the signs as real witches
  • Aries: Agnes Waterhouse// Had a deal with the Devil and wasn't afraid to say so. The Brave witch.
  • Taurus: Joan Wytte// Clairvoyant and healer who eventually became possessed by the Devil, getting involved in many fights.
  • Gemini: Marie Laveau// Voodoo Queen. Performed necromancy, mind control, telekinesis and pinning.
  • Cancer: Chedipe// Witch-vampire who rode on tigers in the moonlight, choosing houses to visit to cast spells on men.
  • Leo: Agnes Sampson// Tried to sink the ship of Queen Anne, wife of King James VI of England.
  • Virgo: Isobel Gowdie// Could control the weather and would often write poetry about witch practices. Allegedly marked by the Devil.
  • Libra: Circe// Transformed random sailors into wolves and lions and all kinds of animals.
  • Scorpio: Mother Shipton// Clairvoyant, sorceress. An outcast with a great talent.
  • Sagittarius: Maret Jonsdotter// Frequently tricked men. Attended witch sabbaths.
  • Capricorn: Alice Kyteler// Poisoned her rich husbands, disappeared the night before her execution.
  • Aquarius: Angele de la Barthe// Allegedly had sex with the Devil.
  • Pisces: Catherine La Voisin// Fortune Teller & Love Potions expert. Plotted to murder Louis XIV.

anonymous asked:

Um, I'm pretty sure that Christianity is against witchcraft. There are verses in the bible that say so. So what exactly is it that you mean?

i have answered this before, many times. i mean exactly that. christianity, is not actually against witchcraft. the ones who say so are misinformed, and have not done their research.

the verses that are in the bible that “say so” are not original to the bible. they were added in rather recently in history, which came to be known as the king james bible, as it was his idea and his personal vendetta against witches. 

i’m just gonna do the math for you so this is clear:

the bible is about 2700 years old. 

king james, of england, his bible is from  1611.  let’s call that about 400 years ago. 

2700 > 400. 

2700 - 400 = 2300

for 2300 years, the bible said nothing against witchcraft, and if you actually read it (a non king-james influenced one, that is), a there are acts of witchcraft that happen in it, and no one gives a shit. 

in fact, a lot of traditional witchcraft as we know it, or the european interpretation of witchcraft, is directly influenced from / uses the bible as a reference/starting point. it’s not too far off to say a lot of witchcraft today is actually descended from christianity. 

On June 10th 1688 James Edward Stuart was born 

The Old Pretender as he became known was the son of James VII and his second wife Mary of Modena. His life began under a cloud of suspicion as his mother was judged to be too old for childbearing and James was said to have been a child of Sir Theophilus Oglethorpe who had been smuggled into the Queen’s bedchamber in a warming-pan. Not best of starts for a royal Prince!
His father King James II was something of a problem when he came to the throne as he was a devout Catholic and his subjects were devout Protestants. James II was hated by the people and was forced to flee to France with his Queen and his son in 1688.

On James II’s death in 1701, James Edward, now 13, declared himself King James III of England and VIII of Scotland.  

 In 1708 James Stuart failed in his attempt to land his army in Scotland. He returned to France and served with its army in the Low Countries and fought at Malplaquet in 1709.

In 1715 he returned to in Scotland’s shores to start a Jacobite rising, but he was disappointed by the strength of support he found.  He returned to France, but was considered a political embarrassment by the French government. The Pope offered him a home and it was in Rome he took his Jacobite court. 

 Although considered brave and honourable James was largely ineffectual and continually suffered from bad luck earning him the nickname ‘Old Mr. Misfortune’. The Old Pretender had two children, Charles and Henry. Charles went on to become known as Bonnie Prince Charlie, while Henry became a Cardinal in the Catholic Church. Both were raised in Rome and protected and supported by the pope, particularly in their later years.

