text:
Subscribe here to receive our latest monthly issue.
Archives Selecionar o mês janeiro 2020 (12) dezembro 2019 (18) novembro 2019 (20) outubro 2019 (20) setembro 2019 (22) agosto 2019 (22) julho 2019 (15) junho 2019 (20) maio 2019 (18) abril 2019 (14) março 2019 (16) fevereiro 2019 (20) janeiro 2019 (18) dezembro 2018 (12) novembro 2018 (26) outubro 2018 (29) setembro 2018 (20) agosto 2018 (21) julho 2018 (20) junho 2018 (18) maio 2018 (19) abril 2018 (18) março 2018 (21) fevereiro 2018 (20) janeiro 2018 (23) dezembro 2017 (19) novembro 2017 (43) outubro 2017 (30) setembro 2017 (30) agosto 2017 (24) julho 2017 (24) junho 2017 (35) maio 2017 (30) abril 2017 (28) março 2017 (27) fevereiro 2017 (28) janeiro 2017 (24) dezembro 2016 (25) novembro 2016 (27) outubro 2016 (31) setembro 2016 (21) agosto 2016 (23) julho 2016 (27) junho 2016 (16) maio 2016 (21) abril 2016 (21) março 2016 (21) fevereiro 2016 (33) janeiro 2016 (17) dezembro 2015 (14) novembro 2015 (20) outubro 2015 (19) setembro 2015 (1) janeiro 2015 (1)
Felix Duque: Remnants of Hegel: Remains of Ontology, Religion and Community
Título: Remnants of Hegel: Remains of Ontology, Religion, and Community
Series: SUNY series in Contemporary Continental Philosophy
Autor: Félix Duque. Translated by Nicholas Walker
Publisher: SUNY Press
Reviewed by: Oded Balaban (Dept. of Philosophy, University of Haifa, Israel)
Felix Duque is arguably the most important living philosopher in the Spanish-speaking world. Remnants of Hegel is the first book translated into English. It is not a mere interpretation of Hegel, but rather a critical study that attempts to drive the aspects of its subject matter toward their ultimate consequences using Hegelian criteria. In other words, if Hegel's philosophy is a critique of Kant's critical philosophy, then Duque's exposition is a critique of Hegelian philosophy. Furthermore, and just as Hegel develops Kantian categories in order to reveal a truth that goes beyond Kant, Duque develops Hegelian concepts in order to deduce a truth that transcends them. Indeed, Duque says that "The Hegelian system, impressive as it is, ultimately reveals itself as a miscarried attempt to reconcile nature and theory, individuality and collective praxis" (Duque, x).
Moreover, I should begin my review by noting that the book is clearly written for readers who are well acquainted with Hegel's philosophy. In this respect, my review will attempt to overcome this difficulty by limiting itself to a reading that makes it accessible to those who are not conversant with this philosophy.
The book itself contains five chapters:
Chapter I: Substrate and Subject (Hegel in the aftermath of Aristotle). This chapter is concerned with the famous expression made in the preface to the Phenomenology of Spirit: "According to my view of things, which can be justified through the exposition of the system itself, everything depends on apprehending and expressing the true not as [nicht als] substance, but just as much [eben so sehr] as subject" (Duque, 17).
Chapter II: Hegel on the Death of Christ, is a discussion that seeks to analyze the transition from nature to society, or, rather, the transition from a natural human being to a historical being, and to a being having a second nature, which is the political life of man, a transition which is made possible by the understanding of society and politics as a higher level of self-consciousness.
Chapter III: Death Is a Gulp of Water. This chapter is concerned with terror in World History. More specifically, it is a critical exposition of Hegel's idea of revolution and terror which primarily refers to the French Revolution. The politics of terror, the chapter argues, is the necessary result of trying to implement the revolution without mediations, that is, directly and as an abstract revolution (Duque, 83). Here Duque does not limit himself to an analysis of Hegel and his time, but also deals with its historical reception by the likes of Communism and Stalinism in the twentieth century. Such an idea of terror does much to radically undervalue the value of life and also makes us remember Hanna Arendt's Banality of Evil. Indeed, terror is, paradoxically, a result of the French Revolution in its historical imagining of Napoleon, namely, the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity as mediated by his political force appearing as the opposite of those values' true essence.
Chapter IV: Person, Freedom, and Community is an analysis of the last chapter of Hegel's Science of Logic which is concerned with the notion of the absolute idea. It is an essential problem to understanding the book as a whole since Hegel begins and ends the book by praising this notion rather than explaining or developing it.
Chapter V: The Errancy of Reason. This chapter summarizes the previous chapters and engages in a holistic critical analysis of the topics discussed.
I would now wish to develop some ideas on Hegel inspired by reading Duque's work and by my own understanding of Hegel's philosophy.
Hegel's logic is not normative. Unlike formal logic, which determines how we should think and not how we actually think, Hegel's Science of Logic, proceeds in the opposite direction by studying thought as it is as well as its development from the most abstract stage (the thought of pure being without further determinations) to the most concrete, this being the absolute idea as the unit of theoretical and practical thinking. Duque's interpretation adopts this principle, and unlike the interpretations offered by Alexandre Kojève and many others, asserts that it should be taken literally, that is, by not trying to correct the author in order to understand him! Understanding by correcting makes the original a tabula rasa since it allows the interpreter to introduce any idea as it occurs to her or him to the work in the belief that it is an interpretation, while it is actually a creation of her or his own mind.
Hegel's Logic is a reflective study of the concept. In Duque's words, "the entire Logic is nothing but a relentless attempt to furnish a conscious and deliberate reconstruction of fugitive and fleeting linguistic forms and determinations." (Duque, ix). The terms in his Logic do not have the fixity that they have in formal logic (both classical and modern), but their meaning varies according to the context, and especially according to the level in which the study is developed. Hegel perceives only the term, the word, as fixed, but not the concept or content that is expressed through words.
Hegel's logic attempts to solve the classic problem of Aristotelian logic, in which "to say what something in the last instance really is, its ultimate logos, amounts to affirming all the affections, properties, and determinations of that thing" (Duque, 4). Hegel, however, is not successful in resolving this difficulty despite believing he is.
Hegel suggests that thought and reality, as well as mind and world, are inseparable in the sense that their meaning undergoes constant change and construction with respect to the conceptual level and context in which it takes place. A concept's level of abstraction or concreteness thus simultaneously determines the degree of reality to which it refers. Put differently, this reading suggests that the Science of Logic ultimately serves as an ontological proof which not only proves the existence of God but also the existence of every concept subjected to actual thought. In other words, if I really believe in the concept of having a hundred thalers in my pocket, and not merely imagining them, then the hundred thalers become real and become part of my patrimony. I thus either have them in my pocket or, alternately, owe them and am obliged to pay them. This is not the case with Kant, since he merely imagines them, that is to say, recognizes from the very outset that they are not real thalers. This, in turn, is the difference between abstract and concrete concepts.
The process of concretion is clearly explained in the "logic of the judgment" discussion in the third part of Science of Logic, which is nothing but logic from the perspective of the relationship between the two essential components of judgment—subject and predicate. Thus, every judgment announces that the subject is the predicate. More explicitly, the subject of the judgment is the entity whose identity is being subjected to inquiry, and the answer is offered by all the predicates that refer to that subject. Each predicate thus changes the meaning of the subject, and, in reality, amplifies its meaning. In this respect, a subject is enriched by having more predicates attributed to it – as each of the latter forms another subject with other questions. In other words, to think is – formally – to pass from the subject, which functions as what is unknown and in need of becoming known, to the predicate, which functions as what is known and therefore as what bestows knowledge and meaning on the subject. It is thus a relation between a bearer of meaning (the subject) and a meaning (the predicate).
However, this relationship occurs within the frame of another relationship that occurs in the same intentional field. It is the relation (entirely unlike that of subject and predicate) between subject and object. Despite their difference, subject-predicate and subject-object relations cannot be separated but only distinguished. In effect, when the thought passes from the subject to the predicate, it does not consider the predicate (that is to say, it does not think about grammar) but its content, that is, the object or, rather, something that acquires the status of an object. The subject thus objectifies the target of though by means of predication. In the case of philosophy, that is to say, thinking about thinking, thought passes to something else, to what is being thought about, namely the object. And what is an object if not something that stands in front of the subject as a correlative to the subject? Hegel indeed argued that the object possesses nothing more than this relational character. The object is thus what was thought about by the subject. It is the entire universe existing insofar as it is the content of thought. There is no other universe. However, it is not the thought of my individual reflection. It is ultimately a universal reflection, and Hegel goes so far as to maintain that everything is Spirit ("There is nothing at hand that is wholly alien to spirit" (Hegel, Encyclopedia § 377, note, quoted by Duque, 38).
The Spirit is the objectification of subjectivity, the whole universe as thought of, a conceptualized universe, insofar as another does not replace it. But if something else remains, it is the task of thought to appropriate it, that is, as we said, to conceptualize it and thus imbue it with reality. This, in turn, is the secret of the coincidence of logic and metaphysics.
Thus, it turns out that the object is the complete expression of the subject. A strange reflection indeed. Fully aware of being a reflection and its denial at the same time—because it always returns to thinking about the object when it is supposed to be thinking about thinking about the object.
