Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

This is a broad, catch-all category of works that fit best here and not elsewhere. If you haven't found it someplace else, you might want to look here.

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Wed Jan 22, 2020 6:17 am

Part 1 of 2

Max Stirner [Johann Kaspar Schmidt]
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 1/21/20



Max Stirner

-- Max Stirner

Max Stirner
Max Stirner as portrayed by Friedrich Engels
Born: Johann Kaspar Schmidt, 25 October 1806, Bayreuth, Bavaria
Died: 26 June 1856 (aged 49), Berlin, Prussia
Education: Gymnasium illustre zu Bayreuth [de]
University of Berlin (no degree)
University of Erlangen (no degree)
Era: 19th-century philosophy
Region: Western philosophy
School: Young Hegelians (early)
Egoist anarchism (post-mortem icon)
Main interests: Ethics, politics, ontology, property, value theory
Notable ideas: Union of egoists, psychological egoism
Influences: Bauer, Feuerbach, Hegel,[1] Fichte, possibly the Marquis de Sade
Influenced: Arrigoni, Byington, Engels, Marx, Newman, Bahnsen,[2] Darwin, Freud, Tucker, Mackay, Jünger, Steiner, Mussolini,[3][4] Armand, Camus, Schmitt, Novatore, Evola, Brand, Goldman, Black, Igualada, Read, Wilson, Reich, Landauer, Mühsam, Mencken, Adler, Gross[5]

Johann Kaspar Schmidt (25 October 1806 – 26 June 1856), better known as Max Stirner, was a German philosopher who is often seen as one of the forerunners of nihilism, existentialism, psychoanalytic theory, postmodernism, and individualist anarchism[6][7]. Stirner's main work, The Ego and Its Own, also known as The Unique And Its Property, or, literally, The Individual and His Property[8][9], was first published in 1845 in Leipzig and has since appeared in numerous editions and translations.


Stirner's birthplace in Bayreuth

Stirner was born in Bayreuth, Bavaria. What little is known of his life is mostly due to the Scottish-born German writer John Henry Mackay, who wrote a biography of Stirner (Max Stirner – sein Leben und sein Werk), published in German in 1898 (enlarged 1910, 1914) and translated into English in 2005. Stirner was the only child of Albert Christian Heinrich Schmidt (1769–1807) and Sophia Elenora Reinlein (1778–1839). His father died of tuberculosis on 19 April 1807 at the age of 37.[10] In 1809, his mother remarried to Heinrich Ballerstedt (a pharmacist) and settled in West Prussian Kulm (now Chełmno, Poland). When Stirner turned 20, he attended the University of Berlin,[10] where he studied philology, philosophy and theology. He attended the lectures of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, who was to become a source of inspiration for his thinking.[11] He attended Hegel's lectures on the history of philosophy, the philosophy of religion and the subjective spirit. Stirner then moved to the University of Erlangen, which he attended at the same time as Ludwig Feuerbach.[12]

Stirner returned to Berlin and obtained a teaching certificate, but he was unable to obtain a full-time teaching post from the Prussian government.[13] While in Berlin in 1841, Stirner participated in discussions with a group of young philosophers called Die Freien (The Free Ones) and whom historians have subsequently categorized as the Young Hegelians. Some of the best known names in 19th century literature and philosophy were involved with this group, including Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Bruno Bauer and Arnold Ruge. Contrary to popular belief, Feuerbach was not a member of Die Freien, although he was heavily involved in Young Hegelian discourse. While some of the Young Hegelians were eager subscribers to Hegel's dialectical method and attempted to apply dialectical approaches to Hegel's conclusions, the left-wing members of the group broke with Hegel. Feuerbach and Bauer led this charge.

Frequently the debates would take place at Hippel's, a wine bar in Friedrichstraße, attended by among others Marx and Engels, who were both adherents of Feuerbach at the time. Stirner met with Engels many times and Engels even recalled that they were "great friends",[14] but it is still unclear whether Marx and Stirner ever met. It does not appear that Stirner contributed much to the discussions, but he was a faithful member of the club and an attentive listener.[15] The most-often reproduced portrait of Stirner is a cartoon by Engels, drawn forty years later from memory at biographer Mackay's request. It is highly likely that this and the group sketch of Die Freien at Hippel's are the only firsthand images of Stirner. Stirner worked as a teacher in a school for young girls owned by Madame Gropius[16] when he wrote his major work, The Ego and Its Own, which in part is a polemic against Feuerbach and Bauer, but also against communists such as Wilhelm Weitling and the anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. He resigned from his teaching position in anticipation of controversy from this work's publication in October 1844.

Stirner married twice. His first wife was Agnes Burtz (1815–1838), the daughter of his landlady, whom he married on 12 December 1837. However, she died from complications with pregnancy in 1838. In 1843, he married Marie Dähnhardt, an intellectual associated with Die Freien. They divorced in 1846. The Ego and Its Own was dedicated "to my sweetheart Marie Dähnhardt". Marie later converted to Catholicism and died in 1902 in London.

After The Ego and Its Own, Stirner wrote Stirner's Critics and translated Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations and Jean-Baptiste Say's Traite d'Economie Politique into German to little financial gain. He also wrote a compilation of texts titled History of Reaction in 1852. Stirner died in 1856 in Berlin from an infected insect bite and it is said that Bruno Bauer was the only Young Hegelian present at his funeral, held at the Friedhof II der Sophiengemeinde Berlin.


Main article: Philosophy of Max Stirner

See also: Egoism and Egoist anarchism

The philosophy of Stirner is credited as a major influence in the development of nihilism, existentialism and post-modernism as well as individualist anarchism, post-anarchism and post-left anarchy. Stirner's main philosophical work was The Ego and Its Own.


Stirner argues that individuals are impossible to fully comprehend. All mere concepts of the self will always be inadequate to fully describe the nature of our experience. Stirner has been broadly understood as a proponent of both psychological egoism and ethical egoism, although the latter position can be disputed as there is no claim in Stirner's writing in which one ought to pursue one's own interest and further claiming any ought could be seen as a new Fixed Idea.

Stirner's Egoism is purely descriptive and must be understood in the Dialectical context to which it refers. Stirner's egoism is an attempt to surpass the very idea of 'ought' itself. To try to fit Stirner into the contemporary mindset misses the point.

Hence this self-interest is necessarily subjective, allowing both selfish and altruistic normative claims to be included. Individual self-realization rests on each individual's desire to fulfill their egoism. The difference between an unwilling and a willing egoist is that the former will be possessed by an "empty idea" and believe that they are fulfilling a higher cause, but usually being unaware that they are only fulfilling their own desires to be happy or secure; and in contrast the latter will be a person that is able to freely choose its actions, fully aware that they are only fulfilling individual desires as stated by Stirner:

Sacred things exist only for the egoist who does not acknowledge himself, the involuntary egoist [...] in short, for the egoist who would like not to be an egoist, and abases himself (combats his egoism), but at the same time abases himself only for the sake of "being exalted", and therefore of gratifying his egoism. Because he would like to cease to be an egoist, he looks about in heaven and earth for higher beings to serve and sacrifice himself to; but, however much he shakes and disciplines himself, in the end he does all for his own sake [...] [on] this account I call him the involuntary egoist. [...] As you are each instant, you are your own creature in this very 'creature' you do not wish to lose yourself, the creator. You are yourself a higher being than you are, and surpass yourself. [...] [J]ust this, as an involuntary egoist, you fail to recognize; and therefore the 'higher essence' is to you – an alien essence. [...] Alienness is a criterion of the "sacred".

— Max Stirner[17]

The contrast is also expressed in terms of the difference between the voluntary egoist being the possessor of his concepts as opposed to being possessed. Only when one realizes that all sacred truths such as law, right, morality, religion and so on are nothing other than artificial concepts—and not to be obeyed—can one act freely. For Stirner, to be free is to be both one's own "creature" (in the sense of creation) and one's own "creator" (dislocating the traditional role assigned to the gods). To Stirner, power is the method of egoism—it is the only justified method of gaining property.


Three pioneers of individualist anarchism

Stirner proposes that most commonly accepted social institutions—including the notion of state, property as a right, natural rights in general and the very notion of society—were mere illusions, "spooks" or ghosts in the mind.[18] He advocated egoism and a form of amoralism in which individuals would unite in Unions of egoists only when it was in their self-interest to do so. For him, property simply comes about through might, saying: "Whoever knows how to take, to defend, the thing, to him belongs property. [...] What I have in my power, that is my own. So long as I assert myself as holder, I am the proprietor of the thing". He adds that "I do not step shyly back from your property, but look upon it always as my property, in which I respect nothing. Pray do the like with what you call my property!".[19] Stirner considers the world and everything in it, including other persons, available to one's taking or use without moral constraint[20] and that rights do not exist in regard to objects and people at all. He sees no rationality in taking the interests of others into account unless doing so furthers one's self-interest, which he believes is the only legitimate reason for acting. He denies society as being an actual entity, calling society a "spook" and that "the individuals are its reality" (The Ego and Its Own).

Despite being labeled as anarchist, Stirner was not necessarily one. Separation of Stirner and egoism from anarchism was first done by Dora Marsden in her debate with Benjamin Tucker in 1914 in her journals, The New Freewoman and The Egoist[21]. The idea of "egoist archism" was also expounded by various other egoists, mainly Malfew Seklew[22] and Sidney E. Parker[23]

Union of egoists

Main article: Union of egoists

Stirner's idea of the Union of egoists was first expounded in The Ego and Its Own. The Union is understood as a non-systematic association, which Stirner proposed in contradistinction to the state.[24] Unlike a "community" in which individuals are obliged to participate, Stirner's suggested Union would be voluntary and instrumental under which individuals would freely associate insofar as others within the Union remain useful to each constituent individual.[25] The Union relation between egoists is continually renewed by all parties' support through an act of will.[26] The Union requires that all parties participate out of a conscious egoism. If one party silently finds themselves to be suffering, but puts up and keeps the appearance, the Union has degenerated into something else.[26] This Union is not seen as an authority above a person's own will. Stirner's hyperindividualism puts him outside mainstream anarchist philosophy which emphasizes community and collective organization.[25]


Stirner criticizes conventional notions of revolution, arguing that social movements aimed at overturning the state are tacitly statist because they are implicitly aimed at the establishment of a new state thereafter.

Hegel's possible influence

Caricature of Max Stirner taken from a sketch by Friedrich Engels (1820–1895) of the meetings of Die Freien

Scholar Lawrence Stepelevich argues that G. W. F. Hegel was a major influence on The Ego and Its Own. While the latter has an "un-Hegelian structure and tone" on the whole and is hostile to Hegel's conclusions about the self and the world, Stepelevich argues that Stirner's work is best understood as answering Hegel's question of the role of consciousness after it has contemplated "untrue knowledge" and become "absolute knowledge". Stepelevich concludes that Stirner presents the consequences of the rediscovering one's self-consciousness after realizing self-determination.[27]

Scholars such as Douglas Moggach and Widukind De Ridder have argued that Stirner was obviously a student of Hegel, like his contemporaries Ludwig Feuerbach and Bruno Bauer, but this does not necessarily make him an Hegelian. Contrary to the Young Hegelians, Stirner scorned all attempts at an immanent critique of Hegel and the Enlightenment and renounced Bauer and Feuerbach's emancipatory claims as well. Contrary to Hegel, who considered the given as an inadequate embodiment of rationality, Stirner leaves the given intact by considering it a mere object, not of transformation, but of enjoyment and consumption ("His Own").[28] According to Moggach, Stirner does not go beyond Hegel, but in fact leaves the domain of philosophy in its entirety:

Stirner refused to conceptualize the human self, and rendered it devoid of any reference to rationality or universal standards. The self was moreover considered a field of action, a 'never-being I'. The 'I' had no essence to realize and life itself was a process of self-dissolution. Far from accepting, like the humanist Hegelians, a construal of subjectivity endowed with a universal and ethical mission, Stirner's notion of 'the Unique' (Der Einzige) distances itself from any conceptualization whatsoever: 'There is no development of the concept of the Unique. No philosophical system can be built out of it, as it can out of Being, or Thinking, or the I. Rather, with it, all development of the concept ceases. The person who views it as a principle thinks that he can treat it philosophically or theoretically and necessarily wastes his breath arguing against it'.

— Douglas Moggach and Widukind De Ridder[29]


The False Principle of Our Education

Main article: The False Principle of Our Education

In 1842, The False Principle of Our Education (Das unwahre Prinzip unserer Erziehung) was published in Rheinische Zeitung, which was edited by Marx at the time.[30] Written as a reaction to Otto Friedrich Theodor Heinsius' treatise Humanism vs. Realism, Stirner explains that education in either the classical humanist method or the practical realist method still lacks true value. Education is therefore fulfilled in aiding the individual in becoming an individual.

Art and Religion

Art and Religion (Kunst und Religion) was also published in Rheinische Zeitung on 14 June 1842. It addresses Bruno Bauer and his publication against Hegel called Hegel's Doctrine of Religion and Art Judged From the Standpoint of Faith. Bauer had inverted Hegel's relation between Art and Religion by claiming that Art was much more closely related to Philosophy than Religion, based on their shared determinacy and clarity, and a common ethical root. However, Stirner went beyond both Hegel and Bauer's criticism by asserting that Art rather created an object for Religion and could thus by no means be related to what Stirner considered—in opposition with Hegel and Bauer—to be Philosophy, saying:

[Philosophy] neither stands opposed to an Object, as Religion, nor makes one, as Art, but rather places its pulverizing hand upon all the business of making Objects as well as the whole of objectivity itself, and so breathes the air of freedom. Reason, the spirit of Philosophy, concerns itself only with itself, and troubles itself over no Object.

— Max Stirner[31]

Stirner deliberately left Philosophy out of the dialectical triad (Art–Religion–Philosophy) by claiming that Philosophy "doesn't bother itself with objects" (Religion), nor does it "make an object" (Art). In Stirner's account, Philosophy was in fact indifferent towards both Art and Religion. Stirner thus mocked and radicalised Bauer's criticism of religion.[28]

The Ego and Its Own

Main article: The Ego and Its Own

Stirner's main work is The Ego and Its Own (Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum), which appeared in Leipzig in October 1844, with as year of publication mentioned 1845. In The Ego And Its Own, Stirner launches a radical anti-authoritarian and individualist critique of contemporary Prussian society and modern western society as such. He offers an approach to human existence in which he depicts himself as "the unique one", a "creative nothing", beyond the ability of language to fully express:

If I concern myself for myself, the unique one, then my concern rests on its transitory, mortal creator, who consumes himself, and I may say: All things are nothing to me.

— Max Stirner[32]

The book proclaims that all religions and ideologies rest on empty concepts. The same holds true for society's institutions that claim authority over the individual, be it the state, legislation, the church, or the systems of education such as universities.

Stirner's argument explores and extends the limits of criticism, aiming his critique especially at those of his contemporaries, particularly Ludwig Feuerbach and Bruno Bauer; and at popular ideologies, including religion, liberalism and humanism (which he regarded as analogous to religion with the abstract Man or humanity as the supreme being), nationalism, statism, capitalism, socialism and communism:

In the time of spirits thoughts grew till they overtopped my head, whose offspring they yet were; they hovered about me and convulsed me like fever-phantasies – an awful power. The thoughts had become corporeal on their own account, were ghosts, e. g. God, Emperor, Pope, Fatherland, etc. If I destroy their corporeity, then I take them back into mine, and say: "I alone am corporeal." And now I take the world as what it is to me, as mine, as my property; I refer all to myself.

— Max Stirner[33]

Stirner's Critics

Stirner's Critics (Recensenten Stirners) was published in September 1845 in Wigands Vierteljahrsschrift. It is a response in which Stirner refers to himself in the third-person to three critical reviews of The Ego and its Own by Moses Hess in Die letzten Philosophen (The Last Philosophers), by a certain Szeliga (alias of an adherent of Bruno Bauer) in an article in the journal Norddeutsche Blätter, and by Ludwig Feuerbach anonymously in an article called On 'The Essence of Christianity' in Relation to Stirner's 'The Ego and its Own' (Über 'Das Wesen des Christentums' in Beziehung auf Stirners 'Der Einzige und sein Eigentum') in Wigands Vierteljahrsschrift.

Portrait of Max Stirner

The Philosophical Reactionaries

The Philosophical Reactionaries (Die Philosophischen Reactionäre) was published in 1847 in Die Epigonen, a journal edited by Otto Wigand from Leipzig. At the time, Wigand had already published The Ego and Its Own and was about to finish the publication of Stirner's translations of Adam Smith and Jean-Baptiste Say. As the subtitle indicates, The Philosophiscal Reactionaries was written in response to a 1847 article by Kuno Fischer (1824–1907) entitled The Modern Soliphist (Die Moderne Sophisten). The article was signed G. Edward and its authorship has been disputed ever since John Henry Mackay "cautiously" attributed it to Stirner and included it in his collection of Stirner's lesser writings. It was first translated into English in 2011 and the introductory note explains:

Mackay based his attribution of this text to Stirner on Kuno Fischer's subsequent reply to it, in which the latter, 'with such determination', identified G. Edward as Max Stirner. The article was entitled 'Ein Apologet der Sophistik und "ein Philosophischer Reactionäre"' and was published alongside 'Die Philosophischen Reactionäre'. Moreover, it seems rather odd that Otto Wigand would have published 'Edward's' piece back- to-back with an article that falsely attributed it to one of his personal associates at the time. And, indeed, as Mackay went on to argue, Stirner never refuted this attribution. This remains, however, a slim basis on which to firmly identify Stirner as the author. This circumstantial evidence has led some scholars to cast doubts over Stirner's authorship, based on both the style and content of 'Die Philosophischen Reactionäre'. One should, however, bear in mind that it was written almost three years after Der Einzige und sein Eigentum, at a time when Young Hegelianism had withered away.

— Max Stirner[34]

The majority of the text deals with Kuno Fischer's definition of sophism. With much wit, the self-contradictory nature of Fischer's criticism of sophism is exposed. Fischer had made a sharp distinction between sophism and philosophy while at the same time considering it as the "mirror image of philosophy". The sophists breathe "philosophical air" and were "dialectically inspired to a formal volubility". Stirner's answer is striking:

Have you philosophers really no clue that you have been beaten with your own weapons? Only one clue. What can your common sense reply when I dissolve dialectically what you have merely posited dialectically? You have showed me with what kind of 'volubility' one can turn everything to nothing and nothing to everything, black into white and white into black. What do you have against me, when I return to you your pure art?

— Max Stirner[35]

Looking back on The Ego and Its Own, Stirner claims:

Stirner himself has described his book as, in part, a clumsy expression of what he wanted to say. It is the arduous work of the best years of his life, and yet he calls it, in part, 'clumsy'. That is how hard he struggled with a language that was ruined by philosophers, abused by state-, religious- and other believers, and enabled a boundless confusion of ideas.

— Max Stirner[36]

History of Reaction

History of Reaction (Geschichte der Reaktion) was published in two volumes in 1851 by Allgemeine Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt and immediately banned in Austria.[10] It was written in the context of the recent 1848 revolutions in German states and is mainly a collection of the works of others selected and translated by Stirner. The introduction and some additional passages were Stirner's work. Edmund Burke and Auguste Comte are quoted to show two opposing views of revolution.

Critical reception

Stirner's work did not go unnoticed among his contemporaries. Stirner's attacks on ideology—in particular Feuerbach's humanism—forced Feuerbach into print. Moses Hess (at that time close to Marx) and Szeliga (pseudonym of Franz Zychlin von Zychlinski, an adherent of Bruno Bauer) also replied to Stirner, who answered the criticism in a German periodical in the September 1845 article Stirner's Critics (Recensenten Stirners), which clarifies several points of interest to readers of the book—especially in relation to Feuerbach.