He remained in Rome for the majority of his life, growing increasingly feeble and despondent, until his death on 1 January 1766 aged 77. James, Charles and Henry are all buried in  St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican City.  The monument to the Stuarts there was ironically commissioned and paid for by the British government and King George III

King James Was a Black Man (Not a Gay White Man)

King James

King James I of England, who authorized the translation of the now famous King James Bible, was considered by many to be one of the greatest, if not the greatest, monarchs that England has ever seen. Through his wisdom and determination he united the warring tribes of Scotland into a unified nation, and then joined England and Scotland to form the foundation for what is now known as the British Empire. At a time when only the churches of England possessed the Bible in English, King James’ desire was that the common people should have the Bible in their native tongue. Thus, in 1603, King James called 54 of history’s most learned men together to accomplish this great task. At a time when the leaders of the world wished to keep their subjects in spiritual ignorance, King James offered his subjects the greatest gift that he could give them. Their own copy of the Word of the Most High in English. James, who was fluent in Latin, Greek, and French, and schooled in Italian and Spanish even wrote a tract entitled “Counterblast to Tobacco”,which was written to help thwart the use of tobacco in England. Such a man was sure to have enemies.

King James was a King of Great Britain France and Ireland. King James was a Black man and the King James Bible is named after King James I of England, who lived from June 19, 1566 to March 27, 1625. The Established Church was divided during this era. In 1603, King James called a conference in the Hampton Court in attempt to resolve issues. As a result, a new translation and compilation of approved books of the Bible was commissioned to resolve issues with translations then being used. For example, the Geneva Version contained controversial marginal notes that proclaimed the Pope as an anti-Christ. The leaders of the church desired a Bible for the people, with scriptural references only for word clarification or cross-references.

King James approved 54 scholars to work on the translation, and 47 worked in six groups at three locations for seven years, comparing to previous English translations (such as the Geneva Bible) and texts in the original languages. The new translation was published in 1611 and called the Authorized Version, because it was authorized to be read in the churches. It later became known as the King James Version.

The King James translation had a significant influence on the English language and was widely accepted as the standard English Bible. Because of the project being overseen by King James and the care and precise attention to detail during this seven-year translation, the King James Bible was considered one of the most accurate translations in existence.

Edomities/ Gentiles are feeding us lies. They  started this whole lie and said King James was a homosexual. The one who started this rumor was Anthony Weldon, he wanted vengeance for being excluded from James court so In 1650, twenty-five years after the death of James, Weldon saw his chance. He wrote a paper calling James a homosexual. Obviously, James, being dead, was in no condition to defend himself. The report was largely ignored since there were still enough people alive who knew it wasn’t true. In fact, it lay dormant for years, until recently when it was picked up by Christians who hoped that vilifying King James would tarnish the Bible that bears his name so that most if not all would turn away from the most high Scroll/book to a more “modern” translation.

It seems, though, that Weldon’s false account is working because a lot of The Most High people refuse to read or get to know the book b/c of this elaborate and demeaning lie.

It might also be mentioned here that the Roman Catholic Church was so desperate to keep the true Bible out of the hands of the real people that it attempted to kill King James and all of Parliament in 1605. In 1605 a Roman Catholic by the name of Guy Fawkes, under the direction of a Jesuit priest by the name of Henry Garnet, was found in the basement of Parliament with thirty-six barrels of gunpowder which he was to use to blow up King James and the entire Parliament. Why you ask would someone go so hard to not only kill a Homosexual KING but why would you go through these extremes to kill one of your own? would it be b/c he was gay? Doubt it. Would it be because he was white? Doubt it again. The only reason and sole reason is he was a man of color, black, NEGRO!!!! Also they hunted down James Son, if he was Gay why are they hunting down a Gay white man’s son. Also King James and his wife had 9 children who were all BLACK!

The name James deprived from the Hebrew name lacob with in English the J was instated b/c in Hebrew there are no J’s it is a stated and given fact. If you look in the pic accompanying this post you see the name lacobus and the name Jacob in Hebrew means “hold the heel” let’s go deeper into the name. the name came into English language from the french variation of the late latin name: lacomus: a dialect variant of lacobus.

