around, perhaps). And that for his hostility to Lutheranism the Pope awarded him the title 'Defender of the Faith' which our monarchs bear to this day. A large portion of the 70,000 victims of his murderous Stalinoid paranoia were Protestants. Eg. Anne Askew, the only woman to be racked before her execution by burning

I think that the peculiar horror engendered by Bloody Mary's persecutions was the manner of death - burning at the stake, which was generally seen as an un-English foreign import first used against proto-Protestants, the Lollards, in the reign of Henry V.

When you start tossing accusations of 'ignorance' around with such blithe abandon Peter, it might be better to attend to the beam in your own eye rather than the mote in mine. That's a Biblical quote, by the way, if your Church allows you to read it in the vernacular these days - they didn't in the 16th century which was one root cause of the whole Reformation.

I really think that you will have to accept that the Reformation was a long overdue popular upheaval in a corrupt Church, and was therefore a Europe-wide phenomenon, not confined to rapacious English Mercantile Protestant pirates as you appear to believe.

PayDirt

B off Peter of Maidwhereever, Orthodox Christainity is the true faith.

Peter From Maidstone

Paydirt, I am not sure what you mean? Since I am an Orthodox Christian I am well aware that Orthodoxy is the fulness of the Christian Faith. But I have a great sympathy for and appreciation of the Catholic Church.

Peter From Maidstone

The Protestant Reformation was much more properly a Protestant Revolution. And it required a great deal of bloodshed, and threats of violence to achieve it on the part of a small metropolitan clique close to the King.

I have long considered that this illustrates how it is possible for a similar metropolitan clique to attempt a similar social revolution introducing Islam and Political Correctness as the new 'Reformed' religion. We have had a decade of being afraid of speaking out - much as the Catholics did under Henry. And if we do not resist then the same process will take place and it will seem to future generations that it is we who were out of step, unwilling to become an Islamic republic with a minority White population.

Peter Treadwell

It is truly fabulous to see Christianity used as a reason for squabbling and getting all cross about things, slinging insults around and taking umbrage. So much for brotherly love and forgiveness, so much for humility, too. Still, it's better than killing and torturing people, which Christianity has spent so much of its history busy at.

Nigel Jones

@ Noa: I cannot be the only CH poster to have noticed that whereas most who Blog here adhere to polite discourse when arguing their corner, the two who do not and spray insults around with abandon are you and Peter from Maidstone, obviously ardent Roman Catholics both.

Do you not feel that this abuse may, ahem, detract from the worth of your points and suggest that you are a little insecure in your own dogmas?

A little wearily I take up your points: the date 1570 came not from me but from your co-relgionist Edward Sutherland. Of course I am aware that the Reformation began much earlier, some would say as early as the reign of Richard II with John Ball's role in the Peasant's revolt.

One has only to examine the history of the Reformation in France, or Spain, or the Dutch republic, or Germany in the 30 years War, to realise that Protestant fears of extermination by Catholics were far from 'risible' as you say and were a perfectly realistic appraisal of what would happen in England had Catholics succeeded in regaining their control.

In France the majority native Catholics exterminated the Protestant Huguenots with the utmost brutality and violence - cf. the St Bartholemews Eve massacre of 1569 and the revocation of the tolerant Edict of Nantes. The same happened to Protestants in Spain, and would have happened in Holland and Germany had not the Protestants physically resisted in Arms.

Catholics in England made repeated attempts to assassinate Elizabeth I and restore their faith, with the blessing of Jesuit Missionary priests so these protestations of Jesuit innocence you make can be utterly discounted.

I am not going to make insulting remarks about the depths of your historical ignorance as it speaks for itself.

Noa.

Nigel Jones

"Do you not feel that this abuse may, ahem, detract from the worth of your points and suggest that you are a little insecure in your own dogmas?..."

That is the basis of my objections to your post. You used the term 'bigot' without any qualification or reference to context and to a historical background with which you claim familiarity but which is subjective, offensive and biased.

The weariness is mine, having been brought up as an English catholic, I have experienced a lifetime of similar ignorance, factual inaccuracy, prejudice and discrimination from my fellow Englishmen.

Noa.

Nigel Jones

"..you and Peter from Maidstone, obviously ardent Roman Catholics both..."

Wearisomely assuming, but a habit of yours I notice and plain wrong again Sir!

Peter from Maidstone has stated that he is an Orthodox christian and for the avoidance of doubt I am a non practicing English Roman Catholic.

We have both, upon request of fellow posters provided facts and detailed arguments to substantiate our objections to your post and I have have no doubt that few objective readers would consider your reply to be a convincing rebuttal of the various matters raised.

Edward Sutherland

Nigel Jones: re my reference to 1570 as the date around about which England ceased to be predominantly Catholic, I am afraid it was you who caused confusion by commenting "and then came the Reformation". As "any fule kno" (Molesworth, N) the Henrician and Edwardine reformations, and the Elizabethan settlement, took place much earlier. There was clearly a time lapse between these reformations and England ceasing to be a predominantly Catholic country. Some historians would place the date even later than 1570.