While Marx's Saint Max (Sankt Max), a large part of The German Ideology (Die Deutsche Ideologie), was not published until 1932 and thus assured The Ego and Its Own a place of curious interest among Marxist readers, Marx's ridicule of Stirner has played a significant role in the preservation of Stirner's work in popular and academic discourse despite lacking mainstream popularity.

Comments by contemporaries

Twenty years after the appearance of Stirner's book, the author Friedrich Albert Lange wrote the following:

Stirner went so far in his notorious work, 'Der Einzige und Sein Eigenthum' (1845), as to reject all moral ideas. Everything that in any way, whether it be external force, belief, or mere idea, places itself above the individual and his caprice, Stirner rejects as a hateful limitation of himself. What a pity that to this book – the extremest that we know anywhere – a second positive part was not added. It would have been easier than in the case of Schelling's philosophy; for out of the unlimited Ego I can again beget every kind of Idealism as my will and my idea. Stirner lays so much stress upon the will, in fact, that it appears as the root force of human nature. It may remind us of Schopenhauer.

— Friedrich Albert Lange[37]

Some people believe that in a sense a "second positive part" was soon to be added, though not by Stirner, but by Friedrich Nietzsche. The relationship between Nietzsche and Stirner seems to be much more complicated.[38] According to George J. Stack's Lange and Nietzsche,[39] Nietzsche read Lange's History of Materialism "again and again" and was therefore very familiar with the passage regarding Stirner.
Site Admin
Posts: 31201
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Wed Jan 22, 2020 7:08 am

Part 2 of 2


While Der Einzige was a critical success and attracted much reaction from famous philosophers after publication, it was out of print and the notoriety that it had provoked had faded many years before Stirner's death.[40] Stirner had a destructive impact on left-Hegelianism, but his philosophy was a significant influence on Marx and his magnum opus became a founding text of individualist anarchism.[40] Edmund Husserl once warned a small audience about the "seducing power" of Der Einzige, but he never mentioned it in his writing.[41] As the art critic and Stirner admirer Herbert Read observed, the book has remained "stuck in the gizzard" of Western culture since it first appeared.[42]

Many thinkers have read and been affected by The Ego and Its Own in their youth including Rudolf Steiner, Gustav Landauer, Victor Serge,[43] Carl Schmitt and Jürgen Habermas. Few openly admit any influence on their own thinking.[44] Ernst Jünger's book Eumeswil, had the character of the Anarch, based on Stirner's Einzige.[45] Several other authors, philosophers and artists have cited, quoted or otherwise referred to Max Stirner. They include Albert Camus in The Rebel (the section on Stirner is omitted from the majority of English editions including Penguin's), Benjamin Tucker, James Huneker,[46] Dora Marsden, Renzo Novatore, Emma Goldman,[47] Georg Brandes, John Cowper Powys,[48] Martin Buber,[49] Sidney Hook,[50] Robert Anton Wilson, Horst Matthai, Frank Brand, Marcel Duchamp, several writers of the Situationist International including Raoul Vaneigem[51] and Max Ernst. Oscar Wilde's The Soul of Man Under Socialism has caused some historians to speculate that Wilde (who could read German) was familiar with the book.[52]

Since its appearance in 1844, The Ego and Its Own has seen periodic revivals of popular, political and academic interest based around widely divergent translations and interpretations—some psychological, others political in their emphasis. Today, many ideas associated with post-left anarchy's criticism of ideology and uncompromising individualism are clearly related to Stirner's. His ideas were also adopted by post-anarchism, with Saul Newman largely in agreement with many of Stirner's criticisms of classical anarchism, including his rejection of revolution and essentialism.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels

Caricature by Engels of the meetings of Die Freien

Friedrich Engels commented on Stirner in poetry at the time of Die Freien:

Look at Stirner, look at him, the peaceful enemy of all constraint.
For the moment, he is still drinking beer,
Soon he will be drinking blood as though it were water.
When others cry savagely "down with the kings"
Stirner immediately supplements "down with the laws also."
Stirner full of dignity proclaims;
You bend your willpower and you dare to call yourselves free.
You become accustomed to slavery
Down with dogmatism, down with law.[53]

Engels once even recalled at how they were "great friends" (Duzbrüder).[14] In November 1844, Engels wrote a letter to Karl Marx in which he first reported a visit to Moses Hess in Cologne and then went on to note that during this visit Hess had given him a press copy of a new book by Stirner, The Ego and Its Own. In his letter to Marx, Engels promised to send a copy of the book to him, for it certainly deserved their attention as Stirner "had obviously, among the 'Free Ones', the most talent, independence and diligence".[14] To begin with, Engels was enthusiastic about the book and expressed his opinions freely in letters to Marx:

But what is true in his principle, we, too, must accept. And what is true is that before we can be active in any cause we must make it our own, egoistic cause -- and that in this sense, quite aside from any material expectations, we are communists in virtue of our egoism, that out of egoism we want to be human beings and not merely individuals.[54]

Later, Marx and Engels wrote a major criticism of Stirner's work. The number of pages Marx and Engels devote to attacking Stirner in the unexpurgated text of The German Ideology in which they derided him as Sankt Max (Saint Max) exceeds the total of Stirner's written works.[55] As Isaiah Berlin has described it, Stirner "is pursued through five hundred pages of heavy-handed mockery and insult".[56] The book was written in 1845–1846, but it was not published until 1932. Marx's lengthy ferocious polemic against Stirner has since been considered an important turning point in Marx's intellectual development from idealism to materialism. It has been argued that historical materialism was Marx's method of reconciling communism with a Stirnerite rejection of morality.[57]

Stirner and post-structuralism

See also: Post-anarchism

In his book Specters of Marx, influential French poststructuralist thinker Jacques Derrida dealt with Stirner and his relationship with Marx while also analysing Stirner's concept of "specters" or "spooks".[58] Gilles Deleuze, another key thinker associated with post-structuralism, mentions Stirner briefly in his book The Logic of Sense.[59] Saul Newman calls Stirner a proto-poststructuralist who on the one hand had essentially anticipated modern post-structuralists such as Foucault, Lacan, Deleuze and Derrida, but on the other had already transcended them, thus providing what they were unable to—i.e. a ground for a non-essentialist critique of present liberal capitalist society. This is particularly evident in Stirner's identification of the self with a "creative nothing", a thing that cannot be bound by ideology, inaccessible to representation in language.

Possible influence on Friedrich Nietzsche

Main article: Relationship between Friedrich Nietzsche and Max Stirner

The ideas of Stirner and Friedrich Nietzsche have often been compared and many authors have discussed apparent similarities in their writings, sometimes raising the question of influence.[60] During the early years of Nietzsche's emergence as a well-known figure in Germany, the only thinker discussed in connection with his ideas more often than Stirner was Arthur Schopenhauer.[61] It is certain that Nietzsche read about The Ego and Its Own, which was mentioned in Friedrich Albert Lange's History of Materialism and Karl Robert Eduard von Hartmann's Philosophy of the Unconscious, both of which Nietzsche knew well.[62] However, there is no indication that he actually read it as no mention of Stirner is known to exist anywhere in Nietzsche's publications, papers or correspondence.[63] In 2002, a biographical discovery revealed it is probable that Nietzsche had encountered Stirner's ideas before he read Hartmann and Lange in October 1865, when he met with Eduard Mushacke, an old friend of Stirner's during the 1840s.[64]

Yet as soon as Nietzsche's work began to reach a wider audience, the question of whether he owed a debt of influence to Stirner was raised. As early as 1891 when Nietzsche was still alive, though incapacitated by mental illness, Hartmann went so far as to suggest that he had plagiarized Stirner.[65] By the turn of the century, the belief that Nietzsche had been influenced by Stirner was so widespread that it became something of a commonplace at least in Germany, prompting one observer to note in 1907 that "Stirner's influence in modern Germany has assumed astonishing proportions, and moves in general parallel with that of Nietzsche. The two thinkers are regarded as exponents of essentially the same philosophy".[66]

From the beginning of what was characterized as "great debate"[67] regarding Stirner's possible positive influence on Nietzsche, serious problems with the idea were nonetheless noted.[68] By the middle of the 20th century, if Stirner was mentioned at all in works on Nietzsche, the idea of influence was often dismissed outright or abandoned as unanswerable.[69]

However, the idea that Nietzsche was influenced in some way by Stirner continues to attract a significant minority, perhaps because it seems necessary to explain the oft-noted (though arguably superficial) similarities in their writings.[70] In any case, the most significant problems with the theory of possible Stirner influence on Nietzsche are not limited to the difficulty in establishing whether the one man knew of or read the other. They also consist in determining if Stirner in particular might have been a meaningful influence on a man as widely read as Nietzsche.[71]

Rudolf Steiner

The individualist-anarchist orientation of Rudolf Steiner's early philosophy—before he turned to theosophy around 1900—has strong parallels to and was admittedly influenced by Stirner's conception of the ego, for which Steiner claimed to have provided a philosophical foundation.[72]


Main articles: Egoist anarchism and Individualist anarchism

Stirner's philosophy was important in the development of modern anarchist thought, particularly individualist anarchism and egoist anarchism. Although Stirner is usually associated with individualist anarchism, he was influential to many social anarchists such as anarcha-feminists Emma Goldman and Federica Montseny. In European individualist anarchism, he influenced its major proponents after him such as Émile Armand, Han Ryner, Renzo Novatore, John Henry Mackay, Miguel Giménez Igualada and Lev Chernyi.

In American individualist anarchism, he found adherence in Benjamin Tucker and his magazine Liberty while these abandoned natural rights positions for egoism.[73] Several periodicals "were undoubtedly influenced by Liberty's presentation of egoism". They included I, published by Clarence Lee Swartz and edited by William Walstein Gordak and J. William Lloyd (all associates of Liberty); and The Ego and The Egoist, both of which were edited by Edward H. Fulton. Among the egoist papers that Tucker followed, there were the German Der Eigene, edited by Adolf Brand; and The Eagle and The Serpent, issued from London. The latter, the most prominent English-language egoist journal, was published from 1898 to 1900 with the subtitle A Journal of Egoistic Philosophy and Sociology.[73] Other American egoist anarchists around the early 20th century include James L. Walker, George Schumm, John Beverley Robinson, Steven T. Byington and Edward H. Fulton.[73]

In the United Kingdom, Herbert Read was influenced by Stirner and noted the closeness of Stirner's egoism to existentialism (see existentialist anarchism). Later in the 1960s, Daniel Guérin says in Anarchism: From Theory to Practice that Stirner "rehabilitated the individual at a time when the philosophical field was dominated by Hegelian anti-individualism and most reformers in the social field had been led by the misdeeds of bourgeois egotism to stress its opposite" and pointed to "the boldness and scope of his thought".[74] In the 1970s, an American Situationist collective called For Ourselves published a book called The Right To Be Greedy: Theses On The Practical Necessity Of Demanding Everything in which they advocate a "communist egoism" basing themselves on Stirner.[75]

Later in the United States, it emerged the tendency of post-left anarchy which was influenced profoundly by Stirner in aspects such as the critique of ideology. Jason McQuinn says that "when I (and other anti-ideological anarchists) criticize ideology, it is always from a specifically critical, anarchist perspective rooted in both the skeptical, individualist-anarchist philosophy of Max Stirner".[76] Bob Black and Feral Faun/Wolfi Landstreicher strongly adhere to Stirnerist egoism. In the hybrid of post-structuralism and anarchism called post-anarchism, Saul Newman has written on Stirner and his similarities to post-structuralism. Insurrectionary anarchism also has an important relationship with Stirner as can be seen in the work of Wolfi Landstreicher and Alfredo Bonanno who has also written on him in works such as Max Stirner and Max Stirner and Anarchism.[77]

Free love, homosexuals and feminists

German Stirnerist Adolf Brand produced the homosexual periodical Der Eigene in 1896. This was the first ongoing homosexual publication in the world[78] and ran until 1931. The name was taken from the writings of Stirner (who had greatly influenced the young Brand) and refers to Stirner's concept of "self-ownership" of the individual. Another early homosexual activist influenced by Stirner was John Henry Mackay. Feminists influenced by Stirner include Dora Marsden who edited the journals The Freewoman and The New Freewoman and anarchist Emma Goldman. Stirner also influenced free love and polyamory propagandist Émile Armand in the context of French individualist anarchism of the early 20th century which is known for "[t]he call of nudist naturism, the strong defense of birth control methods, the idea of "unions of egoists" with the sole justification of sexual practices".[79]

See also

• Egoist anarchism
• Individualist anarchism in Europe
• Philosophy of Max Stirner
• Relationship between Friedrich Nietzsche and Max Stirner


1. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, volume 8, The Macmillan Company and The Free Press, New York 1967.
2. Beiser, Frederick C., Weltschmerz: Pessimism in German Philosophy, 1860-1900, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016, p. 233.
3. Maurice Cranston on Max Stirner (1971)
4. Censorship and Literature in Fascist Italy. Pg. 33. Guido Bonsaver (2007)
5. Bernd A. Laska, Otto Gross zwischen Max Stirner und Wilhelm Reich, In: Raimund Dehmlow and Gottfried Heuer, eds.: 3. Internationaler Otto-Gross-Kongress, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München. Marburg, 2003, pp. 125–162, ISBN 3-936134-06-5
6. Leopold, David (2006-08-04). "Max Stirner". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
7. Goodway, David. Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow. Liverpool University Press, 2006, p. 99.
8. A Ready Reference to Philosophy East and West.
9. Anarchism: A Criticjsm and History of the Anarchist Theory.
10. Jump up to:a b c "John Henry Mackay: Max Stirner – Sein Leben und sein Werk". p. 28.
11. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, volume 8, The Macmillan Company and The Free Press, New York 1967.
12. Stepelevich 1985, p. 602.
13. Marshall, Peter (1992). Demanding the Impossible. Harper Collins. p. 221. ISBN 0002178559.
14. Jump up to:a b c Lawrence L Stepelevich. The Revival of Max Stirner.
15. Gide, Charles and Rist, Charles. A History of Economic Doctrines from the Time of the Physiocrats to the Present Day. Harrap 1956, p. 612.
16. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 8, The Macmillan Company and The Free Press, New York 1967.
17. Ibidem, Cambridge edition, pp. 37–38.
18. Heider, Ulrike. Anarchism: Left, Right and Green, San Francisco: City Lights Books, 1994, pp. 95–96.
19. Stirner, Max. The Ego and Its Own, p. 248.
20. Moggach, Douglas. The New Hegelians. Cambridge University Press, 2006 p. 194.
21. "Dora Marsden & Benjamin R. Tucker – Sidney E. Parker Archives". Retrieved 2019-11-28.
22. "The Gospel According to Malfew Seklew" (PDF).
23. "Archists, Anarchists and Egoists – Sidney E. Parker Archives". Retrieved 2019-11-28.
24. Thomas, Paul (1985). Karl Marx and the Anarchists. London: Routledge/Kegan Paul. p. 142. ISBN 0-7102-0685-2.
25. Jump up to:a b Cohn, Jesse (September 2002). "What is Postanarchism 'Post'?". Postmodern Culture. 13 (1). doi:10.1353/pmc.2002.0028. ISSN 1053-1920 – via Project MUSE.
26. Jump up to:a b Nyberg, Svein Olav. "The union of egoists" (PDF). Non Serviam. Oslo, Norway: Svein Olav Nyberg. 1: 13–14. OCLC 47758413. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 December 2010. Retrieved 1 September 2012
27. Stepelevich 1985.
28. Jump up to:a b Moggach, Douglas and De Ridder, Widukind. "Hegelianism in Restoration Prussia, 1841–1848: Freedom, Humanism and 'Anti-Humanism' in Young Hegelian Thought". In: Hegel's Thought in Europe: Currents, Crosscurrents and Undercurrents, ed. Lisa Herzog (pp. 71–92). Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, pp. 82–83.
29. "Hegelianism in Restoration Prussia,1841–1848: Freedom, Humanism and 'Anti-Humanism' in Young Hegelian Thought.", In: Hegel's Thought in Europe: Currents, Crosscurrents and Undercurrents, ed. Lisa Herzog (pp. 71–92). Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, p. 75.
30. Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (1967). The Macmillan Company and The Free Press: New York.
31. Art and Religion, p. 110.
32. The Ego and Its Own, p. 324.
33. The Ego and Its Own, p. 17.
34. "The Philosophical Reactionaries: 'The Modern Sophists' by Kuno Fischer", Newman, Saul (ed.), Max Stirner (Critical Explorations in Contemporary Political Thought), Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 90 (2011).
35. "The Philosophical Reactionaries: 'The Modern Sophists' by Kuno Fischer", Newman, Saul (ed.), Max Stirner (Critical Explorations in Contemporary Political Thought), Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 99 (2011).
36. "The Philosophical Reactionaries: 'The Modern Sophists' by Kuno Fischer", Newman, Saul (ed.), Max Stirner (Critical Explorations in Contemporary Political Thought), Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 104 (2011).
37. History of Materialism, ii. 256 (1865).
38. See Bernd A. Laska: Nietzsche's initial crisis. In: Germanic Notes and Reviews, vol. 33, n. 2, Fall/Herbst 2002, pp. 109–133.
39. George J. Stack, Lange and Nietzsche, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, 1983, p. 12, ISBN 978-3-11-008866-3.
40. Jump up to:a b Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). "Max Stirner". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
41. "Max Stirner, a durable dissident – in a nutshell".
42. Quoted in Read's book, "The Contrary Experience", Faber and Faber, 1963.
43. See Memoirs of a revolutionary, 1901–1941 by Victor Serge. Publisher Oxford U.P., 1967.
44. See Bernd A. Laska: Ein dauerhafter Dissident. Nürnberg: LSR-Verlag 1996 (online).
45. See Bernd A. Laska: Katechon und Anarch. Nürnberg: LSR-Verlag 1997 (online).
46. Huneker's book Egoists, a Book of Supermen (1909)contains an essay on Stirner.
47. See Goldman, Anarchism and Other Essays, p. 50.
48. Wilson, A. N. (1 November 2004). "World of books". The Daily Telegraph. London. Retrieved 12 May 2010.
49. Between Man and Man by Martin Buber, Beacon Press, 1955.
50. From Hegel to Marx by Sidney Hook, London, 1936.
51. "The long revolution is preparing to write works in the ink of action whose unknown or nameless authors will flock to join Sade, Fourier, Babeuf, Marx, Lacenaire, Stirner, Lautréamont, L'hautier, Vaillant, Henry, Villa, Zapata, Makhno, the Communards, the insurrectionaries of Hamburg, Kiel, Kronstadt, Asturias – all those who have not yet played their last card in a game which we have only just joined: the great gamble whose stake is freedom". Raoul Vaneigem. The Revolution of Everyday Life.
52. David Goodway, Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow, Liverpool University Press, 2006. p. 75.
53. Henri Arvon, Aux sources de 1'existentialisme Max Stirner (Paris, 1954), p. 14.
54. Zwischen 18 and 25, pp. 237–238.
55. "Chapter Sankt Max in Die deutsche Ideologie.
56. I. Berlin, Karl Marx (New York, 1963), 143.
57. G. Stedman-Jones, 'Introduction' in K. Marx and F. Engels, The Communist Manifesto (London, 2002).
58. Jacques Derrida. Specters of Marx. Routledge. 1994.
59. "Human or divine, as Stirner said, the predicates are the same whether they belong analytically to the divine being, or whether they are synthetically bound to the human form" (Gilles Deleuze. The Logic of Sense. Continuum. 2004). p. 122.
60. Albert Levy, Stirner and Nietzsche, Paris, 1904; Robert Schellwien, Max Stirner and Friedrich Nietzsche, 1892; H.L. Mencken, The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche, 1908; K. Löwith, From Hegel To Nietzsche New York, 1964, p. 187; R. A. Nicholls, "Beginnings of the Nietzsche Vogue in Germany", in Modern Philology, Vol. 56, No. 1, August 1958, pp. 24–37; T. A. Riley, "Anti-Statism in German Literature, as Exemplified by the Work of John Henry Mackay", in PMLA, Vol. 62, No. 3, September 1947, pp. 828–843; Seth Taylor, Left Wing Nietzscheans, The Politics of German Expressionism 1910–1920, p. 144, 1990, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York; Gilles Deleuze, Nietzsche et la Philosophy, Presses Universitaires de France, 1962; R. C. Solomon and K. M. Higgins, The Age of German Idealism, p. 300, Routledge, 1993.
61. While discussion of possible influence has never ceased entirely, the period of most intense discussion occurred between 1892 and 1900 in the German-speaking world. During this time, the most comprehensive account of Nietzsche's reception in the German language, the 4-volume work of Richard Frank Krummel called Nietzsche und der deutsche Geist, indicates 83 entries discussing Stirner and Nietzsche. The only thinker more frequently discussed in connection with Nietzsche during this time is Schopenhauer, with about twice the number of entries. Discussion steadily declines thereafter, but it is still significant. Nietzsche and Stirner show 58 entries between 1901 and 1918. From 1919 to 1945, there are 28 entries regarding Nietzsche and Stirner.
62. "Apart from the information which can be gained from the annotations, the library (and the books Nietzsche read) shows us the extent, and the bias, of Nietzsche's knowledge of many fields, such as evolution and cosmology. Still more obvious, the library shows us the extent and the bias of Nietzsche's knowledge about many persons to whom he so often refers with ad hominem statements in his works. This includes not only such important figures as Mill, Kant, and Pascal but also such minor ones (for Nietzsche) as Max Stirner and William James who are both discussed in books Nietzsche read". T. H. Brobjer, "Nietzsche's Reading and Private Library", 1885–1889, in Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 58, No. 4, October 1997, pp. 663–693; Stack believes it is doubtful that Nietzsche read Stirner, but notes "he was familiar with the summary of his theory he found in Lange's history." George J. Stack, Lange and Nietzsche, Walter de Gruyter, 1983, p. 276.
63. Albert Levy, Stirner and Nietzsche, Paris, 1904.
64. Bernd A. Laska: Nietzsche's initial crisis. In: Germanic Notes and Reviews, vol. 33, n. 2, fall/Herbst 2002, pp. 109–133.
65. Eduard von Hartmann, Nietzsches "neue Moral", in Preussische Jahrbücher, 67. Jg., Heft 5, May 1891, S. 501–521; augmented version with more express reproach of plagiarism in: Ethische Studien, Leipzig, Haacke 1898, pp. 34–69.
66. This author believes that one should be careful in comparing the two men. However, he notes: "It is this intensive nuance of individualism that appeared to point from Nietzsche to Max Stirner, the author of the remarkable work Der Einzige und sein Eigentum. Stirner's influence in modern Germany has assumed astonishing proportions, and moves in general parallel with that of Nietzsche. The two thinkers are regarded as exponents of essentially the same philosophy." O. Ewald, "German Philosophy in 1907", in The Philosophical Review, Vol. 17, No. 4, July 1908, pp. 400–426.
67. [in the last years of the nineteenth century] "The question of whether Nietzsche had read Stirner was the subject of great debate" R.A. Nicholls, "Beginnings of the Nietzsche Vogue in Germany", in Modern Philology, Vol. 56, No. 1, August 1958, pp. 29–30.
68. Levy pointed out in 1904 that the similarities in the writing of the two men appeared superficial. Albert Levy, Stirner and Nietzsche, Paris, 1904
69. R. A. Nicholls, "Beginnings of the Nietzsche Vogue in Germany", in Modern Philology, Vol. 56, No. 1, August 1958, pp. 24–37.
70. "Stirner, like Nietzsche, who was clearly influenced by him, has been interpreted in many different ways", Saul Newman, From Bakunin to Lacan: Anti-authoritarianism and the Dislocation of Power, Lexington Books, 2001, p. 56; "We do not even know for sure that Nietzsche had read Stirner. Yet, the similarities are too striking to be explained away". R. A. Samek, The Meta Phenomenon, p. 70, New York, 1981; Tom Goyens, (referring to Stirner's book The Ego and His Own) "The book influenced Friedrich Nietzsche, and even Marx and Engels devoted some attention to it". T. Goyens, Beer and Revolution: The German Anarchist Movement In New York City, p. 197, Illinois, 2007.
71. "We have every reason to suppose that Nietzsche had a profound knowledge of the Hegelian movement, from Hegel to Stirner himself. The philosophical learning of an author is not assessed by the number of quotations, nor by the always fanciful and conjectural check lists of libraries, but by the apologetic or polemical directions of his work itself". Gilles Deleuze (translated by Hugh Tomlinson), Nietzsche and Philosophy, 1962 (2006 reprint, pp. 153–154).
72. Guido Giacomo Preparata, "Perishable Money in a Threefold Commonwealth: Rudolf Steiner and the Social Economics of an Anarchist Utopia". Review of Radical Economics 38/4 (Fall 2006). pp. 619–648.
73. Jump up to:a b c "Only the influence of the German philosopher of egoism, Max Stirner (né Johann Kaspar Schmidt, 1806–1856), as expressed through The Ego and His Own (Der Einzige und sein Eigentum) compared with that of Proudhon. In adopting Stirnerite egoism (1886), Tucker rejected natural rights which had long been considered the foundation of libertarianism. This rejection galvanized the movement into fierce debates, with the natural rights proponents accusing the egoists of destroying libertarianism itself. So bitter was the conflict that a number of natural rights proponents withdrew from the pages of Liberty in protest even though they had hitherto been among its frequent contributors. Thereafter, Liberty championed egoism although its general content did not change significantly". Wendy Mcelroy. "Benjamin Tucker, Individualism, & Liberty: Not the Daughter but the Mother of Order".
74. Daniel Guérin,Anarchism: From Theory to Practice
75. "Four Ourselves, The Right To Be Greedy: Theses On The Practical Necessity Of Demanding Everything". Archived 22 June 2013 at the Wayback Machine
76. "What is Ideology?" by Jason McQuinn.
77. "Bonanno, Alfredo Maria". Archived from the original on 10 July 2009. Retrieved 10 July 2009.
78. Karl Heinrich Ulrichs had begun a journal called Prometheus in 1870, but only one issue was published. Kennedy, Hubert, Karl Heinrich Ulrichs: First Theorist of Homosexuality, In: 'Science and Homosexualities', ed. Vernon Rosario. New York: Routledge, 1997, pp. 26–45.
79. Xavier Diez. "La insumisión voluntaria. El anarquismo individualista español durante la dictadura y la Segunda República".