Yahsharahia for all that don’t know we know is Jacob (Yahcob) in Hebrew that means he who holds the heel. In most Compact Bible Dictionary you will see that the name James means supplanter, Jacob(Yacob) was known as the supplanter and James means supplanter.

Genesis 27:36 36 And he said, Is not he rightly naed lacob? for he hath supplanted me these two times: hee tooke away my birthright, and behold, now he hath taken away my blessing: and hee said, Hast thou not reserued a blessing for mee?

Why go so hard for King James? For starters he was never white or gay. Second his father was from the tribe of JUDAH so that would make James what? The authorized King James Bible was written in 1611, a year after we the descendants of Judah, Benjamin and Levi were in enslaved 1612 a.d ya-ha-wa-dah/Judah the so called IGBO’s of Nigeria, west Africa, the Mandingo of Mali, west Africa, the Sehwi and the dynasty of Ghana. “so called African Americans.”

Also the ancient Paleo Hebrew Script I know you heard of the house of David, look up Isaiah 7:2

First Westminster Company
Genesis to 2 Kings
Lancelot Andrewes (head) — Cambridge University
William Bedwell — from Cambridge
Francis Burleigh
Richard Clarke — Cambridge University
Geoffrey King — Cambridge University
John Layfield — Cambridge University
John Overal — Cambridge University
Adrian Saravia
Richard Thompson — Cambridge University
Robert Teigh — Cambridge University
First Cambridge Company
1 Chronicles to Song of Solomon
Roger Andrewes — Cambridge University
Andrew Bing — Cambridge University
Laurence Chaderton — Cambridge University
Francis Dillingham — Cambridge University
Thomas Harrison — Cambridge University
Edward Lively (head) — Cambridge University
John Richardson — Cambridge University
Robert Spalding — Cambridge University
First Oxford Company
Isaiah to Malachi
Richard Brett
Richard Fairclough
John Harding (head)
Thomas Holland
Richard Kilby
John Reynolds
Miles Smith (final editor)
Second Cambridge Company
The Apocrypha
John Bois — Cambridgeshire
William Branthwaite — Cambridge University
Andrew Downes — Cambridge University
John Duport (head) — Cambridge University
Jeremiah Radcliffe — Cambridgeshire
Robert Ward — Cambridge University
Samuel Ward — Cambridge University
Second Oxford Company
Matthew to Acts and Revelation
George Abbot
John Aglionby
Richard Eedes
John Harmer
Leonard Hutten
James Montague
John Perin
Ralph Ravens
Thomas Ravis (head)
Sir Henry Savile
Giles Thomson
Second Westminster Company
Romans to Jude
William Barlow (head) — Cambridge University
Thomas Bilson (final editor)
William Dakins — Cambridge University
Roger Fenton — Cambridge University
Ralph Hutchinson
Michael Rabbet
Thomas Sanderson
John Spencer
Seventh Company, London
Richard Bancroft (overseer)
George Ryves (overseer of the New Testament)
William Thorne (member of First Oxford Company)
Daniel Featley (member of First Oxford Company)
William Eyre — Cambridge University (member of Second Cambridge Company)

(The Real King James)

anonymous asked:

Do you think the Blackfyre Rebellions and the Blackfyre Pretenders are a parallel for the Jacobite Rebellions and the Jacobite Pretenders?