Hegel nonetheless moves backward. He rethinks the thought, concentrating not on content but on the fact of thinking about it. Hegel and his readers believed that they were thinking about Being when they were actually thinking about Essence; they thought they were thinking about Essence, and they were actually thinking about Concept! That is to say, Hegel was not concerned with a question of being but with the concept of being. It was not a question of essence but of the concept of essence, and it was not about concept but about the concept of concept. Hegel and his readers believed that they were thinking about substance when they were actually thinking about themselves—about the subject. Duque is therefore right in saying that all this does not mean we are solely concerned with thinking about substance, but also about the subject. This is because the substance is not even the truth, although it is a reflection, but this is a reflection that lacks reflection, or that does not know that it is a reflection. In other words, we are ultimately concerned with a subject thinking about itself.
The culmination of this backwards-advancing reflection is the Absolute Idea, which also serves as the culmination of subjectivity in the Subjective Logic (the third and last part of the Science of Logic). This must not be forgotten, as must the assertion that Hegel's thought cannot migrate to another sphere, or does not enter it because Hegel does not need it, although he promises to explain something new, viz. the content of the Absolute Idea. But it is precisely here, at the end of the Science of Logic, that Hegel begins being poetic and stops being philosophical: he offers pure promises without any fulfillment. Such is the end of the great Science of Logic despite its colossality. Duque, in turn, ascribes a great deal of importance to this abrupt end in Hegel's Logic. When the Absolute Idea is reached, according to Duque, "Everything else [Alles Übrige] is error, obscurity, struggle, caprice, and transience [Vergänglichkeit]." (Hegel, Science of Logic, quoted by Duque, 38). Is it not the case that everything should be included in the Absolute Spirit? Is the whole path unnecessary, as is the case of the ladder for the young Wittgenstein? This would go against the spirit of Hegel's philosophy no less than his own assertion about error, obscurity, etc.
The Absolute Idea, then, does not fulfill Hegel's intention. The universal absolute should deduce the individual in her or his singularity from itself because the individual is absolutely relational. It is a being that includes what is not her or him in itself, as well as what is other than itself, as the determinant of what it is. In other words, it is a concrete individuality understandable in its concrete universality. This is especially apparent when we think of the individual as a social being. If we take away all of the individual's "environment" and context, namely, every socially shared issue and every general feature including language and clothing it will remain, contrary to what could be expected, an abstract individual: Just as when attempting to isolate the individual in order to understand it in her or his singularity, nothing remains and the very individual disappears. This, in turn, means that individuals are wholly social, that is, totally relational. This does not, however, imply that the individual is not individual, but that this is what it consists of: The more singular the individual, the more dependent she or he is on her or his network of relationships. Thus, the more relationships the individual has, the more individual she or he becomes.
When the individual denies her or his otherness, as in the case of the worker or the slave in Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit, she or he not only denies the other but it denies her or himself when alienating her or himself from her or his other because that other is her or his own other, not an abstract, isolated other. Thus, the more she or he is social, the more individual she or he becomes. The more she or he has relations to and dependencies on other individuals, the more she or he is a concrete singularity, a singularity determined by its relationships. This is entirely unlike the Aristotelian relations of genera and species, where the individual is obtained through isolation. The Aristotelian individual is obtained by excluding all difference. In Hegel the opposite is true: the more a thing includes the differentiated as differentiated in itself, the more individual it becomes. History is thus a process of socialization which is – in actual fact – a process of individuation. In Aristotelian logic, intension and extension are opposed: the greater the intension, the smaller the extension; the greater the definition, the smaller the subsumed individual(s). In Hegel, there is no such opposition. The individual is more social the more determined she or he is and the more she or he includes the other. Hegelian logic is not, however, intended as an alternative logic to Aristotelian logic, but rather as the self-consciousness of the Aristotelian logic as well as its inner development and evolution. Formal logic is thus a stage that the spirit must pass through in order to be finally be criticized by consciousness, as it is in the Logic of Essence, the second part of the Science of Logic, which engages in the critique of the "laws" of identity, non-contradiction, and the excluded middle.
I will now turn to the relationships between substance and subject. According to Aristotle, a substance is that which is neither said of a subject nor in a subject, namely, it is not a predicate as predicates are said about a substance (individuals, like this individual man or this statue). However, entities which say what a substance is are "secondary" substances, genera and species, that can be also subjects as well as predicates and are always general and never individual. However, saying what an individual is, has the genera and species as an answer, something that is not individual. The individual man belongs to a species, man, and an animal is a genus of that species. Thus, both man and animal are considered secondary substances. In this respect, Duque rightfully claims that the Aristotelian definition of substance as a negative definition arises from the impossibility of saying what it is without making it into something other than what it is. In other words, predicates will always betray their original intention since they cannot be individuals.
If there is something that is neither said of a subject nor exists in a subject, this is obviously because it is itself the subject, as Aristotle himself concedes: "All the other things are either said of the primary substances as subjects or in them as subjects" (Aristotle, Categories, 2a, 34–35, quoted by Duque, 6). Duque then proceeds to state:
Yet secondary substance does not exist of itself, unless it is given with primary substance. We are evidently confronted with a certain inversion here, with an irresolvable chiasmus: that which is first in the order of being is second in the order of logical discourse, and vice versa." (Duque, 7)
The substance is for Aristotle the being of the being, and it is the fixed (permanent) side of change, something that does not change as things change. As a being of being it has a double function, meaning that it has two meanings in the sense that it is both the essence of the being and the being of the essence.
As the essence of being, the substance is the determinate being, the nature of the necessary being: the man as a two-legged animal. As the being of the essence it is the two-legged animal as this individual man.
This is a duality that Aristotle did not manage to resolve. When Aristotle says that the substance is expressed in the definition and that only the substance has a true definition, the substance is understood as the essence of the being, as that which reason can understand. But when, on the contrary, he declares that the essence is identical to determinate reality, as beauty exists only in what is beauty, Aristotle understands the substance as the being of the essence, and as a principle that offers necessary existence to the nature of a thing.
As the essence of being, the substance is the form of things and bestows unity on the elements that make up the whole where the whole is a distinct proper nature unlike its component elements. Aristotle refers to the form of material things as a species, and species is, therefore, its substance. As the being of the essence, the substance is the substrate: that about which any other thing is predicated but that cannot be a predicate of anything else. And as the substrate it is matter, a reality without any determination other than a potentiality. As the essence of being, the substance is the concept or logos that has neither generation nor corruption, that does not become but is this or that thing. As the being of essence, the substance is the composition, namely, the unity of concept (or form) with matter—the existing thing. In this sense, the substance comes to being and comes to its end.
As the essence of being, the substance is the principle of intelligibility of the being itself. In this sense, it is the stable and necessary element on which science is founded. According to Aristotle, there is no other science than that which is necessary, whereas the knowledge of what can or cannot be is rather an opinion. Substance is thus, objectively, the being of the essence and the necessary reality, and subjectively the essence of being, as necessary rationality. In short, the distinction Aristotle makes between primary substances (0ρώται οὐσίαι) and secondary substances (δεύτεραι οὐσίαι) consists of understanding the former as physical individuals and the latter as species (τά εἴδεα) and genera (τά γένη) of those individuals (Aristotle, Categories, 2a14).
In Hegel, on the other hand, the substance is the principle from which the individual is deduced. He argues for the primacy of the universal and the primacy of substance over the individual. Unlike with Aristotle, the universal is the principle of individuation, so that the individual has no meaning without the universal. This, in turn, is the basis on which his understanding of truth as substance but also as subject can be understood. Duque contends that "primary substance is entirely subsumed in secondary substance, or in universality. But this universality is indeed concrete since it bears and holds all particularity and all individuality within itself. It is concrete, but it does not yet know that it is." (Duque, 2018, 24). Namely, it doesn't know that it is also a subject.
The intentional character of the subject, as it is understood in self-consciousness, means the understanding of the subject as the one that externalizes itself and then internalizes what was rejected, that is, that understands that this is its way of acting. It also means that being is ultimately recognized in reflection as a first instance, that is, as thinking. Substance is itself thinking, though not recognized as such. Ultimately, therefore, subject is a synthesis of self-consciousness and objectivity.
In judgment, when the subject moves toward the predicate, when it is objectified and when, in subsequent reflection, discovers that it returns to itself (since the predicate is predicated from the subject), then the subject ends up enriched with what the predicate attributes to it.
This, in turn, allows us to understand the controversial and somehow obscure dictum in the 1806 preface to the Phenomenology of Spirit:
According to my view of things, which can be justified through the exposition of the system itself, everything depends on apprehending and expressing the true not as [nicht als] substance, but just as much [eben so sehr] as subject (quoted by Duque, 17)
Hegel therefore contends that self-consciousness is externalized and thus becomes an object. But this posited object is itself the very subject that has been placed as another, thus appearing as an opposite to itself: it knows itself knowing the other.
And this happens because that object is not, as it were, a natural object, a given, but an object created or engendered (like any object, according to Hegel) by self-consciousness. They are, then, two momenta, that of subjectivity (being-for-itself) and that of objectivity (being-in-itself). In reality, however, they are not merely two momenta, but a single reality split into two momenta that are only true in their opposition and in their unity. For subjectivity does not become true if it is not objective and true objectivity cannot be natural but only produced by human endeavor (in the broad sense of the word). This is why the fact that men, at one point in history, had subjected other men to work, to externalize themselves, to produce objects out of themselves, and thus transform a given natural environment into a human environment, is a necessary step in human development, as this is a human creation, an elevation above the natural.