PayDirt

Peter of M, apologies; I had taken your comment about Catholicism being "the foundation of our Christian heritage" somewhat out of your context.

Adam Nixon

Catholics killing protestants, protestants killing catholics. It's what they do. Is there anything to be gained from "Your lot were even more savage than our lot" catcalls? I think not. Fortunately, most Christians in our part of the world recently abjured the violence that characterised their predecessors' value system.

As regards the article that kicked the debate off, well, obviously it was written from the point of view of the protestant victors. They saw Fawkes et al as highly dangerous traitors, which is exactly what they were. They saw the RC church as eager to regain worldly power in England, which it was. They responded accordingly. The intimate religious convictions of contributors are completely irrelevant to this.

Raffles

Well i have learnt a fair bit this morning following this thread. Not often i disagree with Peter from M and even less so with the estimable Noa but i would have to award it to Nigel J on points. Please dont take umbrage genetlemen, i enjoyed the joust and i can assure you i am completely neutral in the matter of Protestantism and Catholicism but i think you both saw insult where there was none intended. Entirely your prerogative of course and please keep up your interesting contributions to Coffee House.

Noa.

Adam Nixon November 7th, 2011 12:43pm

The intimate religious convictions of contributors are completely irrelevant to this.

If that is so why did you repeatedly request detailed of poster objections?

If Nigel Jones' original post represents the protestant winners point of view should it, together with its various and subsequent factual inaccuracies, go unchallenged also?

The various objections are factual and, where necessary, interpretational whereas your views are, in defiance of your own demands for evidence, merely your own unsubstantiated opinion.

such Are th

Amanda

Gosh, there was Nigel trying to tell us about a fun and innocent festival of our day, and instead he lit a bonfire of his own.

Noa: I hope that when you fell asleep and the glass slipped from your hand, you didn't lose too much of the good stuff.

Noa.

Amanda

Bless you for your concern dear girl!

Amanda

Noa: Glad you enjoyed your 5th of November, some way, some how.

I am never casual about this particular gift of the ... gods? Shall we just wink and say Bacchus. Broke a glass recently, my hand swept it off the table when I was looking at the music player -- lovely Burgundy goblet (my favourite), but the waste of wine was worse.

Adam Nixon

Noa.: "why did you repeatedly request detailed of poster objections?"

Because I couldn't work out what on earth you were so upset by. To be honest, I still can't. Again, your intimate convictions are irrelevant.

Errors of fact in the article? Haven't spotted any. Unless you believe that every article about the religious killers should always, without exception, point out that both sides were sadistic savages. That is not unsubstantiated opinion. You probably learned it at primary school.

Peter Treadwell

there is a difference between the RC torturers and murderers and the protestant ones. Protestants can look back in horror at the deeds of their predecessors. RCs have to accept that burning people alive (after racking them, blinding them, skinning them, breaking their bones etc.) it was done with the consent of the infallible pope and, therefore, was right.

Amanda

I notice that the astute gentleman with the nice name (above) meticulously gives Noa his dot at the end. The full stop suggests (indicates?) an abbreviation. So what's the full name -- Noaddress? Or are you telling us you worked for the National Weather Service (NOAA)? Or perhaps you're confirming that you are not Hawaiian (Noa means 'free' and 'freedom')? Or perhaps you are making a statement in Japanese ('Noa'= 'From love'). Or is your name really Noahjehosephat Ichabod Smith?

Noa.

Adam Nixon
Thank you for that view. I have no intimate convictions,just a less than sanguine view of the article and its underlying suppositions. Perhaps I was unduly harsh to consider it bigoted hate filled. Over seasoned perhaps, but not filled.

As to accuracy: “...In historical fact he was racked in the Tower and then hanged rather than burnt, but let that pass)…"
Or perhaps not. As he threw himself off the scaffold ladder and broke his neck he hanged himself. Dismemberment still took place with the body distributed around the country though.

I'm sure you and other interested bloggers knew that, but I wonder how many of the Lewes revellers did, especially the catholics and Greens? Not too many, I suspect.

Still, enough! No more posts from me on this matter, considering the bonefire fatigue now being suffered by our fellow CHrs we must put burning effigies away for another 362 days.
After all the Speccies own spinners conjure new demons daily for that purpose.

Adam Nixon

Noa.

Thank you for your gentlemanliness in retracting your barbed remark. Thank you also for the fact, which I didn't know.

Noa.

Amanda

Why lass, would you strip away all my secrets!?
But the Ark, and the totality of its contents, may be a clue.

There's a local legend that it really landed on nearby Pendle Hill, but I've never believed that one myself, quite, except after a few pints of Witches Brew...

I like that Hawaiian definition though, quite outre and very Speccie!

Amanda

Noa. I see. But I did think Noah was spelled with an H. Who knew that a full stop could be substituted?

I love being called lass. Reminds me of my boyfriend of about 1000 years ago, who was riggish and played the bagpipes and winked at me. Sigh.