Oh sure, I think GRRM was very much inspired by the Jacobites for the Blackyre pretenders. (As a refresher: Jacobites were supporters of King James II/VII of England, Scotland, and Ireland - “Jacobus” in Latin, hence the name - who had been deposed in the Glorious Revolution and replaced by his daughter, Mary II, and his son-in-law, William III. The Jacobite Pretenders were King James II, his son James “the Old Pretender”, and the Old Pretender’s two sons, Charles (“Bonnie Prince Charlie” or “the Young Pretender”) and Henry, more often referred to as the “Cardinal Duke of York”.) Like the Blackfyres, the Jacobites found comfortable political exile with relatives across the water (in their case, King Louis XIV of France, King James II’s first cousin, who was happy to host the rightful - and Catholic - monarch of England), and like the Blackfyres, failure eventually resulted in the loss of that exile home (after the failed Jacobite rebellion in Scotland in 1715, the French court - now ruled by the Duke of Orleans as regent for the new Louis XV - withdrew its support for the Jacobite cause). Like the Blackfyres, the Jacobites tried several uprisings to crown the descendants of James II, none of which were successful (although unlike the Blackfyre Rebellions, the last of these true uprisings - the so-called “Forty-Five”, in 1745 - was perhaps the most successful, relatively speaking). Just as some Westerosi nobles, like Harry Strickland’s antecedent, chose to go into exile with Bittersteel and the young Blackfyres, the Jacobites hosted a number of Scottish, English, and Irish exiles at their “court” (first in France, then in Rome). And, as the Blackfyres died out in the male line within a few generations, so to did the Jacobites: Bonnie Prince Charlie married but had no legitimate offspring, while his brother Henry went into the Catholic Church and died childless in 1807, age 82. (Interestingly, the current Jacobite pretender - via James II’s sister Henrietta - is Franz, Duke of Bavaria, also the pretender to the Bavarian throne, although no one since the Cardinal Duke of York has actually pursued any Jacobite inheritance.)


January 30th 1649: Charles I executed

On this day in 1649, King Charles I of England, Scotland and Ireland was executed in London aged 48. He was born in 1600 the son of James VI of Scotland, who in 1603 became King James I of England and Ireland, in addition to Scotland, when Queen Elizabeth I died. Charles succeeded to the throne in 1625 when his father died, becoming the second Stuart monarch. Charles inherited from his father a firm belief in the divine right of kings to absolute rule, which led to conflict between the King and Parliament. These tensions lay in part due to debates over money and religion, with Charles’s Anglicanism alienating Puritans in England. Charles dissolved Parliament three times, and in 1629 resolved to rule the nation alone, without Parliament. During this period his actions appeared increasingly tyrannical, raising taxes and cracking down on Puritans and Catholics, leading to an exodus of the former to the American colonies. Personal rule ended when the King attempted to interfere with the Scottish Church, and had to restore Parliament to raise the funds to fight the Scottish. The English Civil War broke out in the last years of his reign, which pitted the crown against Parliament and occurred after he attempted to arrest members of Parliament. Charles’s Royalist supporters were defeated in 1646, and the King himself was eventually captured. The Parliamentarians, including general Oliver Cromwell, put the King on trial for treason, which resulted in his execution in 1649 outside the Banqueting House in Whitehall. The monarchy was then abolished, leading to the short-lived Commonwealth of England. A leading figure of this republic was Oliver Cromwell, though his rule as Lord Protector became increasingly authoritarian. Cromwell died of natural causes in September 1658, but on January 30th 1661, on the anniversary of Charles’s death, Cromwell’s remains were ritually executed. The monarchy was restored in 1660 with Charles’s son in power ruling as King Charles II.

Daemonologie - with original illustrations Paperback by King James I of England (Author)

In 1590 three hundred Scottish ‘witches’ were tried for plotting the murder of their King, James VI of Scotland (soon to be James I of England). 

James is known to have suffered from a morbid fear of violent death, and the trial heightened his anxiety over this apparently treasonous 'un-Christian’ sect, and stimulated him to study the whole subject of witchcraft.

 'Daemonologie’ is the result of this royal research, detailing his opinions on the topic in the form of a Socratic dialogue between the sceptic Philomathes and witch-averse Epistemon, who reveals many aspects of witch-craft. The book consists of three sections, on magic, on sorcery and witchcraft, and on spirits and ghosts, and ends with a lurid account of the North Berwick witch trials, based on the evidence of Dr John Fian, the alleged head of the coven, whose 'confession’ was obtained with the aid of thumbscrews, the Boot, and by the ripping out of his fingernails.


Mary, Queen of Scots  

8 December 1542 – 8 February 1587

On the eighth of December in 1542, Mary of Guise, wife of King James V of Scotland, gave birth to a baby girl. At the time of Mary’s birth her father was ill and it legend states that King James said “It cam wi’ a lass and it will gang wi’ a lass!” when he learned of his child’s sex, referring to the Stewarts, ruling house of Scotland. James died within a week of Mary’s birth, making her Queen of Scotland as a newborn. 