A misreading, according to Duque, is to believe that the substance is not true as if the subject has nothing to do with the substance (or mutatis mutandis, a misreading that believes that freedom has nothing to do with necessity). Just as reason does not exist without understanding, subject does not exist without substance. The subject is thus the conceptual understanding of the substance and the consciousness of necessity. Put differently, it is a continuation of Spinozism taken to its logical extreme.
Publicado em 03 de junho de 2019 03 de junho de 2019 Autor Oded BalabanCategorias Resenhas, UncategorizedTags Community, Hegel, Metaphysics, Ontology, Religion
Anterior Post anterior: Simon Høffding: A Phenomenology of Musical Absorption
Seguinte Próximo post: Emmanuel Alloa, Frank Chouraqui, Rajiv Kaushik (Eds.): Merleau-Ponty and Contemporary Philosophy, SUNY Press, 2019


Perfect for sophisticated guests who want to spend their Caribbean vacation in luxurious surroundings with exceptional service, Majestic Resorts offer a true all-inclusive experience, including unlimited à la carte dining, upscale selected drinks, and free rounds of golf (restrictions apply). Elegant accommodations and Junior Suites & Suites with Jacuzzi®, phenomenal daily and nightly entertainment, and gourmet dining are just the beginning. For an intimate adults only atmosphere, each resort offers an exclusive Club with access to private pools and beach areas, adults only restaurant, butler service, VIP lounges, and more.
Experience the ultimate all-suites resort at Majestic Mirage in Punta Cana! White Sandy beaches and turquoise waters makes this luxurious property the perfect place for guests who enjoy intimate resorts with personalized service!


text:
By JUSTIN PARTRIDGE
1...2...SPOILERS AHEAD are comin' for you. 3...4...better shut the door.
A Quick Mea Culpa Before We Start: So, last column I very dumbly misspelled Asta Parry's name. Which is even more embarrassing as I was heaping praise onto her for about three paragraphs. So, my apologies to her and to you all.
"I was hungry…"
In so few words? Holy shit. Episode 10 of Bloodlust really aims for the throat. Literally. It has taken a while to get to this point in the narrative, but writers Joseph Lidster, Alan Flanagan, and Will Howells really go for the gusto in the series' first double-digit episode. They and directors Ursula Burton and David Darlington deliver nothing but action this time around, sending certain characters spiraling toward doom and placing others in wildly precarious situations, ratcheting up the tension to an unbearable degree. I know I have been a bit hyperbolic in these reviews, but Episode 10 had me yelping in fear and delight throughout. And, yes, I mean yelping because that is the only accurate way I can describe the noises I was making.
Click HERE to get the episode.
So, okay. So much happens in this episode it is kind of hard to know where to start. Let's start at the most interesting aspects, shall we? Aspects that concern my beloved Kate Ripperton. When we last saw her, she was on the receiving end of Barnabas' fangs and her fate was unclear. But, thankfully, Episode 10 gives up that ghost early by opening the episode with Kate narrating. We then get a quick look at her trying to recover from her "hangover" which, of course, isn't a hangover at all. Barnabas turned her and now she hungers for the sweet taste of blood!
This episode kind of takes it's time really getting to this reveal, but whooooo, boy, once it finally comes out with it, it is a real bloodbath and adds another roving murder machine to the already panicked Collinsport. More on that in a bit. But before that, Burton and Darlington do a fantastic job telegraphing the reveal somewhat with eerie sound design based around the steady sound of a heartbeat. A sound that has established itself as an entertaining recurring motif throughout the serial.
I have somewhat avoided discussing the pair's directing at length in these reviews. Mainly because I don't know the first thing about sound design. I was a theatre major and you all know what we are like. BUT Episode 10 is a wonderful showcase of the pair's direction and design from the jump, even to a layman like me. There are several sequences, like the episode's opening dream sequence centered around Tommy and the extra creepy reveal of just what kind of magick is happening in the walls of Collinwood, that really shine thanks to their effects and transitions.
But, back to the vampirism. All throughout this episode, the script keeps giving us minor check ins with Kate, who sleeps through most of the day and then awakes with a starling hunger. She then heads down to the Blue Whale in order to grab a meal and then try to talk with Frankie. And she grabs a meal alright. Two in fact, as she openly attacks Deputy Hanley AND Frankie, killing them both in full view of the patrons. Asta Parry really impresses again here in this episode. While before she was all snark and unexpected vulnerability, here she goes fully feral, showing only touches of her former humanity as Frankie tries to reason with her. It is a rollercoaster ride of a scene but Parry really sells the terror and confusion along with her newfound bloodlust (I said the thing!). RIP Frankie and Deputy Hanley. Y'all were...certainly characters.
The episodes other major set piece is a taut investigation in and around that great house up on the hill. Having gone through his first transformation, Tommy comes clean to his mother which prompts Quentin to finally spill his heritage beans to Amy. The trio then hook up with Angelique, who tells them of her discovery of Carolyn's casting up in Collinwood. So, naturally they all want to go poke the mystery with a stick and see what happens. You can already assume that it doesn't go great, but this grouping is really fun to listen to, thanks to David Selby's impassioned performance and Stephanie Ellyne's reluctant, but curious new emotional state. It also doesn't hurt that Alec Newman's David gets some more facetime in the story, reconnecting with Amy and providing a nice slice of backstory for us newbies to the Big Finishverse. His turn toward villany isn't exactly shocking, but the way the episode's script and Newman's performance lulls listeners into a false sense of security, only to drop the magickal hammer on us is really, really fun.
The episode is rounded out with some movement on Maggie's plot, but it is still kinda awful, just on an optics level. She goes forward this episode with her plan to blood test the town's residents, which, of course, is a whole bowl of yikes. It only gets worse still when the script reveals that they already have people in custody for "anomalies", one of which is merely a child. Though I expected a certain level of monster action in this story, I did not expect the uncomfortably timely and heart wrenching turn this plot took. Maggie Evans, the closest thing Collinsport has to a saint, is now a child detaining fascist and it kind of rules? I never in a million strange aeons would have thought that MAGGIE EVANS would be a villain, but Bloodlust Episode 10 really makes her a damn good one, even in the face of actual monsters committing murder and the town on the edge of destruction (which is one of my favorite Classic Doctor Who episodes).
Like I said, holy shit, right? And we still have three more of these bastards to go! My heart might not survive it. But at the very least I will die having been thoroughly impressed and entertained by Episode 10 and the bloody, witchy, and goth as all hell climaxes this installment delivered. We are in the endgame now, fellow ghouls, and for the first time since I started these, I am genuinely nervous for our cast and the fracturing town. I cannot wait to see how this thing turns out.
NEXT TIME! Episode 11! It probably won't have Matt Smith in it, but it will have some werewolves, a deliciously evil Alec Newman, and an alive(ish) Kate Ripperton. I am but a simple man with simple, monstrous tastes. Be seeing you.
Justin Partridge has always loved monsters and he thinks that explains a lot about him. When he isn't over analyzing comics at Newsarama or ranting about Tom Clancy over at Rogues Portal, he is building Call of Cthulhu games, spreading the good word of Anti-Life, or rewatching Garth Marenghi's Darkplace for the dozenth time. He can be reached at the gasping Lovecraftian void that is Twitter @j_partridgeIII or via e-mail at justin@betweenthepanels.com Odds are he will want to talk about Hellblazer.
Labels: Big Finish, Bloodlust, Justin Partridge

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Category Archives: Rental
Custom contrived: London Bridge Sheep Drive
If you turn up on the last Sunday in September it is not just cars you have to dodge as you cross London bridge, no it will be sheep, liverymen, an odd celebrity and photographers! Yes for this is the annual London sheep drive – drive as in the sense to drive them across, as I mean a sheep drove, er no not with a car, you go behind them…oh well hopefully you will realise what I mean!
Pulling the wool over one's eyes?
The event is organised by the Woolmen of the city, who claim that in medieval times, when sheep farmers drove their sheep across the bridge into the City of London to sell them at market, the Freemen of the City were excused the bridge toll that had to be paid by the others, as they were local traders and were recognised as such. It is not clear when this sheep were last driven across but the appearance of the motor car would have made such a journey a bit perilous and unnecessary as well!
At some point in one of those conversations down the pub; this time presumably in the bar of the livery company of Woolmen, someone came up with the idea of re-instating the drove; as some sort of ancient right cum tradition, which of course there is little evidence it was despite what Bill Clark, Past Master of the Worshipful Company of Woolmen, said: "Driving sheep over London Bridge by Freemen of the City is a tradition rooted in more than 800 years of the history of the Woolmen.
This notwithstanding, in 2013 wanting to uphold the tradition of Freemen's rights, the Worshipful Company of Woolmen arranged:
"the first official Sheep Drive for Freemen of the City and their guests to 'drive' sheep across the bridge. The event has been so successful that it has continued ever since and with places selling out every year we are planning for over 700 pre-booked supporters for 2021."
Being a bit sheepish!
However, this was not the first time in recent years. As in 2009 a group dressed as farmers had crossed the bridge – albeit in far less publicity as the recent establishment. Over the short number of years the company has attracted a colourful and impressive roster of celebrity drivers ranging from Alan Titchmarsh to Barbara Windsor; .