• Stirner, Max: Der Einzige und sein Eigentum (1845 [October 1844]). Stuttgart: Reclam-Verlag, 1972ff; English translation The Ego and Its Own (1907), ed. David Leopold, Cambridge/ New York: CUP 1995.
• Stirner, Max: "Recensenten Stirners" (September 1845). In: Parerga, Kritiken, Repliken, Bernd A. Laska, ed., Nürnberg: LSR-Verlag, 1986; English translation Stirner's Critics (abridged), see below.
• Max Stirner, Political Liberalism (1845).
Further reading[edit]
• Max Stirner's 'Der Einzige und sein Eigentum' im Spiegel der zeitgenössischen deutschen Kritik. Eine Textauswahl (1844–1856). Hg. Kurt W. Fleming. Leipzig: Verlag Max-Stirner-Archiv 2001 (Stirneriana).
• Arena, Leonardo V., Note ai margini del nulla, ebook, 2013.
• Arvon, Henri, Aux Sources de l'existentialisme, Paris: P.U.F. 1954.
• Essbach, Wolfgang, Gegenzüge. Der Materialismus des Selbst. Eine Studie über die Kontroverse zwischen Max Stirner und Karl Marx. Frankfurt: Materialis 1982.
• Feiten, Elmo (2013). "Would the Real Max Stirner Please Stand Up?". Anarchist Developments in Cultural Studies. ISSN 1923-5615.
• Helms, Hans G, Die Ideologie der anonymen Gesellschaft. Max Stirner 'Einziger' und der Fortschritt des demokratischen Selbstbewusstseins vom Vormärz bis zur Bundesrepublik, Köln: Du Mont Schauberg, 1966.
• Koch, Andrew M., "Max Stirner: The Last Hegelian or the First Poststructuralist". In: Anarchist Studies, vol. 5 (1997) pp. 95–108.
• Laska, Bernd A., Ein dauerhafter Dissident. Eine Wirkungsgeschichte des Einzigen, Nürnberg: LSR-Verlag 1996 (TOC, index).
• Laska, Bernd A., Ein heimlicher Hit. Editionsgeschichte des "Einzigen". Nürnberg: LSR-Verlag 1994 (abstract).
• Marshall, Peter H. "Max Stirner" in "Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism "(London: HarperCollins, 1992).
• Moggach, Douglas; De Ridder, Widukind, "Hegelianism in Restoration Prussia,1841–1848: Freedom, Humanism and 'Anti-Humanism' in Young Hegelian Thought". In: Herzog, Lisa (ed.): Hegel's Thought in Europe: Currents, Crosscurrents and Undercurrents. Basingstoke and New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, pp. 71–92 (Google Books).
• Newman, Saul (ed.), Max Stirner (Critical Explorations in Contemporary Political Thought), Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011 (full book).
• Newman, Saul, Power and Politics in Poststructural Thought. London and New York: Routledge 2005.
• Parvulescu, C. "The Individualist Anarchist Discourse of Early Interwar Germany". Cluj University Press, 2018 (full book).
• Paterson, R. W. K., The Nihilistic Egoist: Max Stirner, Oxford: Oxford University Press 1971.
• Spiessens, Jeff. The Radicalism of Departure. A Reassessment of Max Stirner's Hegelianism, Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Newcastle upon Tyne, 2018.
• Stepelevich, Lawrence S. (1985). "Max Stirner as Hegelian". Journal of the History of Ideas. 46 (4): 597–614. doi:10.2307/2709548. ISSN 0022-5037. JSTOR 2709548.
• Stepelevich, Lawrence S., Ein Menschenleben. Hegel and Stirner". In: Moggach, Douglas (ed.): The New Hegelians. Philosophy and Politics in the Hegelian School. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 166–176.
• Welsh, John F. Max Stirner's Dialectical Egoism: A New Interpretation. Lexington Books. 2010.
• Wilkinson, Will (2008). "Stirner, Max (1806–1856)". In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; Cato Institute. pp. 493–494. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n300. ISBN 978-1-4129-6580-4. LCCN 2008009151. OCLC 750831024.
• Di Mascio, Carlo, Stirner Giuspositivista. Rileggendo l'Unico e la sua proprietà, 2 ed., Edizioni Del Faro, Trento, 2015, p. 253, ISBN 978-88-6537-378-1.

External links

• Works written by or about Max Stirner at Wikisource
• Quotations related to Max Stirner at Wikiquote
• Media related to Max Stirner at Wikimedia Commons


• Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). "Max Stirner". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy., an extensive introduction
• Svein Olav Nybergs website on Max Stirner, with extensive links to texts and references
• Max Stirner within the LSR project (English section)
• Max Stirner Project by H. Ibrahim Türkdogan
• Archive of texts on Stirner at the Anarchist Library
Relationship with other philosophers[edit]
• "Max Stirner, a durable dissident -- in a nutshell -- 'How Marx and Nietzsche suppressed their colleague Max Stirner and why he has intellectually survived them'
• Stirner Delighted in His Construction – "loves miracles, but can only perform a logical miracle", by Karl Marx
• Nietzsche's initial crisis due to an encounter with Stirner's "The Ego", by Bernd A. Laska (2002)
• "At the End of the Path of Doubt: Max Stirner", By Lawrence S. Stepelevich (Owl of Minerva 41:1–2 (2009–2010) pp. 85–106)


• Works by Max Stirner at Project Gutenberg
• Works by or about Max Stirner at Internet Archive
• Works by Max Stirner at LibriVox (public domain audiobooks)
• Online book Der Einzige und sein Eigentum
• The complete original text in German of Der Einzige und sein Eigentum
• The complete English edition of "The Ego and his Own", in the translation of Steven T. Byington.
• Some of Stirner's illuminating "Shorter Essays", translated into English
• Recensenten Stirners / Stirner's Critics bilingual: full text in German / abridged text in English (trans. Frederick M. Gordon)
• Stirner's Critics by Max Stirner translated by Wolfi Landstreicher, with an introduction by Jason McQuinn (2013 revision of the only full-text English translation of both "Stirner's Critics" and "The Philosophical Reactionaries" by Wolfi Landstreicher published by CAL Press)
• Archive of the 4 works of Stirner translated into English including a 2011 complete translation of Stirner´s Critics (translated by Wolfi Landstreicher at the Anarchist Library)
Site Admin
Posts: 31201
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Wed Jan 22, 2020 9:19 am

Alexandra David-Neel's Adventures in Tibet: Fact or Fiction?
by Braham Norwick
The Tibet Journal
Vol. 1, No. 3/4, Special Issue : “Tibet: A Living Tradition”: Proceedings of a Symposium held at The Newark Museum (Autumn 1976), pp. 70-74
Published by: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives
Autumn, 1976



Braham Norwick was born on July 6, 1916 in New York City, New York, United States; the son of Mark and Rose (Ungar) Norwick.

Norwick received a Bachelor of Science degree in Chemistry from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 1938.

Norwick began his career as a technical director at Beaunit Mills, Inc. in 1938 and had held it for forty years. He served in the United States Army from 1943 to 1946. In 1973, he was appointed a vice president of Joseph Bancroft & Sons Company, where he worked until 1978. In 1980 Braham became an expert witness of Technical Architecture Group. In 1983 he was appointed a columnist at Maschen Industrie. Norwick was a visiting professor at Cornell University....

Works: Locating Tibet: The maps 1988

Locating Tibet: The Maps: This article looks at the different possibilities and implications of the maps that could have been housed at the legendary libraries of Shangri la. (Mark Premo-Hopkins 2004-05-06)

-- Search Results for Author/Creator Braham Norwick, by The Tibetan & Himalayan Library

The lamasery, however, had more to offer than a display of Chinoiserie. One of its features, for instance, was a very delightful library, lofty and spacious, and containing a multitude of books so retiringly housed in bays and alcoves that the whole atmosphere was more of wisdom than of learning, of good manners rather than seriousness. Conway, during a rapid glance at some of the shelves, found much to astonish him; the world's best literature was there, it seemed, as well as a great deal of abstruse and curious stuff that he could not appraise. Volumes in English, French, German, and Russian abounded, and there were vast quantities of Chinese and other Eastern scripts. A section which interested him particularly was devoted to Tibetiana, if it might be so called; he noticed several rarities, among them the Novo Descubrimento de grao catayo ou dos Regos de Tibet, by Antonio de Andrada (Lisbon, 1626); Athanasius Kircher's China (Antwerp, 1667); Thevenot's Voyage à la Chine des Pères Grueber et d'Orville; and Beligatti's Relazione Inedita di un Viaggio al Tibet.

-- Lost Horizon, by James Hilton

Norwick was a member of American Society for Testing and Material, American Society for Quality Control, American Chemical Society, American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists, New York Academy of Sciences and Chemists Club.

-- Braham Norwick, by Prabook

A frequent question mature Tibetan language students and art collectors hear is "What got you started?" Usually, we find the question difficult to answer simply, since the truth is multifaced, like a diamond in the subconscious, hidden by the past. A fairly likely, non-mystical reason for some is that they were, at an impressionable age, exposed to the writings of a remarkable woman, Alexandra David-Neel. In her books, even youngsters, while swept along by the exotic and the unremitting suspense, were able to sense and appreciate this liberated woman's forthright altitude. She was a rational mystic, unprejudiced by received conclusions from any source, trying with difficulty to keep her feet on the ground, careful, cautious, not fearless but brave, not dishonest, but a wonderful actress and liar when need be, and always for a philosophic purpose, with white lies and stellar performances. She was ever curious, evidently a good listener, because she picked up so many good stories. At times, one would wonder why a reasonable person involved herself with such frequent predicaments, but then one could only consider how much we would have liked to have been with her, and shared her adventures.

Surprisingly, though she lived to be over a hundred and only died in 1969, not much has been known about her except through her books. Despite the clarity of her thought, which allowed her books to survive translation into many languages, she managed to be rather reticent about a host of personal details.

And then early in 1972, a short and libellous publication, A. David-Neel au Tibet [Alexandra David-Neel in Tibet: trickery uncovered] appeared, and the thesis was clear. From the point of view of the author, whose pseudonym was Jeanne Denys, Madame Alexandra David-Neel was presumably relegated to the large category of people who pretended to have visited Tibet, but in fact never went there. Not only that, but Mademoiselle Denys claimed the photographs were faked. She began her book with a quotation from America's President Lincoln: "One can fool all the people some of the lime, and some of the people all of the time, but one can't fool all the people all the time." Mademoiselle Denys cited numbers of details she evidently considered pejorative, many of a type carping and inconsequential in balance, though valid information if true. Of course, knowing facts is not the same as understanding what they signify. Among her statements are the following: Alexandra David-Neel was actually christened Alexandrine. Her parents, though Catholic at the time of her birth, were of Jewish families and spoke Yiddish at home. These parents, both of academic family backgrounds, had always been poor, but were not in "reduced circumstances". David-Neel had worked in a store. She had studied music and singing, not philosophy nor languages. She had had a career touring as a singer and actress. She had never learned Tibetan, nor was there any Tibetan material in her home. She beat her servants. She always came running to the missionaries when in trouble, but engaged in back-biting attacks on them. What philosophy she knew was a smattering cadged from other writers. She had had no initiations, never interviewed the Dalai nor the Panchen Lamas, never went to Shi-ga-tze (gShis-ga-rtze), nor met the Pan-chen Lama's (bla-ma) mother, was never in Lhasa, nor Ku-bum (sKu-'bum) and even if she had been to some of the places she claimed, could never have carried on the conversations she reported, since the people in these areas spoke such different tongues as to be mutually incomprehensible. Mademoiselle Denys claims the adopted son Yongden was not only no lama, but had no religious training. When she saw his room, she found no sign a saintly man had lived in it, since, as she puts it, there was not even a bed in the room -- this primitive had slept on the floor. Mademoiselle Denys quotes others to confirm her conclusions; missionaries, diplomats and even some scholars. She is not the only one to ask about exact dales for trips, routes, names, and to find Yongden far from extraordinary.

Fortunately for those of us who prefer to keep some of the happy illusions of our youth, we have been able to refute, one by one, all of the important canards against Alexandra David-Neel, thanks to a series, still incomplete, of publications written or arranged by another most interesting woman, Marie-Madeleine Peyronnet, and by a careful comparison of David-Neel's publications in different languages.

Mademoiselle Denys, who had just retired, spent a few weeks at Samten Dzong (bSam-gten rDzong) with David-Neel when the latter was approaching ninety. They did not get along, and when Mademoiselle Denys accused David-Neel of never having done what she had claimed in her books, David-Neel ironically replied that she should prove it, as it would be good publicity for David-Neel's books.
The next day, Mademoiselle Denys left.

According to Jeanne Denys’ Alexandra David-Néel au Tibet. Une supercherie dévoilée, Paris: La Pensée universelle, 1972, the editor explicitly asked David-Néel to stuff her adventure narratives and novels with such anecdotes; Denys, who was her former librarian in Digne, accused her of fraud and claimed that her accounts amounted to falsification and pure deception.... I argue here that David-Néel certainly played with the readers’ expectancies.... she sets new literary standards for the question of reality/fiction that she was trying out.