From her first days Mary’s life was riddled with politics and plots. Her great-uncle King Henry VIII of England sought to unite Scotland and England by marrying his son Edward to young Mary in a time known as the “rough wooing” of Scotland. The outcome of this was Mary’s betrothal to Francis, the Dauphin of France. Mary was sent to France at the age of five and would live at the French court for the next 14 years.In 1558 Mary and Francis were married. The two were childhood friends and got along well, but the Dauphin was weak and sickly compared to the very tall, beautiful,and lively Mary. They would have no children. Francis became king in 1559 and Mary became his consort. Francis was dead of an ear infection a year later and Mary returned to Scotland in 1561, with very little knowledge of the country’s people or political environment. Within the first years of her reign Mary saw religious strife, intrigue, rebellions, and conflict. 

When Mary wed a second time to Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, she received disapproval from all sides. Soon Darnley became arrogant and demanding and their marriage was strained. Despite this, Mary became pregnant. During her pregnancy, Mary was witness to the murder of her Catholic friend and private secretary David Ritzzio at the hands of Darnley and his co-conspirators. Mary and Darnley were forced into hiding by the Protestant conspirators, and in 1566 she gave birth to her son James. Shortly afterwards, Mary began working with some Scottish lords to get rid of “the Darnley problem.” This resulted in Darnley’s murder by strangulation after the house he resided in was blown up with gunpowder. It was believed Mary was directly responsible for her husband’s murder and allowed the guilty men to escape, with James Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell being the chief conspirator. But Bothwell had his own plot to wed Mary and rule Scotland with her. In 1567 Mary was abducted by Bothwell and possibly raped by him. Mary, whether by her own will or not, married Bothwell, to the shock and animosity of both Protestants and Catholics. Many Scottish nobles turned against Mary and she was eventually forced to abdicate in favor of her infant son James, now James VI of Scotland. 

Mary fled to England, possibly seeking help from her cousin Elizabeth to regain her throne. But Elizabeth was not keen to involve herself and her army so far into Scottish politics, and instead ordered an investigation into the murder of Mary’s husband Darnley. Mary was placed under house arrest in England, from which she would never be freed. For the next 19 years Mary would be kept under careful surveillance, as she was suspected to be involved in Catholic plots to usurp Queen Elizabeth. After Mary was implicated in the Babington plot, which was a plot to assassinate Queen Elizabeth and place Mary on the English throne with the aid of King Phillip II of Spain, she was put on trial. She was allowed no legal council nor was she permitted to review evidence that had been seized from her. Nevertheless, Mary was found guilty and sentenced to death. She was beheaded on February 8, 1587 at the age of forty four after a short but tumultuous life.

Mary’s son James succeeded Elizabeth I as King James I of England, and thus began the Stuart dynasty’s rule of England and Scotland in a personal union. Through her son, Mary is a direct ancestor of all British rulers extending to the present day. 


Charles Stuart (1600 – 1649)

Charles I was born in Fife on 19 November 1600, the second son of James VI of Scotland and Anne of Denmark. On the death of Elizabeth I in 1603 James became king of England and Ireland. Charles’s popular older brother Henry, whom he adored, died in 1612 leaving Charles as heir, and in 1625 he became king. Three months after his accession he married Henrietta Maria of France. They had a happy marriage and left five surviving children.

When Charles I succeeded his father in 1625, friction with Parliament began at once. Charles believed in his divine right as king and struggled to control Parliament who resented his attempts at absolute rule. One of his first acts was to dissolve parliament in 1625, and again in 1626 after attempts to impeach the Duke of Buckingham over war against Spain and support of the French Huguenots. Charles forced an unpopular ‘Ship Money’ tax to raise funds without the consent of Parliament. In 1628 Charles was presented with the Petition of Right a declaration of the “rights and liberties of the subject", which he reluctantly agreed to. However, in 1629 he dissolved Parliament again, imprisoned its leaders and ruled without a Parliament from 1629 to 1640. His advisers Earl Strafford and Archbishop Laud persecuted the Puritans, and provoked the Presbyterian Scots Covenanters to revolt when Laud attempted to introduce the English Book of Common Prayer.