"Re-energising this old tradition provides a fun day out for Londoners but it is also a reminder of the City of London's important trading history. Wool may have been replaced by stocks and shares but London is still the world's centre of commerce."
In 2016 it was reported that:
"Thirty sheep are provided for the event by a Bedfordshire farmer, with just ten at a time driven across the bridge by successive groups of Freemen."
The event offers a colourful spectacle as the liverymen and the mayor officials and even Bo Peep stand by to drive in small groups with a sponsor the sheep across the bridge and back again..a real classic British custom colourful but largely if completely pointless! I do wonder what they sheep think of it! The assembled crowds loved it of course.
Filed under Agricultural, Civic, Customs contrived, Food, London, Mayor, Procession, Rental, Trade and tagged Calendar custom blog, calendar customs, calendar customs blog, customs and traditions, customs blog, folklore, folklore blog, London, Mayor, Sheep, Traditional Custom, traditions, traditions blog | Leave a comment
Custom survived: Colchester Oyster Proclaimation
Customs which are firmly attached to a specific date are today a rarity; many have now slipped the more convenient nearest weekend – but not Colchester's Oyster Proclamation, itself a bit of a rarity being an Essex custom. Firmly fixed to the first Friday in September originally the first of September. Why September? Well this is the first month with an R in it!
Now there is another aspect which means witnesses the custom can be a problematic – it is held on a boat in the middle of the estuary. However, this year for logistical reason it returned to shore.
Shellfishly does it!
Dating from 1540 it is a colourful event full of the right level of pomp but not pompous. Afterall you cannot think yourself too important when you are swaying in the sea. Indeed, The Times in 22nd September 1928 recorded:
"The company were about to drink a toast in gin, in accordance with ancient custom, when the table containing the tiny glasses, filled win gin, overbalanced ad fell, crushing to the deck, together with the small cakes of gingerbread provided for the occasion. Amid hearty laughter fresh supplies were soon forthcoming and the ceremony concluded in the time honoured fashion."
An article in the Daily Mail suggests the custom can be even more fraught with problems noting:
"The oyster-opening ceremony has taken place on the sea for more than 400 years – but not this year and possibly not next year. Mrs Lewis said it was uncertain whether the tradition would even return to the water next year, when she is out of office – because of health and safety. She said: 'The jury is still out on that one. If the next mayor wants to go back on the water, there are a couple of health and safety issues that need to be addressed. 'The mayor nearly fell overboard last year so we had to look at the risk anyway."
The Daily Mail had more to state:
"But because last year's mayor almost fell into the water as he moved from boat to boat, the ceremony – which dates back to 1540 – was instead staged on land.
And to make matters worse, the current mayor, Conservative Sonia Lewis, suffers from seasickness, further scuppering any chance of holding the ceremony on the water….Speaking about the decision, Mrs Lewis said: 'I have never been able to attend the opening of the fisheries because of my inability to tolerate tidal waters. I confirmed on more than one occasion that I was prepared to stand down from the 'opening of the Colchester oyster fisheries' this year."
So that year a Mayor nearly overboard, a seasick and a non-oyster eating Mayor made that year's event one a memorable one in its possible 2000 year history – a claim deriving from the Roman's love of Oysters and the significant presence in the Colchester area. Certainly it can be traced back possibly further than its 16th century record possibly to the time when the town confirmed in 1189 by King Richard I that to raise money for a crusade, its control of fishing 'from North Bridge up to Westness was established. It is worth noting however, the Mayor came over her dislike of oysters stating:
"She had said she would not eat the oyster, describing herself as 'more of a fish and chip girl' but she dutifully quaffed it down with a grimace."
Being on land does create another obstacle. Part of the ceremony was the Mayor to dredge in the first catch of Oysters…unless he was planning to scout around on the beach or have a long net, that was not going to happen. The solution was to get a local oyster chef in and to give the Mayor the first oyster on a plate to eat.
I was informed that it was alright to attend and take photos and that it would be in the Country Park. Making my way there it was not difficult to work out where it would be happening – a small white marquee at the end of the park near the sea – planned just in case it was wet!
Inside was a hive of activity, a man was shucking oysters in remarkably quick time whilst nearby a lady was carefully filling glasses of gin and another cutting slices of gingerbread. Soon all the attendees turned up with the Mayor and at the allotted time they assembled on a bank overlooking the bay. The curious spectacle of the Sergeant with his mace and the Mayor in full regalia attracted quite a few onlookers. Then the bell was rung and the proclamation read. A toast to the queen and the Mayor tasted the first oyster of the season.
Gingerly with the gin and gingerbread? .
Soon as the proclamation was made trays of gin and tonic and gingerbread where handed around. I didn't partake of the G and T but the gingerbread was delightfully moist and flavoursome. I asked why it was gin and gingerbread. No one was sure but it was suggested that the ginger in the gingerbread settled the stomach on a stormy sea and the gin masked the fumes of the boat!
The ceremony it appears has to be checked out by her majesty herself. Before it a letter is sent to The Queen. In 2004 it is said to have read:
"According to ancient Custom and Charter dating back to Norman times, the Mayor and Councillors of the Colchester Borough Council will formally proclaim the Opening of the Colne Oyster Fishery for the coming season and will drink to your Majesty's long life and health and request respectfully to offer to your Majesty their expressions of dutiful loyalty and devotion."
She couldn't attend but it was a great pleasure to attend this year's proclamation, eat the gingerbread and be for once able to hear what is said rather than trying to hear it from the shore.
Filed under Civic, Essex, Food, Mayor, Memorial, Rental, Surviving and tagged calendar customs blog, Colchester, customs and traditions, customs blog, Essex, folklore, folklore blog, Gin and Gingerbread, Local history, Mayor, Oysters, Proclamation, Traditional Custom, traditions, traditions blog | Leave a comment
Custom demised: Yarnton Lot Meadows Ceremony, Oxfordshire
In this quiet Oxfordshire village each July all eyes would be on their meadows. Here survived until fairly recently, a peculiar and potentially ancient custom which would allocate these meadows, called Lot Meadows, according to the drawing of balls – called Mead Balls.
Balls up
These meadows were arranged in 13 lots. There were divided in strips called customary acres which covered as much land as one man could mow in a day or 'man's mowth'. The balls represented by these inch in diameter balls, made of cherry or holly wood were inscribed with the name of each lot and of which 4 belonged to the neighbouring Begbroke. The names were thought to represent the names of tenant farmers: Boat, White, Dunn, William, Water Molly, Green, Boulton, Rothe, Gilbert, Harry, Freeman, Walter Jeoffrey and Parry. Traditionally the organisers, called the Meadsmen would proceed to a certain spot in the meadow where the balls were to be draw, but at later times they met at the Grapes Inn in the village.
Here a ball was drawn from the ball and its name proclaimed and as this is done a man would scythe six feet of hay and another would cut the initials of the winner. This was repeated until all the lots were drawn and which point the Meadsman would write down the owners of each strip. Disputes would occur. A report records that:
"There is a record of one disagreement over trespassing after the lots had been drawn and a fight resulted. This was in 1817, in the reign of George III, and in the ancient warrant for the arrest of the participants the Sheriffs are entreated to keep them safely, so that you may have their Bodies before us at Westminster'. To Westminster they went for their trial and careful record of their expenses they kept, even down to two shillings and ten-pence for the hire of a coach!"
To distinguish the boundary, men would tread up and down the edges and this was 'running the treads'.
Having a Field Day
The cutting of the meadows themselves developed into a popular intense one-day custom with large quantities of plum puddings and plum pudding being consumed. The day ended with some subsequently rather drunken races for the honour of 'securing a garland' which would be proudly displayed in the church. It was not always good humoured; as riots and one man died as a result in 1817. Consequently, the vicar gave a severe sermon that Sunday and the mowing was spread over three days to even out the alcohol!
Blackballed!
Despite a survival from the Norman conquest and its survival post fatality, numbers dwindled and then in 1978 as a consequence of the area becoming a nature reserve. The balls and the Meadsmen survive however, the latter being a hereditary title should the meadows return to service! Until then the fields at this time of year are a blaze of local wild flowers and I suppose this can easily replace the loss of an ancient custom.
Filed under Agricultural, Auction, Boundary, Church, Court, Games, Lost, Oxfordshire, Pub, Race, Rental and tagged Calendar custom blog, calendar customs, calendar customs blog, folklore blog, Local history, Lot Meadows, Meadballs, Traditional Custom, traditions blog, Yarnton | Leave a comment
Custom demised: The Byzant Ceremony Shaftesbury Dorset
Posted on May 31, 2016 by pixyledpublications
In Shaftesbury museum is a curious relic from a lost bygone custom. The structure an ornate shaft was called the byzant and a curious ceremony which maintained ancient rights for the town. The custom being at first on Holy Cross Day, the first Sunday after the 3rd of May, being in 1622 transferred to the Monday before Holy Thursday, or Ascension Day.
Many people visit Shaftesbury for its picturesque hill top setting, especially taking in the famed Gold Hill, but this location caused problems for the town as it did not have a reliable water supply. Yet, at some point someone in the settlement came to an idea at nearby Enmore Green at Motcombe was a water supply which could be utilised.