-- From the Guimet Museum to De-Chen Ashram: Alexandra David-Neel, Buddhism and Fiction, by Samuel Thévoz

A short time later, Marie-Madeleine Peyronnet arrived and spent the next ten years with Madame David-Neel. Mademoiselle Peyronnet's book, Dix Ans Avec Alexandra David-Neel is a warm and exciting insight into the lives of two admirable people. Last spring, the first volume of the letters of Alexandra David-Neel to her husband were published. These cover the years 1904 to 1917 and we can expect the letters of 1918 to 1941 to follow early in 1976. For all of these letters still exist, along with the stamped envelopes, the pictures, the Tibetan artifacts, all preserved at Samten Dzong, the fortress of meditation in Digne, a mountain town of Haute Provence. The house is now a museum, and scholars are welcomed.

Since the Correspondance has not been published in English, the translations of all quoted letters are mine. On the editing of the letters, see Marie-Madeleine Peyronnet’s prefaces to the letters (pp. 11–32). David-Néel wrote the letters intending to use them later as an aide-mémoire (hence the title Journal de voyage) and asked Philippe to keep the most important of them (see Correspondance, p. 167). A few days before her death, she handed the three suitcases that contained them to her secretary, Marie-Madeleine Peyronnet, trusting that she would make good use of them. Moved by their unexpected frankness and sensing that they gave access to a new dimension of David-Néel public and print persona, Peyronnet decided to publish them with considerable editing: passages about physical hard times, financial difficulties, but also Sanskrit and Tibetan expressions and lengthy descriptions have been reduced....

The dates are only indicative, since they refer to the headings of the letters and hence can reveal some interval with the actual time of travel.

-- From the Guimet Museum to De-Chen Ashram: Alexandra David-Neel, Buddhism and Fiction, by Samuel Thévoz

In the English version of David-Neel's most famous book, My Journey to Lhasa, on which one can see she was much directly involved, since she comments on her choice of English words, there is nothing said about a camera, but there are four pictures taken in Lhasa. In the French version, Voyage d'Une Parisienne a Lhassa, she explains how she had been stopped in a previous attempt, when the authorities had discovered cameras in the baggage of Yongden, and had then tracked her down. This had been the time when she had left from Kye kun-do (sKye-rku-mdo). Her Lhasa pictures, she explains, had been taken by Tibetan pholographers in Lhasa, and this explains why they are so different, somewhat peculiar, and how they were made without exciting suspicion. Questions of dates are fully answered by the dated letters and postmarks, though occasionally Alexandra David-Neel herself is not exactly sure which day of the month it may be at the time of writing.

Since the letters exist, one may question why dates are so vague in the books. The answers are in the books themselves, but are clearer in the letters. Those who know what happened to Tibetans who had aided two previous travellers to Tibet, Sarat Chandra Das and Ekai Kawaguchi, already have an insight into her caution; but David-Neel specifically explains what happened even to the Sikkimese villagers who had lived near her dwelling when she made her trip to Shi-ga-tze to see the Panchen Lama and his mother. They had been fined Rs. 200/- by the British Resident, and in revenge, had sacked and destroyed her place. Moreover, she had been expelled from Sikkim. This was late July 1916. It is interesting to read her letter of June 20, 1916, asking her husband not to use the word Tibet in his letters, which may be opened by the censor, and her theories later, while still at De-chen (bDe-chen) Ashram, why the Resident had made such an issue of her trip, with fines and punishments; the missionaries especially were upset that she could go in and they were persona non grata. She had first arrived in Gangtok in April 1912, establishing a close relationship with the royal family of Sikkim, and not leaving until she went to Pema Yangtze (Pad-ma dyongs-rtze) in October; she remained in Nepal until March 1913, then going to Benares, and left from there in December to return to Gangtok. On October 6, 1914, she wrote from Tibet, at the time of her first crossing of the border, at Cho-te Nyi-ma Gon-pa (mChod-rten Nyi-ma dGon-pa). She had decided to live and study not far from the border in La-chen, until she moved still closer to the border at Dewa Thang in the spring of 1915. She remained at De-chen Ashram through the end of June 1916; early in July 1916 she was again in Tibet at Cho-ten Nyi-ma, and it was from there that she made her dash to Shi-ga-tze, visiting the Panchen Lama and his mother. With the letters, it is easy to follow her route. In addition, she mentions many more names in her letters than in her books, for example, the Laden-las and the help they gave her.

One of the most remarkable events, and the key to her later adventures, dates back to April 1912, when she was able, thanks to her reputation as a Buddhist, to have an unprecedented interview with the Dalai Lama, who was then in temporary exile. Through the letters to her husband, we discover that she wrote under many pseudonyms, even, in at least one case, with a Hindu name. One of her pen names was Alexandra Myrial, and in the Bulletin de la Societe d'Anthropologie Populaire of 1901, there is one of her articles, "Les Mantras aux Indes" referred to in the Buddhist Bibliography of Shinsho Hanayama. There too, are other references to her publications under the name Alexandra David, beginning in 1907. By the time she arrived in India, she had already established herself internationally as a Buddhist and something of an authority. The Dalai Lama wanted to know who had been her guru, and was at first astonished to learn that she had none. When she explained that when she had determined to hold to the principles of Buddhism, she did not know another Buddhist, and was perhaps then the only one in Paris, the Dalai Lama laughed and said indeed that was a good reason. He told her to learn Tibetan. In her letters, we can follow her progress, slow initially, then faster and better; her Calligraphy in both styles of writing becomes almost elegant, and three years after her interview, by July, 1976, she was writing and speaking with ease. In 1916, she was so fluent in Tibetan that she could engage in philosophic discussions with an erudite lama, and it was shortly after this that she visited the Panchen Lama. Later at Ku-bum, she again had a language problem, but with her command of Tibetan, which all high-ranking prelates had to know, and her established acquaintance with the Dalai and Panchen Lamas, she managed well.

After leaving Tibet and Sikkim, late in 1916 she went to Japan and found herself homesick for Tibet. In a letter to her husband, she interjects the English expression, "too tame". She was distressed to be surrounded by cultivated fields and thought that there was nothing uglier. She compared it to living in a kitchen, for which, though recognising its value, she seemed to have had some antipathy. Although she appeared to have had a pleasant time with Ekai Kawaguchi, who had preceded her to Tibet, she commented that the Japanese are the Germans of the Far East, permeated with the same spirit that had composed Deutschland Uber Alles.

After only a few months in Japan, she returned to China. Her plans to go to Tibet were uppermost in her mind by the end of October 1917. Aphur Yongden suggested how they might do it together economically, with him earning their keep by teaching and other activities. The fact is that six years later when they finally made their trip to Lhasa, they did support themselves largely on his earnings as a red hat fortune teller, since they did not dare to show that they were reasonably well supplied with silver and gold. They made that trip safely only by dint of looking too poor to rob. It was only in the Po-yul (sPo-yul) country where even such people, poor as they appeared, were seriously threatened with robbery. Even then, her major concern was that the thieves might discover their Western items, such as spoons, compasses and revolvers, which would unmask them. It is as the thieves were trying not only to take Rs. 2. from Yongden, but also to look into his pack, that Alexandra David-Neel felt forced to frighten them off with her revolver ... which she did most effectively but with no intent to kill. It should be noted that she discovered for herself the Lange-James theory, that emotions follow actions. For example, after she decided quite coolly that to protect herself from being exploited by her coolie servants, she must make a show of force, she noted that she only became angry when she was obliged to administer punishment. Also, after posing for a period as a beggar, it amused her to note that she was acquiring a beggar mentality with regard to potential donors on whom she pretended to depend upon.

She made many striking observations. During her stay in China, she was struck by the harmful influence of Confucianism, but in Tibet notes that the country lost materially, more than it gained by its rupture with China. She commented that there were no Buddhist Saints, only those who had been awakened. She noted one European was scandalised by the story of the Buddha, an unworthy man who deserted his wife and child. She was not averse to black humour: hearing that a man characterised as dying for his ideas is accused of dying for the ideas of others, she noted that certain ideas corresponded to the fibre of our being and made it vibrate in resonance. Ideas like these were truly ours, no matter what the source.

The revelation of her theatrical career helped clear up some doubts in her stories, how she had been able to disguise herself and act so well. In her books she tells of using dye on her hair and hands, cocoa and charcoal on her face. The picture in Lhasa shows it well. But the books never told us that she had been a singer and had toured for many years. In her books, she does remark on her playing a part, copying the typical actions, pretending to scratch lice, learning how to lick out her bowl. She tells of Yongden's distress when she planned to take a bath in a hot spring for fear she would wash her face. When she was ordered to take off her hat in a sacred area in Lhasa, she was afraid that her hair would give her away, but people merely thought she was from Ladakh.

Her most difficult problem in leaving for Tibet on her successful trip to Lhasa was that she had, for convention's sake, to start out with coolies. She had to prepare for what looked like just a short trip to collect plants. For a Western woman in that period to have gone without servants, or wearing a back-pack would have caused too much talk. But the coolies could not be taken into her confidence, and so she had to send them off with plausible tasks to perform, in opposite directions, letting them think that the other would still be with her and that she would return soon.

Now that the house, Sam-ten Dzong, has been opened to the public and the accumulation of Alexandra David-Neel's 100 years of exciting living can be studied more intimately, it seems certain that there will be a revival of interest in her career. The psychological details of her life are as fully interesting as her adventures in Tibet, and the two are remarkably intertwined. Some day we must work on answering the question: "What got her started?" It should be fascinating to find the answers.
Site Admin
Posts: 31201
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Wed Jan 22, 2020 7:31 pm

Forbidden travels of an opera singer: The Secret Lives of Alexandra David-Neel by Barbara Foster and Michael Foster Overlook Press pounds 20
by Isabel Hilton
Sunday 11 July 1999 00:02



You couldn't wish for a life more packed with adventure than that of Alexandra David-Neel: born in France in 1868, brought up (unhappily) in Belgium, she was a restless spirit who took an unusual and early interest in Eastern religions. After a brief career as an opera singer, she became a journalist and married a distant cousin before setting off on a series of ever-longer journeys. These culminated in a 14-year absence, during which time she fell in love with the Maharaja of Sikkim, meditated in a series of caves across Central Asia, studied with various spiritual masters, and trekked, disguised as a mendicant pilgrim, to Lhasa.

Exasperating and extraordinary, she was acknowledged in her day as one of the foremost interpreters of the Eastern spiritual tradition to the Western public. She was the author of some 30 books and numerous articles. She served as inspiration to the seekers after soft-focus truth of the Beat Generation in the 1950s and supported the student rebellion in Paris in the 1960s. She finally died a few days before her 101st birthday, having endured the celebrations of her own centenary with characteristic ill- grace. Her adventures were so improbable that one French writer devoted years to the attempt to prove that Alexandra David-Neel made it all up. A biographer -- or in this case, a pair of biographers -- could hardly ask for more. But then, consider the problems. Everything Alexandra David-Neel wished to have known about her life and thoughts, she wrote herself. She destroyed personal papers, letters and other evidence if it did not accord with the image she wished to project. That which she wished to deny about her past, she either concealed or lied about. Getting at the truth about Alexandra David-Neel requires more than simple enthusiasm.

This is the authors' second attempt at their subject: they published the first biography (Forbidden Journey) in 1987. They are diligent researchers, but their point of departure - the moment at which the name of Alexandra David-Neel first exercised its magic upon them - was, we are told, at an ashram in southern India, in the course of a discussion of a shamanistic practice of raising the dead.

The problem for any reader who is disinclined to take the raising of the dead at face value is how to interpret the life of a woman who reported flying yogis and telepathy as rather mundane bits of magic commonly encountered in Tibet. It is a difficulty that can only be compounded by the fact that her biographers are inclined to indulge her on such subjects as the psychic generation of living forms, a party trick that Alexandra claimed to have performed on one of her many pilgrimages. If we are trying to make sense of a woman whose achievements were, indeed, extraordinary, but who lied shamelessly when it suited her purpose - and who certainly had a strong sense of how much a credulous market would bear when it came to the mysteries of the Orient - we need a little more help than we are offered.

The authors do bring a number of contradictions to our attention, offering tantalising glimpses of the discussion they could have had with their subject, if only they had been slightly stricter with her and with themselves. David-Neel's relationship with her long-suffering husband, Philippe, is a case in point. She met him when she was 32 and her singing career was beginning to falter. He was seven years older and a bachelor engineer who was living - apparently contentedly - in Tunis. There seems to have been little passion on either side, but of the two Alexandra was the more determined, and they married. She undoubtedly had the best of the bargain: she had already begun to make a name as an orientalist and, from then on, her extraordinary career would be financed by her husband. As Alexandra travelled, Philippe wrote letters, sent her money and advice and acted as her literary agent. She, meanwhile, made demands, had adventures and formed close emotional attachments to other men. He tried many times to persuade her to come home; she repeatedly promised - and repeatedly broke her promises, despite civil war in China and the determination of the British to thwart her ambition to become the first European woman to reach Lhasa.

She made it to the holy city in the end, trekking in disguise through the appalling Tibetan winter, her sketch maps and notes concealed in her boots. Only after this journey - which had lasted 14 years in total - did Philippe baulk at her proposition that she return to the matrimonial home in the company of her "adopted son" - a Tibetan novice monk who had been her constant companion during her wanderings. The man, who is rather ungenerously described here as a conventional bourgeois figure, had had enough, but he continued to pay the bills. No wonder Alexandra wrote, when Philippe died in 1941, that she had lost "the best of husbands and my only friend".

Equally patient and long-suffering in his way was the monk, Yongden, who served her untiringly and without pay for more than two decades. He was to die in France at the age of 55, a hopeless alcoholic, according to his doctor. Alexandra David-Neel was not an easy woman for any of her companions. She had wandered across the most extraordinary political and spiritual landscape: she had skirted the Great Game, she met both the 13th Dalai Lama and the 9th Panchen Lama, the leading Tibetan hierarchs of her day, she had sat at the unwashed feet of many a lesser spiritual master. She grumbled about her rheumatism and carried a tin bath to the most improbable places, insisting that it be filled daily with hot water.

She wrote copiously about her adventures, but her contribution to geographical knowledge, as one critic pointed out, was nil: there are no maps in her accounts, and almost no dates. It is a deficiency that her biographers might have gone further to correct. Equally frustratingly, this text is full of small historical errors (the 9th Panchen Lama, for instance, died in Jyekundo, not Beijing), the Chinese place names are rendered in a romanisation that has not been current in mainland China for 40 years and which, by now, must be unfamiliar to most readers, and numerous irritating eccentricities of spelling (Paris the "capitol" of France, "diety" for deity) are repeated throughout the book. But despite these flaws, hers was a life so extraordinary that fans of David-Neel may find enough here to hold their attention until the definitive biography comes along.
Site Admin
Posts: 31201
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:14 pm

Aphur Yongden
by Wikipedia (France)
Accessed: 1/22/20



Aphur Yongden
Yongden in 1933.
Birth: December 25, 1899, Mando, Sikkim (India)
Death: October 7, 1955 (at 55), Digne (France)
Nationality: Indian
School / tradition: Tibetan Buddhism
masters Lachen Gomchen Rinpoche

Aphur Yongden also called Albert Arthur Yongden and Lama Yongden or his Tibetan dharmic name: སྙིང རྗེ་ རྒྱ་ མཚོ, Wylie: snying-rje rgya mtsho, THL: Nyingje Gyatso (December 25, 1899 in Sikkim [1], - October 7, 1955 in Digne-les-Bains) was a lama of Sikkim, of Tibetan parents. He was recognized as a tulku [2].


Yongden (left) and Alexandra David-Neel (center) in front of de Potala in 1924.

He accompanied Alexandra David-Néel since 1914, and in 1929 she made him his adopted son [3].

They retreat to the cave of a hermitage at 3,900 meters above sea level, north of Sikkim, near the Lachen Gomchen Rinpoche near Lachen. The city is close to the Indo-Tibetan border, and both will cross it twice, going to Chigatsé where they are received between 17 and July 26, 1916 by the 9 th Panchen Lama at the Tashilhunpo Monastery, of which Alexandra described [4]. In 1916, Yongden and Alexandra were expelled from Sikkim by the British for having gone to Tibet without having asked for authorization. [5]

They stay two months in Lhasa, the capital of Tibet, with Alexandra, during which they visited the holy city and the surrounding great monasteries: Drepung, Séra, Ganden, Samye ... But Alexandra David-Néel, disguised as a beggar, is finally unmasked (because of too great a cleanliness: she would wash herself every morning at the river), and denounced to the Tsarong Shape (governor of Lhasa ) who decides to leave them alone and continue their quest. Yongden was the key that enabled Alexandra to achieve all that she did, it was also a little bit of Tibet that allowed the old lady not to feel too lonely in the West. He was certainly the most important person for her.

In 1925, he arrived in France with Alexandra David-Néel who settled in Toulon before joining in 1928 Digne-les-Bains where she acquired a house. Aphur Yongden legally becomes his adopted son and accompanies him on his conference tours in France and Europe. Between 1937 and 1946, they returned to Asia. He accompanies Alexandra David-Néel when she definitively leaves Asia by plane from Calcutta in June 1946. On July 1, they arrived in Paris, where they stayed until October when they joined Digne-les-Bains [6], where Yongden died on October 7, 1955 to Samten Dzong of an attack of lightning uremia [7].

Equally patient and long-suffering in his way was the monk, Yongden, who served her untiringly and without pay for more than two decades. He was to die in France at the age of 55, a hopeless alcoholic, according to his doctor.

-- Forbidden travels of an opera singer: The Secret Lives of Alexandra David-Neel by Barbara Foster and Michael Foster Overlook Press pounds 20, by Isabel Hilton

His ashes were transported to Vârânasî in 1973 by Marie-Madeleine Peyronnet to be dispersed with those of Alexandra David-Néel in the Ganges.

Aphur Yongden is the author of several works.

A literary prize was named after the illustrious explorer of Tibet and her adopted son, the Alexandra-David-Néel / Lama-Yongden Prize.


• Gods and demons of Tibetan solitudes, Alexandra David-Néel, Lama A Yongden
• Transcendent knowledge from the Tibetan text and commentaries, 1958, Alexandra David-Néel, Lama Yongden, Adyar; (ISBN 2850000167)
• The superhuman life of Guésar de Ling, the Tibetan hero, told by the bards of his country of Gesar, 1931, Alexandra David-Néel and Lama Yongden, preface by Sylvain Levi, Editions du Rocher, (ISBN 2268000303)


• 1935: The Lama with the five wisdoms Alexandra David-Néel, Lama Yongden, Plon, ASIN B0000DPLK9
• 1954: The Power of Nothingness, novel by Lama Yongden, translated and annotated by Alexandra David-Néel (Plon)


1. Joëlle Désiré-Marchand Alexandra David-Néel: From Paris to Lhasa, from adventure to wisdom (1998) Artuad editions, (ISBN 2700311434)
2. Ruth Middleton, Alexandra David-Néel: portrait of an adventurer, Shambhala, 1989, (ISBN 0877734135 and 9780877734130 ) p. 147 "One day a tall, well-dressed lama with gray hair entered her room, without so much as knocking, and insisted on talking with her. Always nervous about giving away her identity, Alexandra did not welcome this intrusion, but she tried to make light of it, so as not to arouse suspicion. This unexpected visitor had an unusual presence, difficult to ignore. He questioned her at length about herself and Yongden, their country of origin, where they had lived, and their motives for adopting the religious life. He then intensified his discourse with a moving commentary on the sad condition of this present world, in which men were completely obsessed with the demands of their own egos, and the tremendous need for committed teachers to expound the doctrine. Referring suddenly to Yongden, he observed that he was a tulku. Alexandra asked him how he had known this. He replied, "One can sense it even if he is not officially recognized. He will have an unusual life." He offered to share with Yongden the teachings he had received from his own master, and invited him to visit him in his quarters in the nearby monastery. For the remainder of their stay Yongden visited him every day. His importance as a man of letters was evident, and great respect was shown him by the other monks. As she pored over her texts, Alexandra mused that Yongden's "unusual life" had indeed already begun. The strange lama's penetrating mind had apparently seen through their disguise. "
3. François Pouillon, Dictionary of French-speaking orientalists, KARTHALA Editions, 2008, (ISBN 2845868022), p. 262
4. Fabienne Jagou, The 9th Panchen Lama (1883-1937): issue of Sino-Tibetan relations, Paris: EFEO, 2004 (Monographs: 191). “As for Alexandra David-Neel, who lived in Tashilunpo from July 17 to 26, 1916, here is what she says. "
5. Biography 5
6. Jean Chalon, The Luminous Destiny of Alexandra David-Néel, p. 418-419.
7. Jacques Brosse, Alexandra David-Neel, p. 232

Related articles

Alexandra David-Néel Foundation, association for the sponsorship of Tibetan children in exile founded in 1977 and based in Digne-les-Bains.