A problem in Scotland brought an abrupt end to Charles’ 11 years of personal rule and unleashed the forces of civil war upon England. Charles attempted to force a new prayer book on the Scots, which resulted in rebellion. Charles’ forces were ill prepared due to lack of proper funds, causing the king to call, first, the Short Parliament, and finally the Long Parliament. King and Parliament again reached no agreement; Charles foolishly tried to arrest five members of Parliament on the advice of Henrietta Maria, which brought matters to a head. The struggle for supremacy led to civil war. Charles raised his standard against Parliamentary forces at Nottingham in 1642.

The Royalists were defeated in 1645-1646 by a combination of parliament’s alliance with the Scots and the formation of the New Model Army. In 1646, Charles surrendered to the Scots, who handed him over to parliament. He escaped to the Isle of Wight in 1647 and encouraged discontented Scots to invade. This ‘Second Civil War’ was over within a year with another royalist defeat by Parliamentarian general Oliver Cromwell. Convinced that there would never be peace while the king lived, a rump of radical MPs, including Cromwell, put him on trial for treason. He was found guilty and executed on 30 January 1649 outside the Banqueting House on Whitehall, London.

THIS DAY IN HISTORY:  February 8th, 1587- Mary, Queen of Scots was executed

After 19 years of imprisonment, Mary Queen of Scots was found guilty of conspiracy to murder Queen Elizabeth I at Fotheringhay Castle in England, and sentenced to death. In Mary’s final letter, written to her brother-in-law Henri III of France six hours before her execution, she expressed her belief that she was dying a religious martyr.

“Royal brother… having thrown myself into the power of the Queen my cousin, at whose hands I have suffered much for almost twenty years, I have finally been condemned to death by her and her Estates….. I am to be executed like a criminal at eight in the morning… I scorn death and vow that I meet it innocent of any crime… The Catholic faith and the assertion of my God-given right to the English crown are the two issues on which I am condemned, and yet I am not allowed to say that it is for the Catholic religion that I die, but for fear of interference with theirs.”

At 8 a.m. on February 8th, the former Queen of Scotland was led to the scaffold in the great hall of Fotheringhay Castle. It is noted that she told her servant, “You ought to rejoice and not to weep for that the end of Mary Stuart’s troubles is now done… all this world is but vanity and full of troubles and sorrows. Carry this message from me and tell my friends that I died a true woman to my religion, and like a true Scottish woman and a true French woman; but God forgive them that have long desired my end.”

To everyone’s surprise, Mary removed her black dress to reveal a red petticoat underneath, which was well known as a symbol of Catholic martyrdom. She knelt by the block, had a cloth tied across her eyes, and knelt down, repeating In manus tuas, Domine  (Into thy hands, Lord)

The executioner placed a hand on Mary for a moment then cut off her head with two blows of his axe, and when he raised up her head to the crowd, her wig came away, revealing her hidden grey hairs. Mary’s small lapdog was found hiding under the dead queen’s skirts, soaked in her blood. Her body was taken away to be embalmed while her blood stained clothes were burned, and was laid to rest in Peterborough Cathedral. When her son James became king of England he had his mother disinterred and buried beneath a finely carved tomb in Westminster Abbey.

The Birth of Black America: The First African Americans and the Pursuit of Freedom at Jamestown

Tim Hashaw

The voyage that shaped early America was neither that of the Susan Constant in 1607 nor the Mayflower in 1620. Absolutely vital to the formation of English-speaking America was the voyage made by some sixty Africans stolen from a Spanish slave ship and brought to the young struggling colony of Jamestown in 1619. It was an act of colonial piracy that angered King James I of England, causing him to carve up the Virginia Company’s monopoly for virtually all of North America. It was an infusion of brave and competent souls who were essential to Jamestown’s survival and success. And it was the arrival of pioneers who would fire the first salvos in the centuries-long African-American battle for liberation. Until now, it has been buried by historians. Four hundred years after the birth of English-speaking America, as a nation turns its attention to its ancestry, The Birth of Black America reconstructs the true origins of the United States and of the African-American experience.

anonymous asked:

do you have a favorite poem?