However, the town could not just take the water some sort of tribute would have to be established with the giving of gifts. Thus arose the Byzant ceremony. The custom dates back to at least 1364 and its first written account is 1527 as below:
A detailed written reference is in A compleat history of Dorsetshire c 1716. Its name possibly derived from a middle-eastern tradition of royalty giving a special coin called the bezant at religious events. Although it appears the coin was replaced with something clearly ceremonial, the Lord of the Manor of Gillingham, whose land the spring lay, still received more functional gifts. John Symmonds Udal in his 1883 article in Dorset County Chronicle state::
"raw calves head, and a pair of Gloves, which his Steward receives distributing at the same time among the People twelve Penny Loaves and three dozen of Beer."
The former probably from a quit rent and the later to provide for hospitality. The Byzant ceremony thus developed into a celebration with the attendees singing and dancing their way to the spring, a distance of half a mile or so. Before them would be the town officials, the Mayor and council, and in front of them would be two officials. One carried a calf's head which carried a purse of money and another carrying the ornate Byzant or prize-besom covered with ribbons, flowers, feathers and jewels. John Symmonds Udal (1883) state:
"The mayor and burgess of Shaftesbury…dress up a Prize-Besom, as they call it (somewhat like a May Garland in form)"
Chambers in his Book of Days describes the byzant as:
"A frame four feet high was covered with ribbons, flowers, peacock's feathers, jewellery, and gold and silver coins, from which the last name was taken, a bizant being an ancient gold coin, and the amount, probably, of the original water tax."
Once at Enmore Green, the gifts and byzant were handed over. The Lord would receive the ornate staff but then hand it back. As John Symmonds Udal (1883) notes:
"The prize-besom, which was worth usually £1500 being adorned with plate and jewels borrowed of the neighbouring gentry) is restored to the Mayor and brought back again to the Town by one of the officers with great solemnity."
Despite the futile nature of the ceremony the village of Motcombe could still refuse access if it did not happen. After the ceremony the attendees would make their way back, rather tiringly up the hill to Shaftesbury.
Sadly practicalities dominated and thus when an artesian well was established on the hill providing a reliable source of water the need to fete Enmore Green was gone but that may not have been the sole reason for its demise. The ritual really died out in 1830, being abolished by the Marquess of Westminster when he purchased the Motcombe estate. The decision was not popular at Enmore. Udal 1922 Dorsetshire folk-lore notes:
" on the Tuesday and during the week after the custom, a fair was held at Enmore green, a hamlet of Motcombe, in which the wells were situate, and further that the people filled up the wells with rubbish, being disgusted, that the custom had been abolished."
The protestations fell on fallow ground and now the only remembrance ended up in Shaftesbury museum. Thanks to Claire Heron for the photos!
Filed under Church, Civic, dole, Dorset, Fair, Food, Lost, Mayor, Political, Procession, Quit rent, Rental, Singing, Trade, Well visiting and tagged Byzant, Calendar custom blog, calendar customs, calendar customs blog, customs, customs and traditions, customs blog, Dorset, Enmore Green, folklore, folklore blog, holy well, Mayor, quit rent, Shaftesbury, Traditional Custom, traditions | Leave a comment
Custom revived: Damask Rose Ceremony Leceister
With worldwide eyes upon the city of Leicester this year with the unique reinterrment of Richard III, hopefully this much maligned city might attract many more tourists. However, if these visitors are looking for the survival of traditions, unlike other neighboring towns, Leicester is sadly lacking. Gone have the Whipping Toms and the ride to Black Annis have long since vanished. Yet there is one old curious tradition which is virtually unique, only having one parallel custom surviving in London. However, it is little known or frequented, and although it has a recent ropey revival and re-revival looks destined to stay – the ceremony of the Damask Rose.
A rose by any other name…
The Ceremony of the Damask Rose has as stated only one surviving companion custom – Knollys Rose, however such rents called Quit rents were very common across the country A quit rent was a token rent, established to recognise still the ownership of the property but given as a gift. As can be seen across the country, both rose rents are given in June usually on a date close to the 24th June. The date of course, is significant as it was a quarter day, when rents were paid on this date, therefore it is not usual to find that quit rents were paid, in particular the giving of a rose which were common in gardens and would also provide a sweet smell for posies at this smelliest time of the year.
A thorny subject
Leicester's ceremony is newer than its London counterpart dating only from the 17th century. It is now associated with a pub, the old Crown and Thistle Inn in the urban back streets of the city in Loseby Lane. When the rent was set this area was very different, the land was part of the Hospital of St. Mary of the Newarke an establishment founded by the Duke of Lancaster which then transferred to him at the Reformation. A small section of this land, in Fee Farm where the pub now is was purchased by a local shoemaker, James Teele and Elizabeth his wife, on the 24th February 1637 for 40/- and held as noted below:
"To bee holden of Our said Soveraigne Lord the King his heirs and successors as of his honour of Leicester in the site of his Highness Dutchy of Lancaster by fealty only in free and comon soccage and not in Capite; Yielding and Paying therefore yearlye into the Maior of the Borough of Leicester for the time being one Damask Rose at or upon the Feast Day of Saint John the Baptist and also yielding and paying all chief rents yearlye yssueing or goeing a forth of the same."
What is not noted above was that affixed to the price of a rose were at first a groat and then four pennies, Victorian bun pennies and there was some concern that when we went decimal the supply would run out..however the then owners Ind Coope brewery stated that held several years supply. Interestingly it was noted that:
"Mr Smith said that the Treasurer's department would not like to allow the ceremony to come to an end as it was one of the few old customs left. The pennies, once collected went with the rest of the Corporation's rent money and the rose ended up in a vase on the city treasurer's desk."
Dead headed!
Ever since that date it is said that the Lord Mayor would come and collect the rent, continuing when the Town Hall was opened in 1876 requiring a further distance than the nearby guildhall! Then disaster….when the pub was converted to an O'Neill's Irish theme Bar, the custom appeared to vanish. This according to some sources was in 1999, others 2001. Indeed I tried to trace the survival of the custom around this time to be greeted with a rather non-plused response
A rose rose again
Then I was ideally researching it again and coming across the Lord Mayor's website noticed it was on the 24th June 2011 sadly I was reading it in July. The revival is excellently captured in the following blog extract emphasising now how immediate a revival can be!:
"Update 6:30pm: Lord Mayor tweets that he'll see what he can do: https://twitter.com/LeicesterMayor/status/19498460378 Update 28/07/2010: Lord Mayor discussed this on BBC Radio Leicester (34mins in) and apparently O'Neill's are up for bringing it back: http://twitter.com/LeicesterMayor/status/19721471851 Update 15/11/2010: Leicester Mercury reports that the custom will be brought back next summer. Thanks to the Lord Mayor and O'Neill's. Update 24/06/2011: The damask rose ceremony was held again after a 10 year absence."
Mind you they'd be a lot of roses to pay in back rent! I awaited for the date in 2012, nothing on the website…contacted O'Neill's they suggested it wouldn't happen this year…I believe the football was blamed. Then in 2013 a revival was on the cards.
A rose amongst the thorns
In 2013 I missed it as I did in 2014. In 2015 I was better prepared. Awaiting outside the Town Hall at quarter to one, soon the Gild of Freeman of the City dressed in their red robes appeared and a few minutes later, The Lord Mayor, Cllr Ted Cassidy and the Macebearer. As the clock approached one, the group led by the Macebearer begun to process to the pub. They snaked through the streets to the bemused faces of shoppers and bus drivers and onto Loseby Lane. Here some local people were prepared; the florist was thanked for the rose (good to see a local source) and the group massed either side of the old door to the pub. The Macebearer approached the door and akin to Parliament's Blackrod banged on the door, although not with the mace..a few moments later, the landlord, Steve Thorn (ironically appropriately named) appeared, dressed in 17th century clothing. The dressing in old clothing appeared to have been more of a feature of the custom in its dying days if this photo is an indication – perhaps the bar staff were no overly keen to get involved. More importantly, the landlord help a bar tray with the rose and the glistening old pennies. The Lord Mayor examined the pennies but they and the rose were handed back! Not only was no back rent provided but the rent returned…they must have plenty of flowers in the Town Hall!
There were smiles all around by those attending even though clearly it was rather pointless as for a rent ceremony no rent was actually collected. Yet in a city sadly bereft of customs it's great to see this one revived and embraced by the two groups and hopefully it'll blossom!
When is it on? It's not on calendar customs yet but it is always the 24th June
Filed under Civic, Leicestershire, Mayor, Procession, Pub, Quit rent, Rental, Revived, Wills and tagged Calendar custom blog, calendar customs, calendar customs blog, customs, customs blog, damask rose, folklore, Leicester, Local history, Mayor, quit rent, Richard iii, rose rent | 1 Comment
Custom revived: The Fairlop Fair
There you are just about to write a piece about a demised tradition…and lo it gets revived! The Fairlop Fair is one of these!
It's my party!
Tradition has it that the fair begun in an unusual way. Virtually all fairs in England start with either ancient unknown origins or from a charter. No this one. No it started from a private party. It is said that in the 1720s landowner, Daniel Day decided to have a party on the first Friday in July for his friends whilst they collected his rents. This was under an ancient oak called the Fairlop Oak. This feast of bacon and beans then precipitated into something bigger. By 1725, more people joined in and soon stalls appeared! These sold at first innocent products- gingerbread men, toys, ribbons, puppets and these grew so much that in 1736 some were prosecuted for liquor selling and gambling!