External links

• Authority records:
• Virtual international authority file
• International Standard Name Identifier
• National Library of France (data)
• University documentation system
• Library of Congress
• Gemeinsame Normdatei
• Royal Netherlands Library
• Czech National Library
• WorldCat
• Lama Aphur Yongden 1899-1955,
Site Admin
Posts: 31201
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:25 pm

Lobsang Rampa [Cyril Henry Hoskin]
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 1/22/20



Lobsang Rampa
Lobsang Rampa, born as Cyril Hoskin (1910–1981)
Born: Cyril Henry Hoskin, 8 April 1910, Plympton, Devon, United Kingdom
Died: 25 January 1981 (aged 70), Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Nationality: British
Other names: Tuesday Lobsang Rampa, Carl Kuon Suo
Citizenship: British; Canadian
Occupation: Author
Years active 1956–1980
Known for The Third Eye
Spouse(s) San Ra'ab Rampa
Children Sheelagh Rouse (adopted)

Lobsang Rampa is the pen name of an author who wrote books with paranormal and occult themes. His best known work is The Third Eye, published in Britain in 1956.

Following the publication of the book, newspapers reported that Rampa was Cyril Henry Hoskin (8 April 1910 – 25 January 1981), a plumber from Plympton in Devon who claimed that his body hosted the spirit of a Tibetan lama going by the name of Tuesday Lobsang Rampa, who is purported to have authored the books. The name Tuesday relates to a claim in The Third Eye that Tibetans are named after the day of the week on which they were born.

The Third Eye

In November 1956 a book called The Third Eye was published in the United Kingdom. It was written by a man named Tuesday Lobsang Rampa, and it purported to relate his experiences while growing up in Chakpori Lamasery,[1] Chokpori, Tibet, after being sent there at the age of seven. The title of the book is derived from an operation, similar to trepanation, that Rampa claimed he had undergone, in which a small hole was drilled into his forehead to arouse the third eye and enhance powers of clairvoyance. The book describes the operation as follows:

The instrument penetrated the bone. A very hard, clean sliver of wood had been treated by fire and herbs and was slid down so that it just entered the hole in my head. I felt a stinging, tickling sensation apparently in the bridge of my nose. It subsided and I became aware of subtle scents which I could not identify. Suddenly there was a blinding flash. For a moment the pain was intense. It diminished, died and was replaced by spirals of colour. As the projecting sliver was being bound into place so that it could not move, the Lama Mingyar Dondup turned to me and said: "You are now one of us, Lobsang. For the rest of your life you will see people as they are and not as they pretend to be."

During the story, Rampa sees yetis and eventually encounters a mummified body of himself from an earlier incarnation. He also takes part in an initiation ceremony in which he learns that during its early history the Earth was struck by another planet, causing Tibet to become the mountain kingdom that it is today.

The manuscript of The Third Eye had been turned down by several leading British publishers before being accepted by Secker and Warburg for an advance of £800 (£20,000 today). Fredric Warburg of Secker and Warburg had met the book's author, who at the time appeared in the guise of "Doctor Carl Kuon Suo". Intrigued by the writer's personality, Warburg sent the manuscript to a number of scholars, several of whom expressed doubts about its authenticity. Nevertheless, the book was published in November 1956 and soon became a global bestseller. The Times Literary Supplement said of the book: "It came near to being a work of art."[2]

Controversy over authorship

Original 1950s cover of The Third Eye

Explorer and Tibetologist Heinrich Harrer was unconvinced about the book's origins and hired a private detective from Liverpool named Clifford Burgess to investigate Rampa. "In January 1957, Scotland Yard asked him to present a Tibetan passport or a residence permit. Rampa moved to Ireland. One year later, the scholars retained the services of Clifford Burgess, a leading Liverpool private detective. Burgess’s report, when it came in, was terse. Lama Lobsang Rampa of Tibet, he determined after one month of inquiries, was none other than Cyril Henry Hoskin, a native of Plympton, Devonshire, the son of the village plumber and a high school dropout."[3] The findings of Burgess' investigation were published in the Daily Mail in February 1958.[4] It was reported that the author of the book was a man named Cyril Henry Hoskin, who had been born in Plympton, Devon, in 1910 and was the son of a plumber. Hoskin had never been to Tibet and spoke no Tibetan. In 1948, he had legally changed his name to Carl Kuon Suo before adopting the name Lobsang Rampa.[5] An obituary of Fra Andrew Bertie, Grand Master of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, claims that he was involved in unmasking Lobsang Rampa as a West Country plumber.[6]


Rampa was tracked by the British press to Howth, Ireland, and confronted with these allegations. He did not deny that he had been born as Cyril Hoskin, but claimed that his body was now occupied by the spirit of Lobsang Rampa.[7] According to the account given in his third book, The Rampa Story, he had fallen out of a fir tree in his garden in Thames Ditton, Surrey, while attempting to photograph an owl. He was concussed and, on regaining his senses, had seen a Buddhist monk in saffron robes walking towards him. The monk spoke to him about Rampa taking over his body and Hoskin agreed, saying that he was dissatisfied with his current life. When Rampa's original body became too worn out to continue, he took over Hoskin's body in a process of transmigration of the soul.[8]

Rampa maintained for the rest of his life that The Third Eye was a true story. In the foreword to the 1964 edition of the book, he wrote:

I am Tuesday Lobsang Rampa, that is my only name, now my legal name, and I answer to no other.

To Donald S. Lopez, Jr., an American Tibetologist, the books of Lobsang Rampa are "the works of an unemployed surgical fitter, the son of a plumber, seeking to support himself as a ghostwriter."[9]

The authorship controversy was dramatised in a radio play, The Third Eye and the Private Eye, by David Lemon and Mark Ecclestone, first broadcast by BBC Radio 4 in August 2012.[10]

Influence on Tibetologists’ callings

Donald S. Lopez, Jr., in Prisoners of Shangri-La (1998), points out that when discussing Rampa with other tibetologists and buddhologists in Europe, he found that The Third Eye was the first book many of them had read about Tibet: "For some it was a fascination with the world Rampa described that had led them to become professional scholars of Tibet."

Lopez adds that when he gave The Third Eye to a class of his at the University of Michigan without telling them about its history, the "students were unanimous in their praise of the book, and despite six prior weeks of lectures and readings on Tibetan history and religion, [...] they found it entirely credible and compelling, judging it more realistic than anything they had previously read about Tibet."[11]

Role in the Tibetan cause

Lobsang Rampa was a supporter of the Tibetan cause despite criticism of his books. In 1972, Rampa's French language agent Alain Stanké wrote to the Dalai Lama and asked for his opinion about Rampa's identity. He received a reply from the Dalai Lama's deputy secretary stating "I wish to inform you that we do not place credence in the books written by the so-called Dr. T. Lobsang Rampa. His works are highly imaginative and fictional in nature." The Dalai Lama had previously admitted that although the books were fictitious, they had created good publicity for Tibet.[12]

Later career


Lobsang Rampa went on to write another 18 books containing a mixture of religious and occult material. One of the books, Living with the Lama, was described as being dictated to Rampa by his pet Siamese cat, Mrs. Fifi Greywhiskers. Faced with repeated accusations from the British press that he was a charlatan and a con artist, Rampa went to live in Canada in the 1960s. He and his wife, San Ra'ab, became Canadian citizens in 1973, along with Sheelagh Rouse (Buttercup) who was his secretary and regarded by Rampa as his adopted daughter.


Lobsang Rampa died in Calgary on 25 January 1981, at the age of 70.


Rampa claimed that his 1964 book, Living with the Lama, was dictated to him by his cat

• The Third Eye (1956)
• My Visit to Venus (1957)[n 1]
• Doctor from Lhasa (1959)
• The Rampa Story (1960)
• Cave of the Ancients (1963)
• Living with the Lama (1964)
• You Forever (1965)
• Wisdom of the Ancients (1965)
• The Saffron Robe (1966)
• Chapters of Life (1967)
• Beyond The Tenth (1969)
• Feeding the Flame (1971)
• The Hermit (1971)
• The Thirteenth Candle (1972)
• Candlelight (1973)
• Twilight (1975)
• As It Was! (1976)
• I Believe (1976)
• Three Lives (1977)
• Tibetan Sage (1980)

See also

• Grey Owl
• Mediumship
• Third eye
• Trepanation


1. My Visit to Venus is based on work which Rampa did not approve for publication and was published some years after it was written. It describes how Rampa meets the masters of several planets during a trip in a spaceship. The original manuscript was written by Rampa, but this book was not. It was created by Gray Barker and published by Saucerian Books in 1966 who used Rampa's name and manuscript without his permission. Rampa finally gave his permission for the book to be published provided two alterations were made and ten per cent of the profits were sent to the Save A Cat League in New York City (letter to Gray Barker, dated 31 October 1966)[13]


1. Rampa, Lobsang (1956). "Chapter 4: At The Temple Gates". The Third Eye. Secker & Warburg. ISBN 9780345340382.
2. "T. Lobsang Rampa". The Times (obituary). 31 January 1981. Retrieved 23 December 2013.
3. Jr., Donald S. Lopez (1 December 1998). "Lobsang Rampa: The Mystery of the Three-Eyed Lama". Tricycle: The Buddhist Review. Archived from the original on 12 April 2016. Retrieved 28 January2018. In January 1957, Scotland Yard asked him to present a Tibetan passport or a residence permit. Rampa moved to Ireland. One year later, the scholars retained the services of Clifford Burgess, a leading Liverpool private detective. Burgess’s report, when it came in, was terse. Lama Lobsang Rampa of Tibet, he determined after one month of inquiries, was none other than Cyril Henry Hoskin, a native of Plympton, Devonshire, the son of the village plumber and a high school dropout.
4. Donald S. Lopez, Prisoners of Shangri-La: Tibetan Buddhism and the West, University of Chicago Press, 1999, 294 pages, p.99-100: "Pallis, acting on behalf of a group of European experts on Tibet, retained the services of Clifford Burgess, a leading Liverpool private detective, in an effort to discover the true identity of T. Lobsabng Rampa. By the end of the month and three thousand miles of travel, Burgess had produced the following report: CYRIL HENRY HOSKIN - BIOGRAPHICAL DETAILS [...] the February 3 Daily Express ran the headline 'The FULL truth about the Bogus Lama.'"
5. Donald S. Lopez, Prisoners of Shangri-La: Tibetan Buddhism and the West], op. cit., p.101.
6. "Fra Andrew Bertie". The Times (obituary). 23 February 2008.
7. Agehananda Bharati (aka Leopold Fischer), Fictitious Tibet: the Origin and Persistence of Rampaism, in Tibet Society Bulletin, Vol. 7, 1974: "Hoskin had a ready explanation for his predicament: yes, he had indeed been born Cyril Henry Hoskin. That good gentleman’s soul, however, had long since fled its corporeal form, so that the soul of a Tibetan lama, namely Tuesday Lobsang Rampa, could move in."
8. Chapter 8, The Rampa Story. Rampa says that this incident occurred at a house called Rose Croft in Thames Ditton.
9. Lopez, Donald S., Jr. (1998). Prisoners of Shangri-La: Tibetan Buddhism and the West. University of Chicago Press. p. 112.
10. The Third Eye and the Private Eye BBC Radio 4. Retrieved 29 April 2015.
11. Lopez 1998, pp. 104, 112.
12. Mutton, Karen (2006). T. Lobsang Rampa: New Age Trailblazer. TGS Publishing. pp. 166–7. ISBN 9780971316607.
13. Rampa, Tuesday Lobsang. Feeding the Flame. Corgi Books. p. 140. ISBN 9780552086110.

Further reading

• Lobsang Rampa — New Age Trailblazer by Karen Mutton, [[:ru:Служебная:Источники книг/0971316600|ISBN 0-9713166-0-0]]
• Newnham, Richard (1991). The Guinness Book of Fakes, Frauds and Forgeries. ISBN 0-85112-975-7
• Prisoners of Shangri-La: Tibetan Buddhism and the West by Donald S. Lopez Jr., [[:ru:Служебная:Источники книг/0226493113|ISBN 0-226-49311-3]]
• Вавренюк Р. С. Т. Лобсанг Рампа как источник исторической и философской мысли // На шляху до науки XXI сторіччя: Збірник наукових праць і матеріалів другої Міжнародної науково-практичної конференції (4–5 листопада 2011 р.) / Гол. ред. В. С. Рижиков. Кіровоград: Науково-дослідний центр інноваційних технологій, 2011. 339 с. С. 212–223.
• Вавренюк Р. С. Т. Лобсанг Рампа о Византийском соборе (общий анализ) // Науковий вісник інноваційних технологій за матеріалами Міжнародної науково-практичної конференції «Інноваційні наукові технології: передовий світовий досвід» (5 листопада 2012 р.) / Гол. ред. В. С. Рижиков. Т. І–ІІ. Т. І. Кіровоград: Науково-дослідний центр інноваційних технологій, 2012. 344 с. С. 278–288.
• Вавренюк Р. С. Лобсанг Рампа о Византийском соборе (тематический анализ) // Наукові пошуки: актуальні проблеми теорії та практики: Збірник наукових праць і матеріалів Міжнародної науково-практичної конференції (20 травня 2015 року) / Гол. ред. Р. М. Колісніченко. Кіровоград: Кіровоградський інститут ПрАТ «ВНЗ МАУП», 2015. 250 с. С. 49–60.

All the books by his wife, San Ra'ab Rampa

• Pussywillow (1976 English)
• Tigerlily (1978 English)
• Le monde de Rampa (1979 French)
• Autumn Lady (1980 English)
• Ma vie avec Rampa (1980 French)
• Dans L'intimité de Rampa (1981 French)
• Wild Briar (1982 English)
• Lumière et sagesse (1982 French)
• Flor Silvestre (1984 Portuguese)
• Flor Silvestre (1984 Brazil)
• Le Testament de Lobsang Rampa (French,1984)
• Flor Silvestre is listed twice because this book was originally published in 1982 titled Wild Brair and Lumière et sagesse, later in 1984 it was translated into both Portuguese and Brazil. Whilst they are all the same book it was four different languages.

Books by Sheelagh Rouse (alias Buttercup)

• 25 years with T. Lobsang Rampa (2005) ISBN 9781411674325
• Grace, The World of Rampa (2007)

External links

Excerpts from Rampa's writings, advocacy of his views

• Tuesday Lobsang Rampa Multilingual website in 36 languages, including a very comprehensive book lists for Dr Rampa, Sheelagh, and Ra'ab.
• T. Lobsang Rampa – extracts from his writings
• – website maintained by followers of Rampa, containing links to a mailgroup and other Rampa-themed websites


• Carroll, Robert Todd. "T. Lobsang Rampa". The Skeptic's Dictionary (online ed.).
• Randi, James (2006) [1995]. "Rampa, Tuesday Lobsang Rampa". An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural (online ed.).
• Bharati, Agehananda (1974). "Fictitious Tibet: The origin and persistence of Rampaism". Tibet Society Bulletin. 7. Archived 2 February 2009 at the Wayback Machine.
Site Admin
Posts: 31201
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Fri Jan 24, 2020 3:47 am

Norbu Dhondup [Rai Bahadur]
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 1/23/20

Norbu Dhondup
Birth: 1884, Kalimpong
Death: 1944
activities: Politician, diplomat

Rai Bahadur Norbu Dhondup, ( Tibetan : ནོར་བུ་ དོན་ འགྲུབ , Wylie : nor bu don 'grub ) (also called Norbhu Dondup, Norbu Döndrub or Norbu Thondup born in 1884, died in 1944) is a Tibetan interpreter and diplomat then British agent. He was one of the interpreters of the British expedition led by Francis Younghusband in 1903-1904. In 1937 and 1939 he was acting director of the British mission in Lhasa.


Rai Bahadur Norbu Sherpa Döndrub was born in 1884 to a Tibetan family in Kalimpong in North India, then in the British Empire. He studied at Darjeeling High School in Darjeeling 1. He was interpreter of the British military expedition to Tibet in 1903. He was then secretary to the political officer of Sikkim, Bhutan and Tibet, based in Gangtok.

After the death of the 13th Dalai Lama, following the sending of a mission of condolence by China in Lhasa in 1934, the British government of India sent Norbu Döndrub in Lhasa that year 2.

In 1936 he became a British commercial agent in Yatung. In 1937 and again in 1939, he was appointed head of the British mission at Lhasa 3 , and remained there until his retirement in 1942.

He was honored by the Order of the British Empire, an order of British merit. In 1937 the regent Réting Rinpoche awarded him a gold medal for the services he rendered to communication between Tibet and British India 4.


Norbu Dhondup is appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (OBE CBE) 5.

Notes and references

1. ( McKay 1997, p. 226) read page 226 online
2. ( Barraux 1993 , p. 307)
3. ( McKay 1997, p. 126-128 and 230)
4. Wolfgang Bertsch, Medals from Tibet. Numismatic Digest. Indian Institute of Research in Numismatic Studies Publications, vol. 27-28, Anjaneri, 2003-2004, S. 187-196.
5. ( McKay 1997, p. 226) read page 226 online


• (in) Alex McKay, Tibet and the British Raj. The Frontier Cadre 1904-1947, London, Curzon Press,1997 (ISBN 9780700706273, OCLC 470609350)
• Roland Barraux (pref. Dagpo Rinpoche ), History of the Dalai Lamas - Fourteen reflections on the Lake of Visions , Albin Michel, coll. “Living spiritualities. Buddhism Series",1993, 396 p. ( ISBN 2-226-06514-8 , ISSN 0755-1746 , record BNF no FRBNF35593050 )(reissued in 2002, Albin Michel ( ISBN 2226133178 ) (Form BNF no FRBNF38831615 )
Site Admin
Posts: 31201
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:16 am

Herbert Benjamin Edwardes
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 1/23/20

Sir Herbert Benjamin Edwardes
Major Herbert Benjamin Edwardes, CB, DCL (1819–1868), The Hero of Multan, dressed as an Indian nobleman, by Henry Moseley, c.1850. National Portrait Gallery, London, (NPG 1391)
Born: 12 November 1819, Frodesley, Shropshire, United Kingdom
Died: 23 December 1868 (aged 49), London, United Kingdom
East India Company (1842-58)
United Kingdom (1858-62)
Service/branch: Bengal Army
Years of service: 1842–1868
Rank: Major-General
Unit: 1st Bengal European Regiment
Battles/wars: First Anglo-Sikh War; Second Anglo-Sikh War; Indian Mutiny
Awards: Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath; Knight Commander of the Star of India; Doctor of Civil Law
Other work Commissioner of Ambala (1862–1865)

Major-General Sir Herbert Benjamin Edwardes KCB KCSI DCL (12 November 1819 – 23 December 1868) was a British administrator, soldier, and statesman active in the Punjab region of British India. He is best known as the "Hero of Multan" for his pivotal role in securing British victory in the Second Anglo-Sikh War.

