Happy Families: the Tsars

Today, in 1801, Tsar Paul I of Russia died. Poor Paul did not have a very good life at all. I mean, don't get me wrong, he was the most powerful man in Russia for a time, so clearly he wasn't, you know, the most hard done by person on the planet. But he didn't have the easiest time of it, either.

He was the son of Catherine the Great and Grand Duke Peter. Except, he wasn't. Maybe In her memoirs, his mother strongly implied that he was the product of a relationship with one of her lovers. But his mother hated him, and wanted to cast doubt on his claim to the throne, so this, combined with his physical resemblance to his father, suggest that he actually was Peter's son. Regardless of which claim is true, the fact that this was discussed around him from an early age can't have done him much good really.

In 1764, when he was a mere 10 years old, Lord Buckingham, who was the British Ambassador at the Russian court, suggested that his mother would have had him killed if she wasn't afraid of the social consequences of being implicated in a murder. Again, the story has no clear basis in fact, but the rumors circulated wildly, and it is likely that Paul at least heard of them, even if he did not believe them.

Catherine's actions - whether true or not - do seem to have had some effect on him. When he was 16, he started suspecting that his mother was trying to kill him, and once openly accused her of filling his food with broken glass. Once he was old enough, Catherine ensured that he was married off and sent to live in various parts of the realm far away from her. She openly insulted him in front of her favourites when he was at court, and encouraged them to do the same, as well as lavishing luxurious gifts on them whilst ignoring her own son. 

Once his wife had given birth to a son - later to become Alexander I - Catherine was determined to exclude Paul from the line of succession. For this reason, when she eventually did die in 1796, Paul immediately seized control and demanded that any documents which stated that he was to be cut out of the line to the throne be destroyed.

Years of living in his mother's shadow had not prepared him well for rule, and he proved an inadequate monarch over his short five year reign. He was far too concerned with the possibility of his own assassination, and, whilst most people wrote off his crazy conspiracy theories as just that, he did at least have the satisfaction of eventually proving them wrong.

Or he would have, had he lived. Which, after being attacked with a sword, then strangled, then finally trampled to death in his bedroom, he did not. Poor Paul.   

Which would you rather Feminist edition

Hello. Today is celebrate your ladyparts day International Women's Day. This is exciting, non? I think so. There is a lot of stuff out there about celebrating the achievements of various women and, alternatively, criticizing countries and regimes which subjugate women. Having read some of this over the past few days, I started to be very glad that I am living where I am, but also when I am. I'm fortunate, I thought, that I live in the 21st century, where, at least in the UK, I am treated as a human being with human rights. So much better, I thought, than in Ye Olden Days.

Until I started reading this book. It's very interesting, as well as that rare sort of History book which is highly informative and well researched, but also fascinating for someone who only has a small interest in History. Written as a travel guide, it's literally like reading about visiting Spain, or China, or Mars for that matter. Anyway, in this book (which I'm not getting paid for the advertising of, honestly), the author talks about the rights of women in fourteenth century England.

In some ways, as people - myself included - it is very much a misogynistic society, with women controlled by men and no one wanting to change this as it is clearly God's will, as punishment for Eve's sins. Lack of understanding about general medicine meant that a lot of women died in childbirth, and as the general life expectancy was lower, women were often married at around the age of 14, quite shocking to us today. Furthermore, though rape was an extremely serious offense, it was extremely rare that a man was convicted, as it was taught that women could only conceive a child if she orgasmed during sex. If a child was conceived, she had clearly orgasmed, thus "enjoyed" the rape, and so it wasn't rape. Alternatively, if no child was conceived, there was no proof that the rape had taken place other than the woman's word, which, especially against a man in a position of power over her, was not likely to be believed.

Though forced marriages were fairly rare, they did still occur and must have been awful for the women who suffered through them. Women were also not considered free as such - even a high society woman 'belonged' to her father before she was married, then to her husband afterward.

Phew, you think, I'm glad I live now and not then.

Well, yes and no. Obviously there were huge inequalities in society, but there were some ways in which women did manage to have fairly equal opportunities. For example, women were allowed to report abusive husbands in their local church, and the men were often punished severely for their actions. Men on the other hand, were not allowed to report any violence against them by women, as if they did so, they would be perceived as a cuckold and therefore ridiculed. A backhanded reason for celebration, perhaps.

Another way in which women were more equal than we might first think was that, in the event of their husbands' death, she could take over his job or trade and make money for herself this way. For most women, this just meant continuing to farm the same fields or sell meat in a butcher's shop, but for a few notable exceptions this could leave them very rich - such as one woman from Coventry who ended up with a cloth business that was exporting its wares as far afield as Spain and earning her in excess of £800 in Medieval terms. 

Though there were a lot of arranged marriages, often men and women worked together to try hard to make it work and most came to love each other after a little while. If not, especially in the upper classes, one or both partners could take partners whom they loved - or at least lusted after.Women had the advantage of not being allowed to go to fight, and as there were a lot of wars going on during the 14th century, it greatly reduced their chance of dying whilst still young. Men who lived to an old age were looked down upon, unable to fight, they were considered no longer masculine. An old woman, on the other hand, was considered at the height of her power, full of the wisdom of the ages. 

Clearly, there was inequality in the Medieval society, and probably more so than there is in today's society in the UK. But conditions were perhaps not as harsh as one might first think, and though I still wouldn't want to live in their society, this is starting to have more to do with the large amounts of germs flying about with the Black Death and whatnot, rather than their treatment of women.  

Robert Hooke is better than you

Today marks 308 years since the death of Robert Hooke, whom I know of because of having to learn Hooke's Law for AS Physics. (The extension of a spring is proportional to the force or load applied to it, or F = ke if you were wondering.) ((I know you weren't.)) Anyway, I thought he was just that bloke who did that thing with bits of wire or whatever it was that I knew at one point but now I just vaguely recall was important somehow. But he totally wasn't! Robert Hooke did lots of things; and here's a lovely list of his top ten achievements, chosen by me:

1) Being the last of four children living on the Isle of Wight, Hooke obviously wasn't in a position to go very far in life - or so it seemed. He took 20 lessons on the organ, however, and gained a chorister's place at Christ Church, Oxford, where he was introduced to many of the leading scientific thinkers of his day.

2) Hooke was one of the very first people to use a microscope to see cells (in cork, apparently), and so gave them the name 'cell', because he believed that they resembled the small quarters monks lived in.

3) He invented the balance spring in a watch independently and fifteen years before anyone else did (though others get the credit mainly because he was didn't patent his design).

4) He was an extremely talented artist - the picture on the right is a copy of his drawing of a louse - who drew pictures of anything he could find to stick under his microscope. 

5) He built a lot of specialized equipment for himself and other prominent scientists of the day to use when experimenting, one of the most famous examples being his invention of the vacuum pumps Robert Boyle used during his gas law experiments.

6) He was a well-known architect of his day, with building all over London being made to his specifications (though sadly few survive today).

7) He also built some of the first telescopes, and used them to study the planets, becoming an expert on the rotations of Mars and Jupiter.

8) After the Great Fire of London, in 1666, Hooke was asked to be one of the city's official Surveyors, tasked with assessing the damage caused by the fire, and the cost of repairs - an important job, given that 70,000 of the city's 80,000 inhabitants had their homes at least partially destroyed.

9) He was one of the first people to put forward an argument for biological evolution from looking at fossils - a very risky argument in the seventeenth century, given the status of the church.

10) Hooke argued with Isaac Newton about laws of gravity. And not many people can say that.