The fair was certainly an event first and fair after. Day liked to make an event of it. He was an eccentric and it was his tradition to arrive at the fair on horse drawn boat with much fanfare from some musicians. The fair grew and grew and by 1750 over 100,000 people were attending from across London and such that in 1765 it was reported that:
"a great number of people meet in a riotous and tumultuous manner .selling ale and spirituous liquors and keeping tippling booths and gaming tables to the great encouragement of vice and immorality."
In 1767 a bough fell from the tree and Day saw that as an omen and fashioned it into his coffin. Not even death of its creator Day had an effect. Not even the authorities banning it in 1793. The Fairlop Oak fell in 1820 this did not even stop it! Not even the loss of the wood around it and its conversion to arable land in 1851. The Fair continued with controversy for in 1839 the Religious Tract Society counted 72 gaming tables and 108 drinking booths.
Despite all these issues the Fair continued to 1900…then nothing is heard until 2011! The organisers are to be congratulated in creating an event which distilled the feeling of the fair with various acts. Back was the original beanfeast. Costumed characters abounded…lots of beards particularly. In memory of the booths which consisted of the 'living skeleton' and the 'real live mermaid' we had the Fairlop Freak Show presented by the beared ladies and booths with a dancing mermaid. A story boat recreated Mr Day's traditional boat on wheels! This arrived from Mile End and held candlelit tours! It is a splendid vehicle. There were strolling players, particularly the Highwaymen and musicians in costume which gave a real genuine flavour to the proceedings. Traditional aspects abound such as Tug of War, palmists and jugglers. A fantastic dragon which was so real looking you could be mistaken it was real!
Of course there were fairground rides – small scale and traditional in nature and some modern aspects – singers and dancers- but after all the original fair would have moved with the times.
But gone were the gambling stalls of course until a few years time perhaps!
Filed under Civic, Essex, Fair, London, Rental, Revived and tagged Calendar custom blog, calendar customs, calendar customs blog, customs, customs blog, Fairlop Fair, folklore, Local history | Leave a comment
Custom demised: Jack of Hilton and his curious tenure
Posted on January 31, 2014 by pixyledpublications
In the Ashmolean museum in Oxford is a very strange effigy called Jack of Hilton. It was once the property of the manor of Essington between Wolverhampton and Walsall was subject to a strange feudal service custom from the neighbouring Lord of Hilton. An account by topographer Plot (1686) describes it as:
"a hollow brass image, about a foot high, representing a man kneeling in an indecorous posture. …..There were two apertures, one very small at the mouth, another about two-thirds of an inch in diameter at the back.."
Why the holes? Well the structure is what is called an Æolipile, named after Aeolus the Greek God of air and wind, for such a device would spin when heated due to the force of pressure by water. In a way it was the precursor of the engine. An account of one describes it as:
"an instrument consisting of a hollow metallic ball, with a slender neck or pipe, arising from it. This being filled with water, and thus exposed to the fire, produces a vehement blast of wind."
Jack of Hilton would hold more than four pints of water, of which the Plot notes:
"which when set to a strong fire, evaporates after the same manner as in an Aeolipile, and vents itself at the smaller hole at the mouth in a constant blast, blowing the fire so strongly that it is very audible, and makes a sensible impression on that part of the fire where the blast lights, as I found by experience"
Plot (1686) adds:
"Now the custom was this. An obligation lay upon the lord of the adjacent manor of Essington, every New-Year's Day, to bring a goose to Hilton, and drive it three times round the hall fire, which Jack of Hilton was all the time blowing by the discharge of his steam. He was then to carry the bird into the kitchen and deliver it to the cook; and when it was dressed, he was further to carry it in a dish to the table of his lord paramount, the lord of Hilton, receiving in return a dish of meat for his own mess."
Whatever this custom was about is unclear, and it is certainly unique in the country. It is possible that the figure is quite ancient although the museum dates it to 1300. An author in the Mirror of the 18th century notes:
"Besides Jack of Hilton, which had been an ancient Saxon, image, or idol, Mr. Weber shows, that Pluster, a celebrated German idol, is also of the Aeolipile kind, and in virtue thereof, could do noble feats: being filled with a fluid, and then set on the fire, it would be covered with sweat, and as the heat increased, would at length burst out into flames….Some late authors have discovered the extraordinary use to which the frauds of the heathen priesthood applied the Aeolipile, viz. the working of sham miracles."
So perhaps the custom has very ancient origins. Sadly no-one appears to have investigated. Similarly I question why he is so positioned if the steam only leaves his mouth at force and no where else!
Filed under Effigy, Lost, New Year, Oxfordshire, Private, Quit rent, Rental and tagged aeolipie, ashmolean, Calendar custom blog, calendar customs, oxfordshire, quit rent | 1 Comment
Custom survived: Redcliffe Pipe Walk
"For the health of the soul of Robert Berkeley, who gave to God and the church of St. Mary Redcliffe and its ministers the Rugewell and conduit. AD 1190 Erected."
So reads the tap head beside that 'most beautiful church in England' (according to Elizabeth I and who's to argue?) and when Robert Berkeley gave this gift, back in 1190, one wonders if he would have been amazed that some 800 years on, those same church ministers, several generations on of course, would ensure that the supply was still available by this annual custom. I wonder whether he would have been impressed that some 800 years, that his direct descendent would be joining the annual walk to reinforce the ownership of that water, as for the first time possibly ever a member of the Berkley family attended the walk, a Mr. Charles Berkeley from the impressive Berkeley Castle (although it was his father who lived there!). A point I was quickly aware would be a good bargaining point for any naughty children on the walk. Behave! This man has a castle and dungeon he could throw you in. It worked!
Well meaning!
I lived for many years in this crown of the South West, but surprisingly never joined the party which have continued this fine if perhaps defunct tradition. Bristol weather is not always the best and any custom taking place outside at the end of October looks like one which might be prone to the vagaries of the weather! However, I checked the weather it suggested overcast with sunshine, fine by me.
A lot of water under the bridge
The Redcliffe pipe walk is the oldest observed custom of its kind. It survived the Reformation, a time when many church related endowments would be lost or transferred. However, at some point the inspection appears to have fallen into abeyance and was revived in 1928s as a report in a newspaper records as 'after a lapse of some time'. One assumes it died out at the First World War, a common time for such ceremonies to die out a result of the loss of men in that terrible conflict. A similar custom was established to check the more substantial Temple Conduit which died out in 1835. Why is unclear, but around this time the Corporation would be establishing their water works. If the Redcliffe custom died out then, it seems strange that it would be re-established almost 100 years later, unless there was some need to re-emphasise some other endowment or right associated with the original gift. We really don't know. Even when a bomb hit through the pipe line, the custom never ceased. Even when the flow became a trickle or ceased filling the tap head the custom never ceased. So it seems likely that a big event, the War being most likely. Since the late 1920s it has continued unbroken and as I have accepted the World Wars as being acceptable gaps in an over 100 year tradition I shall with this one.
The pipe walkers are ready!
Well met
I arrived early and headed for St. Barnabus Church, Knowle where the walkers would traditionally in recent times gather for refreshments and soon was made very welcome. As soon as ten o'clock arrived we all congregated in an area behind the church. The group, 24 in, made up the surveyor, the vicar, churchwardens, and large number of curious bystanders. Here the leader of the group, the aforemention church's surveyor introduced himself and gleefully asked who was new to the walk..I wasn't the only ones there was quite a few! We would find out why later. He also introduced the vicar of St. Mary Redcliffe who led us in a prayer for the provision of water and in memory of the vicar of St Barnabus's church who was presently ill.
Well thought of
From the vantage point we made our way into the allotments where the spring, called the Huge Well, still arises. We were shown the possible actual site of the well and a part of a conduit which had recently collapsed and revealed the channel beneath. As we stood surveying this site: it began to rain!! Very typical Bristol. However, as soon as we walked a few places to the well head chamber: it stopped! This was especially opened by the surveyor and we all peered in to this considerable stone lined chamber. One wonders what went through the mind of Mr. Berkeley's descendent as he peered 800 years of reflecting on the everflowing gift. It was a good photo opportunity I thought to mark the event.
Mr Charles Berkeley, the descendent of the original benefactor.
Here though I was asked to say a few words myself. Why? I by virtue of my other main interest (and blog) I was the well expert! I said a few words. I hope they were okay, although I did rather put my foot in it with my discussion of St. Anne's well nearby…but that's for another blog.
Inspecting the huge well
From this well head, a pipe line was laid travelling about two miles to a tap conduit head near the church of St. Mary Redcliffe. And of course we were there to survey it, the check at regular points that the pipe was still there and that access was still present. A two mile walk over the pipe, which was fortunately it was all downhill! For the next few 100 yards we travelled without any indication of a pipe, indeed the talk was more like a mass trespass through gardens and allotments, pass chickens and chard, raspberries and radishes…it wasn't until we reached a garden on Raymend Walk that we saw our first real pipe laying under a metal manhole cover and flows through a Victorian metal pipe, replacing the lead and probably even wooden one of old. The family who owned the garden were very accommodating and offered the group apples from the tree. I asked them if they knew they'd be a yearly congregation of pipe walkers each year when they bought it! Fortunately they did. From here we had a bit of a detour as the surveyor worried that a wall on the route might be too prone to collapse to allow 20 odd people to pass it…but did this detour invalidate the claim I wondered! We still checked the stone, labelled SMP, which obviously reasserted the claim!