Background and early life

Edwardes was born at Frodesley in Shropshire on 12 November 1819, the 2nd son of the Rev. Benjamin Edwardes (1790/1-1823), rector of Frodesley, a younger son of Sir John Thomas Cholmondeley Edwardes, 8th Baronet, of Shrewsbury (1764–1816). The Edwardes Baronetcy of Shropshire had been conferred on his ancestor Sir Thomas Edwardes by King Charles I in 1644/5.

Edwardes's mother died during his infancy, and from the age of four, following his father's death in 1823, he was brought up in the household of a deeply religious aunt, from whom he developed his own strongly Protestant Christian faith. At the age of ten, he was sent to a boarding school at Richmond, Surrey, where he did not early distinguish himself. He went on to study Classics and Mathematics at King's College, London, and developed there a great interest in modern literature, composing poetry and drawing. He played a prominent role in the debating society.

Early service in India

Having been prevented from going up to Oxford by pressure from his guardians, Edwardes determined himself on a career in India. He applied directly to Sir Richard Jenkins GCB (1785–1853), of Bicton Hall, Salop.[1] a deputy chairman of the East India Company,[2] formerly of the Bombay Civil Service,[3] Member of Parliament for Shrewsbury in 1837, and family friend, for a cadetship in the Bengal Infantry. He landed at Calcutta early in 1841, aged 22, and from July 1842 served as a Second Lieutenant in the 1st Bengal European Regiment, first at Dinapore and then at Karnal, a frontier station. He remained with this regiment about five years, during which time he obtained a good knowledge of the Hindustani, Urdu and Persian languages, passing exams in all 3 subjects, which qualified him for the position of interpreter, which he obtained in November 1845, aged 26. He developed a deep understanding of military, political and social affairs in India, which showed itself in his many literary contributions to the Delhi Gazette entitled "Brahminee Bull's letters to his Cousin John Bull", expressing bold political opinions often critical of British Indian policy. His essays became well-read throughout British India and particularly impressed the Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Army himself, Sir Hugh Gough, who appointed Edwardes a member of his personal staff.

First Anglo-Sikh War

See also: First Anglo-Sikh War

Edwardes served as aide-de-camp to Gough during the First Anglo-Sikh War and fought at Mudki on 18 December 1845, where he was wounded, and at the final bloody rout of the Sikhs at Sobraon on 10 February 1846. Following the British victory, the Punjab came to be ruled by a British Resident seated at the historic capital of Lahore, supported by a Regency Council acting for the infant Maharaja Duleep Singh. In 1846, aged 27, Edwardes was appointed by the new British Resident Sir Henry Lawrence, as Assistant Resident. After three months at Lahore he was posted to the court of the Maharaja of Jammu, recently established by the British as ruler of Kashmir, divested from Punjab territorial lands following the Treaty of Lahore in 1846. Here he helped to suppress a local rebellion against the Maharaja, Gulab Singh.

Founding of Edwardesabad

In February 1847, aged 28, Edwardes was detached on special duty as Political Agent to the remote trans-Indus district of Bannu, where he was to improve the district's tax-revenue yield to Lahore, much lessened of late by evasion and non-payment. Here backed by a small force of Sikh troops, but largely on the strength of his own personality, he completely reformed the administration. He settled local feuds and demolished local fortresses, built roads and canals and encouraged agriculture. The town established by him was named after his death in his honour Edwardesabad, a name which gave way after independence to Bannu, unlike the surviving name of Abbottabad, which commemorates Edwardes's contemporary, General Sir James Abbott.[4]

Second Anglo-Sikh War

See also: Second Anglo-Sikh War

Sir Herbert Benjamin Edwardes by Alfred Crowquill, c.1850. Etching, National Portrait Gallery, London (NPG D36073)

The events and disturbances which grew into the Second Anglo-Sikh War of 1848–49 started at Multan, in southern Punjab, under the governorship of Dewan Mulraj, near which fortified town Edwardes found himself at the time, devoid of military support. Sensing that time was of the essence to prevent the rebellion spreading rapidly to the whole of the Punjab, and having no senior officer to consult, Edwardes made his response at first on his own initiative. He immediately raised a body of Pathan Irregulars and on 18 June 1848, having been joined by a force of Sikh troops, at Kineyri he routed a rebel force loyal to Dewan Mulraj. Subsequently, on 3 July, with reinforcements from his neighbouring District Officer Lt. Lake, and with troops sent by the Nawab of Bahawalpur from south of Multan, he defeated the rebels a second time at Sadusam, near Multan. Here he permanently injured his right hand in an accident with his pistol. Edwardes then forced the rebels to retreat to the fort of Multan, where they remained contained until the arrival of General William Sampson Whish and the Bombay column, whereupon, assisted by the further action of Edwardes's force, a siege was established. On 22 January 1849 Dewan Mulraj surrendered, following negotiations directed by Edwardes. Sir Henry Lawrence praised Edwardes's pivotal role in the war, stating that "Since the days of Clive no man had done as Edwardes".[5] All had been achieved by personal initiative, without formal military training. He was commended by Gough and the Government, promoted brevet major in September 1848 and made a Companion of the Order of the Bath (CB), in October 1849. The East India Company awarded him a specially struck gold medal for services in the Punjab.[6]

He returned to a hero's welcome in England and Shropshire, was thanked by both Houses of Parliament and on 12 June 1850 was awarded the degree of Doctor of Civil Law (DCL) by Oxford University. He was entertained at civic banquets in London and Liverpool, and made many well-received public speeches. Whilst in England, on 9 July 1850, aged 31, he married Emma Sidney, da. of James Sidney of Richmond, Surrey. It was most probably at this time his portrait was painted by Henry Moseley, showing him dressed as an Indian nobleman, which was presented by his widow in 1905 to the National Portrait Gallery.[7] He published in 1851 an account in 2 vols. of his experiences during the war entitled A Year on the Punjab Frontier.

Treaty with Afghanistan

Edwardes believed that the security of British India against the designs of Russia would be improved on the North-Western Frontier by the existence of a strong and independent Afghanistan and he urged the signing of a British Treaty of Friendship with the Amir Dost Mohammad Khan. Although opposed by Sir John Lawrence, then Chief Commissioner of the Punjab, as the new ruling magistrate was known following the 1849 British annexation of Punjab, Edwardes's suggestion received the approval of the Governor General of India Lord Dalhousie. The treaty was signed by Lawrence and the Amir on 30 March 1855. It contained a strict non-interference clause which turned out to be vital in maintaining calm in the Punjab during the Indian Rebellion of 1857 2 years later, thus allowing Punjab troops to be sent away to assist in the relief of Delhi and in subsequent operations. A second treaty was signed in January 1857.

Indian Rebellion of 1857

See also: Indian Rebellion of 1857

On the outbreak of the Indian Rebellion of 1857 at far away Meerut and Delhi, Edwardes received the sanction of Sir John Lawrence, the successor in the chief magistracy of the Punjab to his elder brother Sir Henry Lawrence, to raise native troops in the Punjab to form a moveable column to maintain order in the Punjab. Lawrence later sent the large part of these troops and other units previously raised by his brother and new units raised by himself to assist in the Siege of Delhi. It was this decisive action of Sir John Lawrence's, in taking the risk to leave the Punjab undefended, a policy opposed by Edwardes, which earned for him the sobriquet "The Saviour of India".

Interlude in England

Sir Herbert Benjamin Edwardes by William Edward Kilburn. Carte-de-Visite, 1860's. National Portrait Gallery, London (NPG x45342)

Aged 40, in mid-1859 Edwardes once more returned to England, his health so greatly impaired by the continual strain of arduous work that it was doubtful whether he could ever return to India. During his stay he was created KCB, with the rank of brevet colonel; and the degree of LL.D. was conferred upon him by the University of Cambridge.[8] In 1860, he was invited to speak at the Wenlock Olympian Games, when he praised their founder William Penny Brookes and the local Olympian Society's work but showed disagreement with the Greek influence of the name by publicly suggesting the games be called "'The Shropshire Class of British Work and Play', or anything else you will; but let it tell of English men and women."[9]

Commissioner of Ambala

Early in 1862, aged 43, with improved health he again returned to the Punjab, and was appointed to the prestigious Commissionership of Ambala and as agent for the Cis-Sutlej states. After holding the posts for 3 years, the health of both himself and his wife deteriorated and on 1 January 1865, aged 46, he left India for the last time.

Later life and death

Following his final return to England he was made Knight Commander of the Star of India (KCSI) on 24 May 1866 and promoted Major-General on 22 February 1868. He received a "good conduct" pension of £100.

He had been engaged for some time on writing a biography of his old chief Sir Henry Lawrence, and high expectations were held for the work, which he did not, however, live to complete, which task was performed by Herman Merivale. He suffered a bad attack of pleurisy in March 1868 from which he temporarily recovered, upon which he was offered the post of Lieutenant-Governor of the Punjab in March 1868. His recovery however relapsed and he died in London on 23 December 1868, aged 49, after a severe haemorrhage. He was buried in Highgate Cemetery and is commemorated by a mural tablet in Westminster Abbey and a stained glass window in the chapel of King's College London. He was survived by his wife.

Christian Evangelism

Edwardes was a devout Christian of the Protestant anti-ritualist variety. Perhaps one of the major criticisms of his career could be stated to be his propensity to evangelise amongst the indigenous populations of India.[10] After the Indian Rebellion of 1857–8, caused in some measure by the sepoys' belief that their ancient religions were under attack with the sanction of the British-Indian regime, he continued, on his return to India in 1862, to enthusiastically urge the Government of India to publicly support the propagation of Christianity in India.[11] Reputable biographers have gone so far as to call this attitude of his "a considerable lack of common sense",.[5] He shared his strong evangelical Christian attitudes with his brother officer and close friend Brigadier-General John Nicholson.[12] During his final period in England, he served as vice-president of the Church Missionary Society.

On 19 December 1853, a meeting was arranged under the Commissioner of Peshawar, Sir Herbert Edwardes, to discuss a Christian Mission to the city. The very first school in the province was established in 1853 by one of the first missionaries, Robert Clarke, under the patronage of Sir Herbert name Edwardes High School kohati gate Peshawar Pakistan

Literary works

• A Year on the Punjab Frontier, 2 vols., 1851.
• Political Diaries of Lieut. H. B. Edwardes, Assistant to the Resident at Lahore 1847 – 1849, Sang-e-Meel Publications, Lahore, Pakistan 2006 (Reprint version) ISBN 969-35-1770-9


• Edwardes College, Peshawar, North West Frontier Province (NWFP), Pakistan.
• Edwardesabad (now Bannu), NWFP, Pakistan.
• Edwardes High School kohati gate Peshawar Pakistan.(S.Qaisar Kazmi)

Further reading

• Memorials of the Life and Letters of Sir Herbert Benjamin Edwardes, by his wife Emma Simpson (2 vols., London, 1886)
• T. H. E. Holmes, Four Soldiers (London, 1889)
• John Ruskin, Bibl. pastorum, iv. A Knight's Faith (1885), passages from the life of Edwardes.


2. India Lists & India Office List, at Google books
3. Archived 8 November 2012 at the Wayback Machine (funerary inscriptions of Indian Service officers)
4. In fact, after Abbott was posted away in April 1853 from Hazara region, Edwardes became the second/next Deputy Commissioner of this district and was responsible for formally naming the region's newly founded town after his predecessor. See Harold Lee, Brothers in the Raj: The Lives of John and Henry Lawrence, Karachi: Oxford UP, 2002, p.320, ISBN 0-19-579415-X; and Charles Allen, Soldier-Sahibs: The Men who made the North-West Frontier, London: Abacus/Time Warner UK, 2002 ed, p.206, ISBN 0-349-11456-0
5. Moreman, T. R., Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.
6. Medal illustrated in Puddester, R.P. Medals of British India with Rarities and Valuations, vol.1
7. NPG 1391
8. "Edwardes, Herbert Benjamin (EDWS860HB)". A Cambridge Alumni Database. University of Cambridge.
9. Beale, Catherine (2011). Born out of Wenlock, William Penny Brookes and the British origins of the modern Olympics. DB Publishing. pp. 42–43. ISBN 978-1-85983-967-6.
10. He rather saw himself as a 'pioneer of Christian civilisation', Allen, p.11
11. Indeed, it is said that the 'triumphant outcome of the Rebellion' further convinced him of the righteousness of his cause and that 'the Giver of Empires is indeed God'; Allen, p.340
12. Allen, p.221


• Moreman, T. R. "Edwardes, Sir Herbert Benjamin". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/8528. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
• This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Edwardes, Sir Herbert Benjamin". Encyclopædia Britannica. 8 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
• Stephen, Leslie, ed. (1889). "Edwardes, Herbert Benjamin" . Dictionary of National Biography. 17. London: Smith, Elder & Co.
Site Admin
Posts: 31201
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:44 am

Henry Morgan
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 1/28/20

Sir Henry Morgan
17th century woodcut of Morgan
Born c. 24 January 1635, Wales; either Llanrumney, Glamorgan or Pencarn, Monmouthshire
Died 25 August 1688 (aged 53), Lawrencefield, Jamaica
Piratical career
Allegiance Kingdom of England
Years active 1663–1671
Later work Lieutenant Governor of Jamaica

Sir Henry Morgan (Welsh: Harri Morgan, c. 1635 – 25 August 1688) was a Welsh privateer, plantation owner, and, later, Lieutenant Governor of Jamaica. From his base in Port Royal, Jamaica, he raided settlements and shipping on the Spanish Main, becoming wealthy as he did so. With the prize money from the raids he purchased three large sugar plantations on the island.

Much of Morgan's early life is unknown. He was born in south Wales,[n 1] but it is not known how he made his way to the West Indies, or how he began his career as a privateer. He was probably a member of a group of raiders led by Sir Christopher Myngs in the early 1660s. Morgan became a close friend of Sir Thomas Modyford, the Governor of Jamaica. When diplomatic relations between the Kingdom of England and Spain worsened in 1667, Modyford gave Morgan a letter of marque, a licence to attack and seize Spanish vessels. Morgan subsequently conducted successful and highly lucrative raids on Puerto Principe (now Camagüey in modern Cuba) and Porto Bello (now Portobelo in modern Panama). In 1668 he sailed for Maracaibo and Gibraltar, both on Lake Maracaibo in modern-day Venezuela. He raided both cities and stripped them of their wealth before destroying a large Spanish squadron as he escaped.

In 1671 Morgan attacked Panama City, landing on the Caribbean coast and traversing the isthmus before he attacked the city, which was on the Pacific coast. The battle was a rout, although the privateers profited less than in other raids. To appease the Spanish, with whom the English had signed a peace treaty, Morgan was arrested and summoned to London in 1672, but was treated as a hero by the general populace and the leading figures of government and royalty including Charles II.

Morgan was appointed a Knight Bachelor in November 1674 and returned to Jamaica shortly afterward to serve as the territory's Lieutenant Governor. He served on the Assembly of Jamaica until 1683 and on three occasions he acted as Governor of Jamaica in the absence of the post-holder. A memoir published by Alexandre Exquemelin, a former shipmate of Morgan's, accused the privateer of widespread torture and other offences; Morgan brought a libel suit against the book's English publishers and won, although the black picture Exquemelin portrayed of Morgan has affected history's view of the Welshman. He died in Jamaica on 25 August 1688. His life was romanticised after his death and he became the inspiration for pirate-themed works of fiction across a range of genres.

Early life

Henry Morgan was born around 1635 in Wales, either in Llanrumney, Glamorgan or Pencarn, Monmouthshire[2][n 1][n 2] (both locations situated between Cardiff and Newport). The historian David Williams, writing in the Dictionary of Welsh Biography, observes that attempts to identify his parents and antecedents "have all proved unsatisfactory",[4] although his will referred to distant relations.[3] Several sources state Morgan's father was Robert Morgan, a farmer.[2][n 3] Nuala Zahedieh, writing for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, states that details of Morgan's early life and career are uncertain, although in later life he stated that he had left school early and was "much more used to the pike than the book".[2]

It is unknown how Morgan made his way to the Caribbean. He may have travelled to the Caribbean as part of the army of Robert Venables, sent by Oliver Cromwell as part of the Caribbean expedition against the Spanish in the West Indies in 1654,[5] or he may have served as an apprentice to a maker of cutlery for three years in exchange for the cost of his emigration.[4] Richard Browne, who served as surgeon under Morgan in 1670 stated that Morgan had travelled either as a "private gentleman" soon after the 1655 capture of Jamaica by the English,[2] or he may have been abducted in Bristol and transported to Barbados, where he was sold as a servant.[6] In the 17th century the Caribbean offered an opportunity for young men to become rich quickly, although significant investment was needed to obtain high returns from the sugar export economy. Other opportunities for financial gain were through trade or plunder of the Spanish Empire.[2] Much of the plunder was from privateering, whereby individuals and ships were commissioned by government to attack the country's enemies.[7][n 4]

Career as a privateer

Sir Christopher Myngs, under whom Morgan served

It is probable that in the early 1660s Morgan was active with a group of privateers led by Sir Christopher Myngs attacking Spanish cities and settlements in the Caribbean and Central America. In 1663 it is likely that Morgan captained one of the ships in Myngs' fleet, and took part in the attack on Santiago de Cuba and the Sack of Campeche on the Yucatán Peninsula.[5][10][11][n 5]

Sir Thomas Modyford had been appointed the Governor of Jamaica in February 1664 with instructions to limit the activities of the privateers; he made a proclamation against their activities on 11 June 1664, but economic practicalities led to him reversing the policy by the end of the month.[13] About 1,500 privateers used Jamaica as a base for their activity and brought significant revenue to the island. As the planting community of 5,000 was still new and developing, the revenue from the privateers was needed to avoid economic collapse.[13] A privateer was granted a letter of marque which gave him a licence to attack and seize vessels, normally of a specific country, or with conditions attached. A portion of all spoils obtained by the privateers was given to the sovereign or the issuing ambassador.[7]

In August 1665 Morgan, along with fellow captains John Morris and Jacob Fackman, returned to Port Royal with a large cargo of valuables. Modyford was impressed enough with the spoils to report back to the government that "Central America was the properest [sic] place for an attack on the Spanish Indies".[2][14] Morgan's activities over the following two years are not documented, but in early 1666 he was married in Port Royal to his cousin, Mary Morgan, the daughter of Edward, the island's Deputy Governor; the marriage gave Henry access to the upper levels of Jamaican society. The couple had no children.[15]

Hostilities between the English and Dutch in 1664 led to a change in government policy: colonial governors were now authorised to issue letters of marque against the Dutch.[n 6] Many of the privateers, including Morgan, did not take up the letters, although an expedition to conquer the Dutch island of Sint Eustatius led to the death of Morgan's father-in-law, who was leading a 600-man force.[17]

Sources differ about Morgan's activities in 1666.[18] H. R. Allen, in his biography of Morgan, considers the privateer was the second-in-command to Captain Edward Mansvelt. Mansvelt had been issued a letter of marque for the invasion of Curaçao, although he did not attack Willemstad, the main city, either after he decided that it was too well-defended or that there was insufficient plunder.[19][20][n 7] Alternatively, Jan Rogoziński and Stephan Talty, in their histories of Morgan and piracy, record that during the year, Morgan oversaw the Port Royal militia and the defence of Jamaica; Fort Charles at Port Royal was partly constructed under his leadership.[21][22][n 8] It was around this time that Morgan purchased his first plantation on Jamaica.[23]