Who can resist this stirring, subtle piece of wry satire by Théophile de Viau, dating from 1623? 

Au marquis du Boukinquan (to the Marquis of Buckingham) 

Apollon avec ses chansons
Debaucha le jeune Hyacinthe,
Si Corridon fout Aminthe,
Cesar n’aimait que les garçons.

On a foutu Monsieur le Grand
L’on fout le Comte de Tonnerre.
Et ce savant Roi d’Angleterre,
Foutait-il pas le Boukinquan?

Je n’ai ni qualité ni rang
Qui me donne un Marquis pour garse.
Et tu sais pourtant bien que j’arse
Aussi fort qu’un Prince du sang.

Which translates loosely (because I only have an A Level in French) as:

Apollo with his songs
Debauched the young Hyacinthus,
If Corridon fucks Amyntas,
Caesar loved only boys.

One man fucks the Baron of Bellegarde*
Another fucks the Count / Earl of Tonnerre.
And this learned King of England,**
Did he not fuck the Duke of Buckingham?***

I have neither the status nor the rank
Which makes a Marquis of a wench.
And yet, you know I could****
As well as any Prince of royal blood.

Sheer poetry.

* Monsieur le Grande was a cute lil nickname.
** King James I of England.
*** George Villiers. Also, in response to the question posed here, yes.
**** I actually have no idea what ‘j’arse’ means, because it looks like no word I have ever seen before, so I was intentionally ambiguous and left it up to context. Naughty me. I am not a translator.


- Le Château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye est un château royal, d'abord un château médiéval entre 1122 et sa destruction en 1346 par le Black Prince, puis une forteresse pendant la Guerre de Cent ans (occupée par les anglais pendant 20 ans), et enfin reconstruit comme château de la Renaissance par François Ier – devenant un des palais préféré des rois. Plusieurs rois naquirent ou moururent à Saint-Germain et, avant Versailles, Louis XIV installa sa cour au château pour éviter les dangers de Paris. Puis, James II y vécu en exile jusqu'à sa mort et ses partisans ne le quittèrent qu'avec la Révolution.

Le château est maintenant le Musée National d'Archéologie et est connu pour sa Grande Terrasse de 2,4km et sa vue sur l'Ouest parisien et La Défense.

- The Château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye is a royal palace, first a medieval castle between 1122 and its destruction in 1346 by the [English] Black Prince, then a fortress during the Hundred Years’ War (occupied by the English during 20 years), and later reconstructed as a Renaissance château by King Francis I (XVI century) – becoming one of the favourite palace of the French kings. Several kings were born or died in Saint-Germain and, before Versailles, Louis XIV held court in the castle to avoid the dangers of Paris. Then, King James II of England lived in exile in the château, where he died, and his supporters remained at the palace until the French Revolution.

The château is now the National Museum of Archaeology and is known for its 2.4km Grande Terrasse along the Seine and its outstanding view of West Paris area and La Défense business district.

littlelaceddandelion  asked:

Hey, I know you aren't a practitioner of Wicca (neither am I) but I do need your advice for a Wicca-related thing. Do you have any advice for someone who wants to start getting into Wicca? I'm not trying to be a Wiccan, but my boyfriend wants to be Wiccan (he comes from a Buddhist/traditional religion family) and I'm not entirely sure what way to guide him. I have no serious experience with Wicca and my witchcraft and spirituality don't normally intermingle so it's not even the same structure

(Not a Wiccan, but I’ll do my best!)

I find the best place to start any journey of this sort is to start acquiring knowledge. Making well-informed choices, or at least correcting wrong assumptions as you go, is the cornerstone of a healthy spiritual life and a healthy witchy mentality.