Through the allotments we go!
A bumping journey
Soon we arrived at Victoria Park, here the water filled a maze based on a labyrinth in St. Marys. It looked fairly clean and small shrimps disported themselves within it…but not sure I would drink it. At this point it was revealed why it was important to know who the newcomers were. At a larger pipe boundary stone the surveyor called forward newcomers to be bumped on the stone. This is probably the most traditionally part of the walk, often done of course at beating of the bounds, when mainly children were done. At first he said there were too many of us and he'd only do the children…however, this caused a bit of a ripple of indignation and so he offered anyone that wanted to be bumped would be done. I of course offered myself up. Followers of this blog will know that I've had a vicar on my chest being shoed at Hungerford Hocktide and this was much gentler. So I was lifted one…two…three. The vicar carrying me this time didn't inflict any bruises. Also bumped was Mr. Berkeley. I am not sure his predecessor would have approved of the commoners manhandling him but of course this Berkeley thoroughly enjoyed it..and no-one would be sent to that castle dungeon.
The pipe inspected.
All ages bumped!
The descendent gets the bumps!
Pipe down we're nearly there!
after the bumping, we examined another pipe. This one being much deeper, being reached by a ladder, and apparently had a tap where previous surveyors would take a sip. I noticed no-one appeared to volunteer this time. Then we regrouped and went under the railway, in the early 20th century we would go over the railway and the group had the power to stop the trains! Fortunately, we didn't risk it. We were close to the final tap head and deep into the buzzy thrall of Bristol a big change from these peaceful allotments. Crossing the Avon, and two major roads, one could be forgiven in forgetting we were following a pipe, but soon at the church we saw the tap head. Charles Berkeley was impressed by this tap head with its fine Lion mouth. Another good photo opportunity, as this descendent peered into the source of water which was of great benefit to the people of Bristol. Nothing flowed from this tap, but above it the final manhole cover revealed oily irony water. I jokingly offered Mr. Berkeley a sip. He politely refused. The arrival at the church was very welcome as was the spread of sandwiches, cakes and very refreshing tea topped off by a nice choir, welcoming us in song!
A custom which involves a long walk might not be everyones cup of tea but the Redcliffe Pipe Walk is an enjoyable experience coupled with some friendly folk. And perhaps it's this sense of camaraderie which despite there being a lack of water and purpose the walk continues.
– images copyright Pixyled Publications
Mr Charles Berkeley inspects the tap.
Filed under Boundary, Church, Civic, Effigy, Gloucestershire, Procession, Rental, Surviving, Wills and tagged Berkeley Castle, Bristol, calendar customs, calendar customs blog, church, customs, customs log, folklore, holy well, labyrinth, Local history, maze, pipes, St Mary Redcliffe, temple meads, traditions, traditions blog, walk | Leave a comment
Custom demised: The Rhyne Toll
Every three years, the Manor Chetwode, in Buckinghamshire a property of the Chetwode family met at a Court Leet during which the Lord could levy a yearly tax, called the 'Rhyne Toll,' upon all cattle found within this liberty, between the 30th of October and the 7th of November. An Elizabethan document records the reading of the order of the day:
"In the beginning of the said Drift of the Common, or Rhyne, first at their going forth, they shall blow a welke shell, or home, immediately after the sunrising at the mansion house of the manor of Chetwode, and then in their going about they shall blow their home the second time in the field between Newton Purcell and Barton Hartshorne, in the said county of Bucks; and also shall blow their home a third time at a place near the town of Finmere, in the county of Oxford; and they shall blow their horn the fourth time at a certain stone in the market of the town of Buckingham, and there to give the poor sixpence; and so, going forward in this manner about the said Drift, shall blow the home at several bridges called Thorn borough Bridge, King's Bridge, and Bridge Mill. And also they shall blow their horn at the Pound Gate, called the Lord's Pound, in the parish of Chetwode.. .. And also (the Lord of Chetwode) has always been used by his officers and servants to drive away all foreign cattle that shall be found within the said parishes, fields, &c., to impound the same in any pound of the said towns, and to take for every one of the said foreign beasts two pence for the mouth, and one penny for a foot, for every one of the said beasts.' All cattle thus impounded at other places were to be removed to the pound at Chetwode; and if not claimed, and the toll paid, within three days, ' then the next day following, after the rising of the sun, the bailiff or officers of the lord for the time being, shall blow their home three times at the gate of the said pound, and make proclamation that if any persons lack any cattle that shall be in the same pound, let them come and show the marks of the same cattle so claimed by them, and they shall have them, paying unto the lord his money in the manner and form before mentioned, otherwise the said cattle that shall so remain, shall be the lord's as strays.' This toll was formerly so rigidly enforced, that if the owner of cattle so impounded made his claim immediately after the proclamation was over, he was refused them, except by paying their full market price."
By the 1800s, changes had occurred such that toll begun at the more sociable nine in the morning instead of at sunrise, and the horn is first sounded on the church hill at Buckingham, and gingerbread and beer distributed among the assembled boys, sadly the girls received nothing. This was repeated at another area of the liberty and the toll would collect two shillings a score on all cattle and swine passing on any road. Then on the 7th November, at twelve o'clock at night you could travel free as the toll closed. The tenants of the land also has to pay one shilling. Before the coming of the railway the toll raised £20, but declined to £1 5s after as a consequence all cattle and sheep went that way.
The area was covered by an ancient wood called Rookwoode, said to be famed for giant boar and no one was safe who passed through it. Finally, the Lord of Chetwode, decided to remove the boar and entered the forest. A local song records:
"Then he Mowed a blast full north, south, east, and west, Wind well thy horn, good hunter; And the wild boar then heard him full in his den, As he was a jovial hunter. Then he made the best of his speed unto him Wind well thy horn, good hunter; Swift flew the boar, with his tusks smeared with gore, To Sir Ryalas, the jovial hunter. Then the wild boar, being so stout and so strong, Wind well thy horn, good hunter; Thrashed down the trees as he ramped him along, To Sir Ryalas, the jovial hunter. Then they fought four hours in a long summer day, Wind well thy horn, good hunter; Till the wild boar fain would have got him away, From Sir Ryalas, the jovial hunter. Then Sir Ryalas he drawed his broadsword with might, Wind well thy horn, good hunter; And he fairly cut the boar's head off quite, For he was a jovial hunter."
News of this deed reached the King, who granted to him, and to his heirs forever the full right and power to levy every year the Rhyne Toll. This it appears to have continued until the 1880s and as far as I am aware anyone can travel this day free of charge through this quiet Buckinghamshire village.
Filed under Lost, Memorial, Oxfordshire, Political, Rental, Trade, Wills and tagged Calendar custom blog, calendar customs, calendar customs blog, cattle, customs, customs blog, folklore, Local history, Manor Chetwode, oxfordshire, Rhyne, traditions, traditions blog | Leave a comment
Custom revived: Knollys Rose Ceremony
The ceremony dates back to a indiscretion undertaken by Sir Robert Knollys who in the 14th century owned a property on Seething Lane. I say he, it was really his wife Lady Constance (make of that what you wish) for he was off fighting the French alongside John of Gaunt! Legend tells that she was so annoyed by chaff dust blowing from the threshing ground nearby that she bought that property turning it into a rose garden which was okay..Planning permissions were fine for this. However, she also built a bridge to avoid the mud. This was more of a problem!
A thorny problem
The City decided Knollys had to pay for the lack of permission but realising he had not only fought in France but was also pivotal in helping the King in the Wat Tyler rebellion, a hefty penalty would be a bit ungrateful. Not only this, but Knollys was close friend of the Mayor, Sir William Walworth. So they decided that he and his heirs present a rose at Midsummer from his garden to the Lord Mayor. Then permission was given to 'make an haut pas of the height of 14 feet' across the lane
This is not the only rose rent. The ceremony is part of what is called a quit rent, a token rent, established to recognise still the ownership of the property but given as a gift. Other examples exist in the county, but I will focus on these rose rents. The date of course, is significant above, it was a quarter day, when rents were paid on this date, therefore it is not usual to find that quit rents were paid, in particular the giving of a rose. A number of rose rents existed of which this is the last true survivor perhaps.
Rose to the occasion
Surely after so many years the penalty would have paid. It appeared to have ceased in 1666, doubtlessly after it was burnt down in the great fire. Yet despite the rose rent being paid already for nearly 300 years and doubtlessly paid in full, it was revived in 1924 by the noted vicar of All Hallows by the Tower, Tubby Clayton. Why is not clear perhaps he was proud of the flowers in the garden.