Attacks on Puerto Principe and Porto Bello (1667–1668)

Puerto Principe being sacked in 1668

In 1667 diplomatic relations between the kingdoms of England and Spain were worsening, and rumours began to circulate in Jamaica about a possible Spanish invasion. Modyford authorised privateers to take action against the Spanish, and issued a letter of marque to Morgan "to draw together the English privateers and take prisoners of the Spanish nation, whereby he might inform of the intention of that enemy to attack Jamaica, of which I have frequent and strong advice".[24] He was given the rank of admiral and, in January 1668, assembled 10 ships and 500 men for the task; he was subsequently joined by 2 more ships and 200 men from Tortuga (now part of Haiti).[22][25]

Morgan's letter of marque gave him permission to attack Spanish ships at sea; there was no permission for attacks on land. Any plunder obtained from the attacks would be split between the government and the owners of the ships rented by the privateers. If the privateers stepped outside their official remit and raided a city, any resultant plunder would be retained by the privateers. Rogoziński observes that "attacks on cities were illegal piracy—but extremely profitable",[22] although Zahedieh records that if Morgan was able to provide evidence of a potential Spanish attack, the attacks on cities were justifiable under the terms of his commission.[2] Morgan's initial plan was to attack Havana, but, on discovering it was heavily defended, this was changed to Puerto Principe (now Camagüey), a town 50 miles (80 km) inland. Morgan and his men took the town, but the treasure obtained was less than hoped for.[26][27] According to Alexandre Exquemelin, who sailed with Morgan, "It caused a general resentment and grief, to see such a small booty".[28] When Morgan reported the taking of Puerto Principe to Modyford, he informed the governor that they had evidence that the Spanish were planning an attack on British territory: "we found seventy men had been pressed to go against Jamaica ... and considerable forces were expected from Vera Cruz and Campeachy ... and from Porto Bello and Cartagena to rendezvous at St Jago of Cuba [Santiago]".[29]

Morgan's attack on the Castillo de San Jeronimo, Porto Bello

After the action, one of the English privateers quarrelled with one of his French shipmates and stabbed him in the back, killing him. Before a riot between the French and English sailors could begin, Morgan arrested the English sailor, and promised the French sailors that the man would be hanged on his return to Port Royal. Morgan kept his word and the sailor was hanged.[30] After dividing the spoils of the conquest of Puerto Principe, Morgan announced a plan to attack Porto Bello (now in modern-day Panama). The city was the third largest and strongest on the Spanish Main, and on one of the main routes of trade between the Spanish territories and Spain. Because of the value of the goods passing through its port, Porto Bello was protected by two castles in the harbour and another in the town.[31] The 200 French privateers, unhappy with the division of the treasure and the murder of their countryman, left Morgan's service and returned to Tortuga.[32] Morgan and his ships briefly landed at Port Royal before leaving for Porto Bello.[31]

On 11 July 1668 Morgan anchored short of Porto Bello and transferred his men to 23 canoes, which they paddled to within three miles (4.8 km) of the target. They landed and approached the first castle from the landward side, where they arrived half an hour before dawn. They took the three castles and the town quickly.[33][34] The privateers lost 18 men, with a further 32 wounded; Zahedieh considers the action at Porto Bello displayed a "clever cunning and expert timing which marked ... [Morgan's] brilliance as a military commander".[2]

Exquemelin wrote that in order to take the third castle, Morgan ordered the construction of ladders wide enough for three men to climb abreast; when they were completed he "commanded all the religious men and women whom he had taken prisoners to fix them against the walls of the castle ... these were forced, at the head of the companies to raise and apply them to the walls ... Thus many of the religious men and nuns were killed".[35] Terry Breverton, in his biography of Morgan, writes that when a translation of Exquemelin's book was published in England, Morgan sued for libel and won. The passage about the use of nuns and monks as a human shield was retracted from subsequent publications in England.[36]

Morgan with a prisoner

Morgan and his men remained in Porto Bello for a month. He wrote to Don Agustín, the acting president of Panama, to demand a ransom for the city of 350,000 pesos.[n 9] As they stripped the city of its wealth it is probable that torture was used on the residents to uncover hidden caches of money and jewels. Zahedieh records that there were no first-hand reports from witnesses that confirmed Exquemelin's claim of widespread rape and debauchery.[2] After an attempt by Don Agustín to recapture the city by force – his army of 800 soldiers was repelled by the privateers – he negotiated a ransom of 100,000 pesos.[38] Following the ransom and the plunder of the city, Morgan returned to Port Royal, with between £70,000 and £100,000 of money and valuables; Zahedieh reports that the figures were more than the agricultural output of Jamaica, and nearly half Barbados's sugar exports. Each privateer received £120 – equivalent to five or six times the average annual earnings of a sailor of the time.[2] Morgan received a five per cent share for his work;[39] Modyford received a ten per cent share, which was the price of Morgan's letter of marque.[40][41] As Morgan had overstepped the limits of his commission, Modyford reported back to London that he had "reproved" him for his actions although, Zahedieh observes, in Britain "Morgan was widely viewed as a national hero and neither he nor Modyford were rebuked for their actions".[2]

Raids on Maracaibo and Gibraltar (1668–1669)

Maracaibo and La Ceiba (now Gibraltar) in modern-day Venezuela

Morgan did not stay long in Port Royal and in October 1668 sailed with ten ships and 800 men for Île-à-Vache, a small island he used as a rendezvous point.[42] His plan was to attack the Spanish settlement of Cartagena de Indias, the richest and most important city on the Spanish Main.[43] In December he was joined by a former Royal Navy frigate, Oxford, which had been sent to Port Royal to aid in any defence of Jamaica. Modyford sent the vessel to Morgan, who made it his flagship.[44] On 2 January 1669 Morgan called a council of war for all his captains, which took place on Oxford. A spark in the ship's powder magazine destroyed the ship and over 200 of its crew.[n 10] Morgan and the captains seated on one side of the table were blown into the water and survived; the four captains on the other side of the table were all killed.[48][49]

The loss of Oxford meant Morgan's flotilla was too small to attempt an attack on Cartagena. Instead he was persuaded by a French captain under his command to repeat the actions of the pirate François l'Olonnais two years previously: an attack on Maracaibo and Gibraltar, both on Lake Maracaibo in modern-day Venezuela.[50] The French captain knew the approaches to the lagoon, through a narrow and shallow channel. Since l'Olonnais and the French captain had visited Maracaibo, the Spanish had built the San Carlos de la Barra Fortress, 20 miles (32 km) outside the city, on the approach. Talty states that the fortress was placed in an excellent position to defend the town, but that the Spanish had undermanned it, leaving only nine men to load and fire the fortress's 11 guns.[51] Under covering cannon fire from the privateer's flagship, Lilly, Morgan and his men landed on the beach and stormed the fortification; they found it empty when they eventually breached its defences. A search soon found that the Spanish had left a slow-burning fuse leading to the fort's powder kegs as a trap for the buccaneers, which Morgan extinguished.[52] The fort's guns were spiked and then buried so they could not be used against the privateers when they returned from the rest of their mission.[53]

San Carlos de la Barra Fortress, which guarded the entrance to Maracaibo

Morgan arrived at Maracaibo to find the city largely deserted, its residents having been forewarned of his approach by the fortress's troops.[54] He spent three weeks in the city, ransacking and plundering what he could. Privateers searched the surrounding jungle to find the escapees; they, and some of the remaining occupants, were tortured to find where money or treasure had been hidden.[55] Satisfied he had stolen all he could, he sailed south across Lake Maracaibo, to Gibraltar. The town's occupants refused to surrender, and the fort fired enough of a barrage to ensure Morgan kept his distance. He anchored a short distance away and his men landed by canoe and assaulted the town from the landward approach. He met scant resistance, as many of the occupants had fled into the surrounding jungle. He spent five weeks in Gibraltar, and there was again evidence that torture was used to force residents to reveal hidden money and valuables.[56]

Four days after he left Maracaibo, Morgan returned. He was told that a Spanish defence squadron, the Armada de Barlovento, was waiting for him at the narrow passage between the Caribbean and Lake Maracaibo, where the San Carlos de la Barra Fortress was sited. The forces, under the command of Don Alonso del Campo y Espinosa, had 126 cannon with which to attack Morgan, and had re-armed San Carlos de la Barra Fortress.[2][57] The Spaniards had orders to end piracy in the Caribbean, and negotiations between Morgan and Espinosa continued for a week. The final offer put by the Spanish commander was for Morgan to leave all their spoils and slaves and to return to Jamaica unmolested, but no agreement was reached that would allow Morgan and his men to pass the fleet with their spoils but without attack. Morgan put the Spaniards' offers to his men, who voted instead to fight their way out. As they were heavily outgunned, one privateer suggested that a fire ship aimed at Espinosa's flagship, Magdalen would work.[58]

To this end, a crew of 12 prepared a ship that had been seized in Gibraltar. They disguised vertical logs of wood with headwear, to make the Spaniards believe that the vessel was fully crewed. To make it look more heavily armed, additional portholes were cut in the hull and logs placed to resemble cannons. Barrels of powder were placed in the ship and grappling irons laced into the ships rigging, to catch the ropes and sails of Magdalen and ensure the vessels would become entangled.[59]

Morgan destroys the Spanish Armada de Barlovento at Lake Maracaibo 1669

On 1 May 1669 Morgan and his flotilla attacked the Spanish squadron. The fire ship plan worked, and Magdalen was shortly aflame; Espinosa abandoned his flagship and made his way to the fort, where he continued to direct events.[60] The second-largest Spanish ship, Soledad, tried to move away from the burning vessel, but a problem with the rigging meant they drifted aimlessly; privateers boarded the ship, fixed the rigging and claimed the craft as plunder. The third Spanish vessel was also sunk by the privateers.[61] Morgan still needed to pass the San Carlos de la Barra Fortress, but was still out-gunned by the stronghold, which had the ability to destroy the privateer fleet if it tried to pass. The privateer decided to negotiate, and threatened to sack and burn Maracaibo if he was not allowed to pass. Although Espinosa refused to negotiate, the citizens of Maracaibo entered into talks with Morgan, and agreed to pay him 20,000 pesos and 500 head of cattle if he agreed to leave the city intact. During the course of the negotiations with the Maracaibos, Morgan had undertaken salvage operations on Magdalen, and secured 15,000 pesos from the wreck.[62] Before taking any action, Morgan tallied his takings and divided it equally between his ships, to ensure that it was not all lost if one ship was sunk; it totalled 250,000 pesos, and a huge quantity of merchandise and a number of local slaves.[63]

Morgan observed that Espinosa had set his cannon for a landward attack from the privateers – as they had done previously. The privateers faked a landing of their forces. The fort and its battlements were stripped of men as the Spanish prepared for a night assault from the English forces. That evening, with Spanish forces deployed to repel a landing, Morgan's fleet raised anchor without unfurling their sails; the fleet moved on the tide, only raising sail when they had moved level with the fortress, and Morgan and his men made their way back to Port Royal unscathed.[64][n 11] Zahedieh considers the escape showed Morgan's "characteristic cunning and audacity".[2]

During his absence from Port Royal, a pro-Spanish faction had gained the ear of King Charles II, and English foreign policy had changed accordingly. Modyford admonished Morgan for his action, which had gone beyond his commission, and revoked the letters of marque; no official action was taken against any of the privateers.[66][67] Morgan invested a share of his prize money in an 836-acre (338 ha) plantation – his second such investment.[68]

Attack on Panama (1669–1672)

Morgan before Panama, 1671 (c. 1736 engraving used to illustrate Captain Charles Johnson's General History)

In 1669 Mariana, the Queen Regent of Spain, ordered attacks on English shipping in the Caribbean. The first action took place in March 1670 when Spanish privateers attacked English trade ships.[69] In response Modyford commissioned Morgan "to do and perform all manner of exploits, which may tend to the preservation and quiet of this island".[70] By December Morgan was sailing toward the Spanish Main with a fleet of over 30 English and French ships carrying a large number of privateers.[42][n 12] Zahedieh observes that the army of privateers was the largest that had gathered in the Caribbean at the time, which was "a mark of Morgan's renown".[2]

Morgan's first action was to take the connected islands of Old Providence and Santa Catalina in December 1670.[74] From there his fleet sailed to Chagres, the port from which ships were loaded with goods to transport back to Spain. Morgan took the town and occupied Fort San Lorenzo, which he garrisoned to protect his line of retreat. On 9 January 1671, with his remaining men, he ascended the Chagres River and headed for Old Panama City, on the Pacific Coast.[75] Much of the journey was on foot, through dense rainforests and swamps.[76] The governor of Panama had been forewarned of a potential attack, and had sent Spanish troops to attack Morgan and his men along the route. The privateers transferred to canoes to complete part of the journey, but were still able to beat off the ambushes with ease.[77] After three days, with the river difficult to navigate in places, and with the jungle thinning out, Morgan landed his men and travelled overland across the remaining part of the isthmus.[78]

The privateers arrived at Old Panama City on 27 January 1671; they camped overnight before attacking the following day. They were opposed by approximately 1,200 Spanish infantry and 400 cavalry; most were inexperienced.[79][80] Morgan sent a 300-strong party of men down a ravine that led to the foot of a small hill on the Spanish right flank. As they disappeared from view, the Spanish front line thought the privateers were retreating, and the left wing broke rank and chased, followed by the remainder of the defending infantry. They were met with well-organised firing from Morgan's main force of troops. When the party came into view at the end of the ravine, they were charged by the Spanish cavalry, but organised fire destroyed the cavalry and the party attacked the flank of the main Spanish force.[81][82] In an effort to disorganise Morgan's forces, the governor of Panama released two herds of oxen and bulls onto the battlefield; scared by the noise of the gunfire, they turned and stampeded over their keepers and some of the remaining Spanish troops.[83] The battle was a rout: the Spanish lost between 400 and 500 men, against 15 privateers killed.[2][84]

Morgan attacking Panama, 1671

Panama's governor had sworn to burn down the city if his troops lost to the privateers, and he had placed barrels of gunpowder around the largely wooden buildings. These were detonated by the captain of artillery after Morgan's victory; the resultant fires lasted until the following day.[n 13] Only a few stone buildings remained standing afterwards.[84] Much of Panama's wealth was destroyed in the conflagration, although some had been removed by ships, before the privateers arrived.[86] The privateers spent three weeks in Panama and plundered what they could from the ruins. Morgan's second-in-command, Captain Edward Collier, supervised the torture of some of the city's residents; Morgan's fleet surgeon, Richard Browne, later wrote that at Panama, Morgan "was noble enough to the vanquished enemy".[87][88]

The value of treasure Morgan collected during his expedition is disputed. Talty writes that the figures range from 140,000 to 400,000 pesos, and that owing to the large army Morgan assembled, the prize-per-man was relatively low, causing discontent.[89] There were accusations, particularly in Exquemelin's memoirs, that Morgan left away with the majority of the plunder.[84][90] He arrived back in Port Royal on 12 March to a positive welcome from the town's inhabitants. The following month he made his official report to the governing Council of Jamaica, and received their formal thanks and congratulations.[91]

Arrest and release; knighthood and governorship (1672–1675)

Charles II, who ordered Morgan's arrest, but later knighted him

During Morgan's absence from Jamaica, news reached the island that England and Spain had signed the Treaty of Madrid.[n 14] The pact aimed to establish peace in the Caribbean between the two countries; it included an agreement to revoke all letters of marque and similar commissions. The historian Violet Barbour considers it probable that one of the Spanish conditions was the removal of Modyford from the Governorship. Modyford was arrested and sent to England by Sir Thomas Lynch, his recent replacement.[94]

The destruction of Panama so soon after the signing of the treaty led to what Allen describes as "a crisis in international affairs" between England and Spain.[95] The English government heard rumours from their ambassadors in Europe that the Spanish were considering war. In an attempt to appease them, Charles II and his Secretary of State, the Earl of Arlington, ordered Morgan's arrest. In April 1672 the privateer admiral was returned to London where, Barbour writes, he was "handsomely lionized ... as the hero on whom Drake's mantle had fallen".[96][97] Although some sources state that Morgan was also incarcerated in the Tower of London,[n 15] Pope writes that Tower records make no mention of his presence there.[98]

Morgan probably remained at liberty throughout his time in London, and the political mood changed in his favour. Arlington asked him to write a memorandum for the king on how to improve Jamaica's defences.[99] Although there was no court case – Morgan was never charged with an offence – he gave informal evidence to the Lords of Trade and Plantations and proved he had no knowledge of the Treaty of Madrid prior to his attack on Panama.[100] Unhappy with Lynch's conduct in Jamaica, the King and his advisers decided in January 1674 to replace him with John Vaughan, 3rd Earl of Carbery. Morgan would act as his deputy.[101] Charles appointed Morgan a Knight Bachelor in November 1674, and two months later, Morgan and Carbery left for Jamaica. They were accompanied by Modyford, released from the Tower of London without charge and made the Chief Justice of Jamaica.[13][102] They travelled on board the Jamaica Merchant, which held cannon and shot meant to boost Port Royal's defences. The ship foundered on the rocks of Île-à-Vache and Morgan and the crew were temporarily stranded on the island until picked up by a passing merchant ship.[103]

In Jamaican politics (1675–1688)

John Vaughan, 3rd Earl of Carbery

On his arrival in Jamaica, the 12-man Assembly of Jamaica voted Morgan an annual salary of £600 "for his good services to the country"; the move angered Carbery, who did not get on with Morgan.[104] Carbery later complained of his deputy that he was "every day more convinced of ... [Morgan's] imprudence and unfitness to have anything to do with civil government".[105][106] Carbery also wrote to the Secretary of State to bemoan Morgan's "drinking and gaming at the taverns" of Port Royal.[106]

Although Morgan had been ordered to eradicate piracy from Jamaican waters,[107] he continued his friendly relations with many privateer captains, and invested in some of their ships. Zahedieh estimates that there were 1,200 privateers operating in the Caribbean at the time, and Port Royal was their preferred destination. These had a welcome in the city if Morgan received the dues owed to him.[2] As Morgan was no longer able to issue letters of marque to privateer captains, his brother-in-law, Robert Bindloss, directed them to the French governor of Tortuga to have a letter issued; Bindloss and Morgan received a commission for each one signed.[108][109]

In July 1676 Carbery called for a hearing against Morgan in front of the Assembly of Jamaica, accusing him of collaborating with the French to attack Spanish interests. Morgan admitted he had met the French officials, but indicated that this was diplomatic relations, rather than anything duplicitous. In the summer of 1677 the Lords of Trade said they had yet to come to a decision on the matter and in early 1678 the king and the Privy Council recalled Carbery from Jamaica, leaving Morgan as governor for three months. In July 1678 Charles Howard, 1st Earl of Carlisle was appointed governor.[110][111]

By the late 1670s France became an increasing threat in the Caribbean, and Morgan took control of the defence of Port Royal. He declared martial law in 1678 and 1680 – both during his periods as temporary governor of the island – because of the threat of invasion, re-built the fortifications surrounding the town, and increased the number of cannon from 60 to more than 100 in the five years up to 1680.[2][112]

In the 1670s and 1680s, in his capacity as an owner of a large slave plantation, Morgan led three campaigns against the Jamaican Maroons of Juan de Serras. Morgan achieved some success against the Maroons, who withdrew further into the Blue Mountains, where they were able to stay out of the reach of Morgan and his forces.[113]