There’s a lot of Wiccan info in modern pagan literature; pretty much anything you’d pick up off a bookstore shelf should have SOMETHING to do with Wicca, because most of the authors that the big-name publishers work with are, ta-da, Wiccan.

Trouble is, a lot of the popular authors (particularly folks like Silver RavenWolf, Raymond Buckland, Amber K, D.J. Conway, and Edain McCoy) are problematic as hell. Whether it’s appropriation, misinformation, or straight-up elitist bullshit, there’s not really such a thing as an UNproblematic pagan book.

For a beginner, you might start with the works of Scott Cunningham and Kate West. They’re not perfect either, but they’re some of the least problematic books that I’ve found, and I keep them in my own collection to this day.

A word of warning: most Wiccans are very nice people, but there is a LOT of poisonous rhetoric and false history that gets thrown around. Here are some pitfalls to watch out for:

  • “Wicca is an ancient religion” - FALSE. Wicca was created by Gerald Gardner and his circle in the early 1900s. While it is BASED on older traditional beliefs, the religion itself isn’t even a full century old. This not does mean it is any less legitimate; it just means it’s not ancient. And that’s okay.
  • “Wicca and witchcraft are always the same thing” - FALSE. There are plenty of non-Wiccan traditions and paths out there. Wicca is neither the only nor the default way to be a witch, despite what some authors will tell you.
  • “All witches follow the Wiccan Rede” - FALSE. The whole “Harm None” mentality that many Wiccans adopt is not unique to their religion, but it is far from being a requirement for anyone else to follow. Again, Wicca and Wiccan rules are not a default setting. (Also, you’ll see a shit-ton of people here on tumblr who want to cram this idea of one universal witchy morality down people’s throats. This is colloquially called “Rede-thumping” and it is not viewed kindly.)
  • “Cursing is evil / Real Witches don’t curse / Any negative use of magic will come back on you threefold” - The decision of whether or not to use baneful magic is dependent on the practitioner’s will alone. Cursing comes with consequences, there’s no doubt of that, but Real Witches do do it, and there are ways of mitigating the backlash if one does decide to sling a hex or two. Point is, it doesn’t make you evil and it doesn’t destroy your life if used wisely and properly prepared for.
  • “Christians are evil and will persecute you; also they stole all our holidays” - FALSE. While Christianity and Wicca may not agree with each other in matters of religion, not all Christians are out to get you for being a witch. There’s a whole lot of needless Christian-bashing in Wiccan literature; I’m still not sure if this is because of the authorrs having personal issues, or if it’s a larger need to be in opposition to the “establishment” religion; i.e. Special Rebel Snowflake Complex. Also, Christians did not steal pagan holidays. We have this argument on tumblr several times a year.
  • “Millions of witches died in The Burning Times” - NOPE NOPE NOPE. There were witch trials and there were people burnt at the stake, but very few if ANY of them were actually witches. (Confessions extracted under coercion or torture do not count.) Besides which, many of the people who were executed were actually up on charges of heresy; it was a dangerous time to be in disagreement with the crowned heads on matters of religion. (See: The Spanish Inquisition, King James I & VI of England, “Bloody Mary” Tudor) And furthermore, if millions of people had died, in addition to all the other historical hazards, the entire population of Europe would have collapsed. We are NOT the descendants of “the witches they failed to burn,” and we do NOT need a persecution complex to be legitimate.

There are also problems with appropriation and casual racism, as well as an over-focus on cis-gendered heterosexuality in practitioners and deities. A lot of this is author-specific (I’m looking at you, Ravenwolf and Buckland), but it pops up in community conversation from time to time too. Just tread lightly, turn up your Bullshit Detector, read critically, and check academic sources for any historical claims, and, perhaps most importantly, talk to actual Wiccans.

None of this is to say that Wicca is bad, or that Wiccans are bad. I want to emphasize that - I have nothing again Wicca or Wiccans. Like I said, most of them are really lovely, open-minded, well-informed people. It’s not their fault that certain people have given the religion and the community a bit of a bad rap.