Never promised you a rose garden
The ceremony is enacted around midsummer and after finding out from the church I decided to witness this ceremony in the 1990s. I waited around 10 o'clock in the garden and soon a small procession appeared of vicar, verger, parishioners, Knollys descendents and members of Company of Watermen and Lightermen of the River Thames, the later who organise it. The procession consisted of cushion bearer and a number of individuals dressed in the finest ceremonial robes. The cushion being an altar cushion from the church. I was pleased to see the picking of the rose was not taken too lightly: a number of roses were inspected carefully. Too much greenfly. Too many uneven petals. Too few petals…just right. The perfect red rose was selected, cut and then pinned to the cushion by the Master of the Watermen. After getting the members of the procession together they then processed to the Mansion House. To give a rose to the Mayor this already belonged to the city! I am always amused how such strange ceremonies rarely affect London residents and very few individuals battered an eyelid as a man carried a rose on a cushion accompanied with ceremonially robbed attendants. We soon arrived at the mansion house, where to my surprise I easily slipped in to witness the final part of the ceremony. Sadly my flash wasn't working, but I did get some video. Here waiting for the rose were the winners of the Doggett Coat and Badge (a ceremony I have yet to record!) in their fine red uniforms guarding the Lord Mayor. The rose was dutifully handed over and gratefully received by the Mayor. And that was it…except I think there was a lunch afterwards. I didn't manage to get invited to this?!
The ceremony of Knollys rose is one of those customs which typifies the eccentric British: colourful, solemn and completely pointless. And all the best for that!
Filed under Church, London, Mayor, Private, Procession, Rental, Revived and tagged calendar customs, calendar customs blog, curious custom, customs, customs blog, folklore, folklore blog, London, Mayor, quit rent, Rose Rents, traditions, watermen | Leave a comment


Robin Weigert (born July 7, 1969) is an American television and film actress. Weigert was born in Washington, D.C., the daughter of Dionne Laufman and Berlin-born Wolfgang Oscar Weigert, a psychiatrist. She is of Jewish heritage. After graduating from Brandeis University in 1991, Weigert attended New York University, earning a Master of Fine Arts degree in the Graduate Acting Program at the Tisch School of the Arts. After a decade as a stage actress based in New York City, she moved to Los Angeles and has appeared in various movies, TV shows and mini-series. Read more on Wikipedia.


We believe that God is the eternal King. He is an infinite, unchangeable spirit, perfect in holiness, wisdom, goodness, justice, power and love. From all eternity He exists as the one living and true God in three persons of one substance: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, equal in power and glory.
We believe that God's kingdom is everlasting. From His throne, through His Son, His eternal word, God created, upholds and governs all that exists: the heavenly places, the angelic hosts, the universe, the Earth, every living thing and human beings. God created all things very good.
We believe that God created mankind in his image, male and female, for relationship with Himself and to govern the Earth. Under the temptation of Satan, our original parents fell from grace, bringing sin, sickness, and God's judgment of death to the Earth. Through the fall, Satan and his demonic hosts gained access to God's good creation. Creation now experiences the consequences and effects of Adams original sin. Human beings are born in sin, subject to God's judgment of death and captive to Satan's kingdom of darkness.
We believe that in the fullness of time, God honored His covenant with Israel and His prophetic promises of salvation by sending His Son, Jesus, into the world. Conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary, as fully God and fully human in one person, He is humanity as God intended us to be. Jesus was anointed as God's Messiah and empowered by the Holy Spirit, inaugurating God's kingdom reign on the earth, overpowering the reign of Satan by resisting temptation and preaching the good news of salvation, healing the sick, casting out demons and raising the dead. Gathering his disciples, He reconstituted God's people as His church to be the instrument of His kingdom.
After dying for the sins of the world, Jesus was raised from the dead on the third day, fulfilling the covenant of blessing given to Abraham. In His sinless, perfect life Jesus met the demands of the law and in his sinless, perfect life Jesus met the demands of the law and in his atoning death on the cross he took God's judgment for sin which we deserve as law-breakers. By his death on the cross, he also disarmed the demonic powers. The covenant with David was fulfilled in Jesus' birth from David's house, His messianic ministry, His glorious resurrection from the dead, His ascent into heaven and His present rule at the right hand of the father. As God's son and David's heir, He is the eternal Messiah King, advancing God's reign throughout every generation and throughout the whole earth today.
We believe that the Holy Spirit indwells every believer in Jesus Christ and that he is our abiding helper, teacher, and guide. We believe that in the filling or the empowering of the Holy Spirit, often a conscious experience, is for ministry today. We believe in the present ministry of the Spirit and in the exercise of all the biblical gifts of the Spirit. We practice the laying on of hands for the empowering of the Spirit, for healing, and for recognition and empowering of those whom God has ordained to lead and serve the church.
We believe that the Holy Spirit inspired the human authors of holy Scriptures so that the Bible is without error in the original manuscripts. We receive the sixty six books of the Old and New Testaments as our final, absolute authority, the only infallible rule of faith and practice.
We believe that the whole earth is under the dominion of Satan and that all people are sinners by nature and choice. All people therefore are under God's just judgment. Through the preaching of the good news of Jesus and the kingdom of God and the work of the Holy Spirit, God regenerates, justifies, adopts and sanctifies through Jesus by the Spirit all who repent of their sins and trust in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. By this they are released from Satan's domain and enter into God's kingdom reign.
We believe that God's kingdom has come in the ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ, that it continues to come in ministry of the Spirit through the church, and that it will be consummated in the glorious, visible and triumphant appearing of Christ – his return to the earth as King. After Christ returns to reign, he will bring about the final defeat of Satan and all of his minions and works, the resurrection of the dead, the final judgment and the eternal blessing of the righteous and eternal conscious punishment of the wicked. Finally, God will be all in all in His kingdom, His rule and reign, will be fulfilled in the new heavens and the new earth, re-created by His mighty power, in which righteousness dwells and in which He will forever be worshiped.


OK 3W is the western half of the OK 3 split route between Shawnee and Ada. Except for a 17-mile stretch between U.S. 177/OK 59 and OK 19, the highway is duplexed with another highway throughout its 51 miles.
Interstate 40 East to U.S. 177 South.
at Business U.S. 270 - Kickapoo Spur.
approaching U.S. 270/OK 9 East.
U.S. 177 North/OK 3W West at U.S.
West at OK 39 West in Asher.
OK 3W East at OK 59A West.
OK 3W East at OK 19 West.
is no "END" sign at this terminus.
Valley. OK 3E begins straight ahead.


text:
Q: How to compile QGIS from source with Grass? I recently decided to reinstall QGIS and build against the latest version of GDAL - something I have been putting off for ages because I suspected it would be a nightmare. Lo and behold it has been, so after a full-day of trying to get this to compile following these: instructions I'm reaching out for some help.
I successfully built GDAL 2.0 this morning (at least I think it was successful gdalinfo --version is now showing GDAL 2.0.0, released 2015/06/14 and have been working my way through the instructions above.
I'm currently stuck at 47% with make failing here:
[ 47%] Built target qgis.d.rast7
Linking C executable ../../../../output/lib/qgis/grass/modules/qgis.g.info7
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRGetLinearUnits@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRExportToWkt@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRGetAttrValue@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `SetCSVFilenameHook@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRExportToProj4@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRMorphFromESRI@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRExportToPrettyWkt@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRMorphToESRI@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRImportFromProj4@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRDestroySpatialReference@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `VSIFree@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRIsProjected@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRNewSpatialReference@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRIsGeographic@GDAL_1.8'
/usr/lib/grass70/lib/libgrass_gproj.so: undefined reference to `OSRGetUTMZone@GDAL_1.8'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
make[2]: *** [output/lib/qgis/grass/modules/qgis.g.info7] Error 1
make[1]: *** [src/providers/grass/7/CMakeFiles/qgis.g.info7.dir/all] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2

I'm not quite sure what this means - though some searching suggests I may still have an old install of GDAL lurking, though not sure I can find it - as I removed a couple earlier when make failed much earlier on.
I thought it could be something to do with Grass 7 which I installed following these enter link description here instructions. But I've also tried to compile with GRASS_PREFIX7 set to OFF in ccmake. But make fails at the same place.
p.s. using:
Ubuntu 14.04
GRASS7
GDAL 2.0

A: If you build gdal yourself, you should also build grass yourself.
Using grass binaries which are linked against a different version of gdal than QGIS is certainly a very bad idea.

A: I had the same issue. It was related to the flags in cmake. My purpose was not related to GRASS 7 so I just had to desactivate it.
My line for compiling is similar to below (I didn't provide all the options just the ones related to GRASS)
cmake -DWITH_GRASS=OFF -DWITH_GRASS7=OFF ..

You need to do before a
make clean

You can also check if your configuration related to GRASS is effective looking at generated file CMakeCache.txt. It should contain something like below:
...
//Determines whether GRASS 6 plugin should be built
WITH_GRASS:BOOL=OFF

//Determines whether GRASS 7 plugin should be built
WITH_GRASS7:BOOL=OFF
...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


LED Amber board 80x40mm 12v - suitable for indicators, bug-resistant lighting.
18x5050 AMBER LED mounted on a 80x40mm PCB board.
Economical and easy replacement in situations where hard to find AMBER bulbs can be replaced with an efficient LED board.
Suitable for 12 volt and 24 volt systems - (Please do not cut between the inline driver and the LED board).
An efficient replacement for incandescent lamps in situations where the LED board can be laid directly on top of the diffused lens.
These boards generate virtually no heat and can be fixed using double sided tape, a small blob of silicon sealant or some other method.
A no-load electronic flasher will still be required if you change your indicator system all over to LED - please see "Related Products" tab.
All of the circuitry is in line in a shrink-wrapped section about 50mm back from the board.
Suitable for 12v and 24vDC systems (even under charge).