As Morgan and his allies on the Assembly of Jamaica continued to deal with privateers and pirates, criticism of their action in London was fomented by two former governors of Jamaica, Carbery and Lynch.[114][115] After Lynch paid £50,000 to Charles II, Morgan's commissions as lieutenant-governor and lieutenant-general were revoked and Lynch was appointed as the island's governor; Morgan still retained his position on the Assembly of Jamaica.[114][116] Morgan had been a heavy drinker for several years;[n 16] he received the news of the revocation of his positions badly and increased his intake of alcohol to the point where his health began to suffer.[116][118] Lynch removed Morgan's supporters from the Assembly of Jamaica by 1683, and in October that year he removed Morgan and his brother-in-law, leaving the assembly packed with men loyal to him. In 1684 Lynch died, and was temporarily replaced as governor by his friend, the lieutenant-general, Hender Molesworth.[119]

Report from The London Gazette regarding Morgan's successful libel action

In 1684 an account of Morgan's exploits was published by Exquemelin, in a Dutch volume entitled De Americaensche Zee-Roovers (trans: About the Buccaneers of America). Morgan took steps to discredit the book and successfully brought a libel suit against the book's publishers William Crooke and Thomas Malthus. In his affidavit he stated that he had "against evil deeds, piracies and robberies the greatest abhorrence and distrust", and that "for the kind of men called buccaneers", he "always had and still has hatred". The court found in his favour and the book was retracted; damages of £200 were paid to him.[120]

In December 1687 Lynch's permanent replacement arrived in Port George, Morgan's friend from his time in London, Christopher Monck, 2nd Duke of Albemarle. He dismissed Molesworth and gave Morgan an unofficial role as advisor.[121] In July 1688 Albemarle persuaded the king to allow Morgan to regain a position on the Assembly, but the former privateer was too ill to attend.[122] Hans Sloane, Albemarle's private physician, inspected Morgan and diagnosed dropsy; he also saw Morgan was drinking to excess and ordered him to reduce his alcohol intake, which was ignored. Sloane described his patient as

lean, sallow-coloured, his eyes a little yellowish and belly jutting out or prominent ... He complained to me of want of appetite for victuals, he had a kicking ... to vomit every morning and generally a small looseness attending him, and withal is much given to drinking and sitting up late, which I supposed had been the cause of his present indisposition.[123]

Death and subsequent events

Morgan died on 25 August 1688; Albemarle ordered a state funeral, and laid Morgan's body at King's House for the public to pay respects. An amnesty was declared so that pirates and privateers could pay their respects without fear of arrest. He was buried at Palisadoes cemetery, Port Royal, followed by a 22-gun salute from the ships moored in the harbour.[124][125] Morgan was a wealthy man when he died. He owned three plantations, had 129 slaves, and his personal wealth was valued at £5,263.[2] In his will, signed 17 June 1688, he left his Jamaican property to his godsons Charles Byndloss and Henry Archbold, on condition they adopted the surname of Morgan. These were the children of his two cousins Anna Petronilla Byndloss and Johanna Archbold. To his sister Catherine Loyd he awarded £60 per annum from his estate "paid into the hands of my ever honest cozen [sic] Thomas Morgan of Tredegar".[126]

On 7 June 1692 an earthquake struck Port Royal. About two-thirds of the town, amounting to 33 acres (13 ha), sank into Kingston harbour immediately after the main shock. Palisadoes cemetery, including Morgan's grave, was one of the parts of the city to fall into the sea; his body has never been subsequently located.[127][128]


See also: Captain Morgan in popular culture

Alexandre Exquemelin's De Americaensche Zee-Roovers (1678) which affected history's view of Morgan

Rogoziński observes that Morgan is probably the "best-known pirate" because of Exquemelin's book,[22] although, Cordingly writes that Exquemelin bore a grudge over what he saw was Morgan's theft of the bounty from Panama. His experience explains "why he painted such a black picture of Morgan and portrayed him as a cruel and unscrupulous villain",[129] which subsequently affected historians' view of Morgan.[22][130] Allen observes that, partly because of Exquemelin, Morgan has not been well-served by historians. He cites the examples of the historians whose biographies were so flawed they wrote that Morgan either died in London, prison or the Tower of London. These included Charles Leslie, A New History of Jamaica (1739), Alan Gardner, History of Jamaica (1873), Hubert Bancroft, History of Central America (1883) and Howard Pyle's work, Howard Pyle's Book of Pirates (compiled in 1921).[131]

Exquemelin wrote that Morgan's men undertook widespread torture in several of the towns they captured. According to Stephen Snelders, in his history of piracy, the Spanish reports of Morgan's raids do not refer to torture being practiced on the residents of Porto Bello or Gibraltar – although there are reliable reports that it was carried out in Panama.[132] The historian Patrick Pringle observes that while torture seems cruel and ruthless to contemporary eyes, it was an accepted part of judicial interrogation in many European countries at the time.[133][n 17] Morgan always fought with a commission from the governor of Jamaica. In doing so, he was acting as a reserve naval force for the English government in the defence of Jamaica.[22][135] As the Spanish did not recognise privateering as a legal activity, even if a captain carried letters of marque, they considered Morgan to be a pirate, something he firmly rejected.[136][137]

Rafael Sabatini's 1922 novel Captain Blood is based in large part on Morgan's career.

Rogoziński observes that Morgan does not appear in later fictional works as much as other pirates because of his "ambiguous mixture of charismatic leadership and selfish treachery",[68] although his name and persona have featured in literature, including Rafael Sabatini's 1922 novel Captain Blood and John Steinbeck's first novel, Cup of Gold (1929), both of which are based in large part on Morgan's career.[138][139] Morgan and stories of a hidden haul of treasure also feature to a lesser extent in other works, including Ian Fleming's 1954 novel Live and Let Die[140] and John Masefield's 1920 poem "Captain Stratton's Fancy".[141][n 18] Screen renditions of his life include Captain Blood (1935), The Black Swan (1942),[n 19] Blackbeard the Pirate (1952), Morgan, the Pirate (1961), Pirates of Tortuga (1961) and The Black Corsair (1976).[68] Morgan has also been featured in several video games, including Sid Meier's Pirates! and Age of Pirates 2: City of Abandoned Ships.[144]

In 1944 the Seagram Company started manufacturing the Captain Morgan brand of rum, named after the privateer. In 2001 the Captain Morgan brand was sold to Diageo, the multinational drinks company based in London.[145][146] The name of Morgan has been attached to local sites in the Caribbean, such as Morgan's Bridge, Morgan's Pass and Morgan's Valley in Clarendon,[147] Morgan's Harbour Hotel and Beach Club in Kingston,[148] the Hotel Henry Morgan, located in Roatán, Honduras,[149] the Port Morgan resort located in Haiti[150] and Captain Morgan's Retreat and Vacation Club on Ambergris Caye, Belize.[151]

The economist Peter Leeson believes that pirates and privateers were generally shrewd businessmen, far removed from the modern, romanticised view of them as murderous tyrants.[152] The anthropologist Anne M. Galvin and the historian Kris Lane separately see Morgan as obtaining wealth to become a member of the landed gentry;[153][154] Galvin wrote that Morgan showed "social mobility through self-interested acts of outlawry, political wiles, and business acumen".[154] Glenn Blalock, writing for the American National Biography, observes that Morgan was seen as a hero to many Jamaicans and British both for his exploits as a buccaneer and for ensuring Jamaica remained a key part of the British Empire.[5] Thomas describes Morgan as

a man of courage, determination, bravery, and ... charisma. He was a planner, a brilliant military strategist and intensely loyal to the king, to England and to Jamaica. ... But unlike so many of the Brethren, he was flexible and adaptable, able to see that the future for Jamaica lay not in plunder or pillage but in peaceful trade. ... He was also an adept politician and held office longer than any of the governors of his time.[155]


1. The administration of Monmouthshire at the time of Morgan's birth was complex; the Encyclopaedia Britannica state that for 400 years, "Monmouthshire was sometimes considered administratively a part of England and sometimes a part of Wales". Since the early 20th century it has been administered as a Welsh county.[1]
2. Information on the year of Morgan's birth is unreliable; in a deposition sworn in November 1671 he gave his age as 36.[3]
3. The sources that show Robert as Henry's father include:
 Zahedieh, Nuala (2004). "Morgan, Sir Henry (c.1635–1688)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.
 Blalock, Glenn (2000). "Morgan, Sir Henry". American National Biography.
 Pope, Dudley (1978). The Buccaneer King: The Biography of the Notorious Sir Henry Morgan 1635–1688.
 Breverton, Terry (2005). Admiral Sir Henry Morgan: The Greatest Buccaneer of them all.
4. According to the anthropologists Shannon Lee Dawdy and Joe Bonni, pirates are defined as "bandits, or sailors who seize property and/or people by force"; privateers are defined as those "who operate with a legal license from a state government to attack enemy ships and ports during wartime, keeping a contracted share of seized goods". Dawdy and Bonni define buccaneers as "originally castaway colonists (usually French or English) on Hispanio (from French) who survived by hunting or raising livestock",[8] although the historian Jon Latimer observes that the terms pirate and buccaneer have been interchangeable in English since the 17th century.[9]
5. Although England and Spain were not at war (the six-year Anglo-Spanish War had ended in 1660) Charles II was concerned about the Spanish attitude to the fledgling English territories in the Caribbean. He instructed the governor of Jamaica, Lord Windsor, to put military pressure on the Spaniards in order to retain the English presence in the region.[12]
6. The hostilities led to the Second Anglo-Dutch War (1665–1667).[16]
7. Mansvelt instead selected the more lucrative city of Cartago, the capital of Costa Rica, as the target for his attack.[20]
8. Rogoziński points out that the erroneous report of Morgan's presence on Mansvelt's expedition was from Alexandre Exquemelin's history The Buccaneers of America, although there is no record of Morgan being part of Mansvelt's group.[22]
9. The full name of the peso was the peso de ocho reales, also known as piece of eight or the Spanish dollar, the main currency used by the Spanish; English merchants and government used pounds, shillings and pence. In the late 17th century the peso was worth between five and six shillings.[37]
10. Some sources, including Breverton and Allen, state that there were only ten survivors from a crew of 350;[45][46] Pope states that more than 250 were killed.[47]
11. For his failure in his action, Espinosa was arrested and sent back to Spain.[65]
12. The size of Morgan's force differs between sources. Breverton states that Morgan commanded a fleet of 36 English and French ships carrying more than 1,800 privateers;[71] Pope gives the figures of 36 ships and 1,846 men;[42] Thomas writes that it was 37 ships with "2,000 fighting men, beside mariners and boys";[72] while Zahedieh and Cordingly separately put the figures at 38 ships with 2,000 men.[2][73]
13. The Spanish later built what is now Panama City six miles down the coast in a more easily defendable position.[85]
14. The treaty was signed on 8 July 1670 and was published in the Caribbean in either May or July 1671.[92][93]
15. Zahedieh in the Dictionary of National Biography is one such writer.[2]
16. Thomas opines that while Morgan drank to excess, "the drinking was not that of a sad man or a man that drank to forget; it was because he was a larger than life character who spent many of his evenings smoking and drinking, exchanging stories of wild adventures with his peers."[117]
17. Pringle identifies legal use of judicial torture in Scotland until 1708, in France until 1789 and the Spanish – as part of the Inquisition until the 1830s.[134]
18. "Captain Stratton's Fancy" was later set to music by Peter Warlock.[141]
19. Captain Blood and The Black Swan were adapted from the respective Sabatini novels of the same name.[142][143]
1. Monmouthshire.
2. Zahedieh 2004a.
3. Pope 1978, p. 62.
4. Williams 1959.
5. J Blalock 2000.
6. Gosse 2007, p. 154.
7. Cordingly 2006, p. xvii.
8. Dawdy & Bonni 2012, p. 678.
9. Latimer 2009, p. 4.
10. Cordingly 2006, p. 444.
11. Talty 2007, pp. 44–45.
12. Knighton 2008.
13. Zahedieh 2004b.
14. Allen 1976, p. 16.
15. Allen 1976, pp. 12–13.
16. Latimer 2009, p. 146.
17. Latimer 2009, p. 148.
18. Thomas 2014, 563.
19. Allen 1976, pp. 16–17.
20. Thomas 2014, 568.
21. Talty 2007, pp. 78–79.
22. Rogoziński 1995, p. 228.
23. Thomas 2014, 738.
24. Latimer 2009, p. 164.
25. Thomas 2014, 756.
26. Breverton 2005, pp. 36–38.
27. Gosse 2007, p. 156.
28. Exquemelin 2010, pp. 138–139.
29. Pope 1978, p. 145.
30. Talty 2007, p. 90.
31. Breverton 2005, p. 40.
32. Exquemelin 2010, p. 139.
33. Pope 1978, p. 147.
34. Cordingly 2006, pp. 45–46.
35. Exquemelin 2010, pp. 144–145.
36. Breverton 2005, p. 43.
37. Little 2007, p. 249.
38. Cordingly 2006, p. 47.
39. Thomas 2014, 1113.
40. Barbour 1911, p. 556.
41. Allen 1976, p. 49.
42. Pope 1978, p. 163.
43. Thomas 2014, 1171.
44. Breverton 2005, pp. 50–51.
45. Breverton 2005, p. 52.
46. Allen 1976, p. 54.
47. Pope 1978, p. 166.
48. Cordingly 2006, p. 48.
49. Talty 2007, p. 145.
50. Pope 1978, pp. 169–171.
51. Talty 2007, p. 149.
52. Thomas 2014, 1346.
53. Talty 2007, p. 150.
54. Talty 2007, p. 151.
55. Breverton 2005, p. 54.
56. Thomas 2014, 1410–1425.
57. Thomas 2014, 1524–1534.
58. Talty 2007, pp. 162–163.
59. Thomas 2014, 1573–1579, 1590, 1608–1613.
60. Thomas 2014, 1657.
61. Talty 2007, pp. 163–165.
62. Thomas 2014, 1652–1680.
63. Talty 2007, p. 170.
64. Talty 2007, pp. 171–172.
65. Talty 2007, p. 172.
66. Gosse 2007, p. 157.
67. Breverton 2005, p. 61.
68. Rogoziński 1995, p. 229.
69. Barbour 1911, p. 559.
70. Paxman 2011, pp. 19–20.
71. Breverton 2005, p. 71.
72. Thomas 2014, 2110.
73. Cordingly 2006, p. 50.
74. Pope 1978, pp. 216–219.
75. Gosse 2007, p. 158.
76. Breverton 2005, p. 83.
77. Allen 1976, pp. 92–93.
78. Thomas 2014, 2453.
79. Earle 2007, pp. 201–204.
80. Cordingly 2006, p. 51.
81. Talty 2007, pp. 239–240.
82. Earle 2007, pp. 206–207.
83. Pope 1978, p. 241.
84. Cordingly 2006, p. 52.
85. Patel 2013, p. 34.
86. Pope 1978, pp. 242–243.
87. Thomas 2014, 2863.
88. Breverton 2005, p. 91.
89. Talty 2007, p. 251.
90. Gosse 2007, p. 159.
91. Breverton 2005, pp. 92–93.
92. Pope 1978, p. 251.
93. Francis 2006, p. 663.
94. Barbour 1911, pp. 562–563.
95. Allen 1976, p. 119.
96. Barbour 1911, p. 565.
97. Pope 1978, pp. 257, 260.
98. Pope 1978, p. 264.
99. Cordingly 2006, p. 54.
100. Breverton 2005, p. 99.
101. Pope 1978, p. 268.
102. Allen 1976, pp. 140–141.
103. Cordingly 2006, pp. 54–55.
104. Breverton 2005, p. 108.
105. Cordingly 2006, p. 55.
106. Pope 1978, p. 277.
107. Talty 2007, p. 271.
108. Breverton 2005, p. 112.
109. Pope 1978, p. 276.
110. Breverton 2005, pp. 111–113.
111. Allen 1976, pp. 145–146.
112. Pope 1978, pp. 295–297.
113. Mavis Campbell, The Maroons of Jamaica 1655-1796: a History of Resistance, Collaboration & Betrayal (Massachusetts: Bergin & Garvey, 1988), pp. 23, 32-3.
114. Burnard 2004.
115. Breverton 2005, p. 120.
116. Pope 1978, p. 244.
117. Thomas 2014, 3879–3885.
118. Thomas 2014, 3949.
119. Thomas 2014, 3970.
120. Cundall 1936, pp. 70–71.
121. Breverton 2005, p. 127.
122. Pope 1978, p. 342.
123. Talty 2007, p. 280.
124. Pope 1978, p. 347.
125. Latimer 2009, p. 260.
126. Pope 1978, p. 344.
127. Allen 1976, p. 181.
128. Historic Earthquakes: Jamaica.
129. Cordingly 2006, pp. 52–53.
130. Allen 1976, p. 175.
131. Allen 1976, pp. 137, 175.
132. Snelders 2005, p. 111.
133. Pringle 2001, 869.
134. Pringle 2001, 869–876.
135. Snelders 2005, pp. 89–90.
136. Snelders 2005, pp. 92.
137. Pringle 2001, 963.
138. McGilligan 1986, p. 299.
139. Breverton 2005, pp. 146–147.
140. Lycett 1996, p. 238.
141. Hold 2005, p. 348.
142. Captain Blood, AFI.
143. Black Swan, AFI.
144. Firaxis 2004.
145. Curtis 2007, p. 42.
146. Diageo Company History.
147. Tortello.
148. Breverton 2005, p. 141.
149. Folliott 2014.
150. Cornell 2014, p. 102.
151. Captain Morgan's Retreat.
152. Matson 2008.
153. Lane 2000, p. 96.
154. Galvin 2012, p. 771.
155. Thomas 2014, 4039–4047.



• Allen, H. R. (1976). Buccaneer: Admiral Sir Henry Morgan. London: Arthur Baker. ISBN 978-0-213-16569-7.
• Breverton, Terry (2005). Admiral Sir Henry Morgan: The Greatest Buccaneer of them all. Pencader, Carmarthenshire: Glyndŵr Publishing. ISBN 978-1-903529-17-1.
• Cordingly, David (2006) [1996]. Under the Black Flag: The Romance and Reality of Life Among the Pirates. London: Random House. ISBN 978-0-8129-7722-6.
• Cornell, Jimmy (2014). World Cruising Routes: 1000 Sailing Routes in All Oceans of the World. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4081-5888-3.
• Cundall, Frank (1936). The Governors of Jamaica in the Seventeenth Century. London: The West India Committee. OCLC 3262925.
• Curtis, Wayne (2007). And a Bottle of Rum: A History of the New World in Ten Cocktails. New York: Three Rivers Press. ISBN 978-0-307-51285-7.
• Earle, Peter (2007). The Sack of Panamá: Captain Morgan and the Battle for the Caribbean. New York: Thomas Dunne Books. ISBN 978-0-312-36142-6.
• Exquemelin, John (2010) [1684]. The Buccaneers of America: A True Account of the Most Remarkable Assaults Committed of Late Years Upon the Coasts of the West Indies by the Buccaneers of Jamaica and Tortuga. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. ISBN 978-1-108-02481-5.
• Francis, John Michael (2006). Iberia and the Americas: Culture, Politics, and History: a Multidisciplinary Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1-85109-421-9.
• Gosse, Phillip (2007) [1932]. The History of Piracy. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications. ISBN 978-0-486-46183-0.
• Hold, Trevor (2005). Parry to Finzi: Twenty English Song-composers. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. ISBN 978-1-84383-174-7.
• Latimer, Jon (2009). Buccaneers of the Caribbean: How Piracy Forged an Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-03403-7.
• Little, Benerson (2007). The Buccaneer's Realm: Pirate Life on the Spanish Main, 1674–1688. Washington, DC: Potomac Books. ISBN 978-1-59797-101-0.
• Lycett, Andrew (1996). Ian Fleming. London: Phoenix. ISBN 978-1-85799-783-5.
• McGilligan, Patrick (1986). Backstory: Interviews with Screenwriters of Hollywood's Golden Age. Oakland, CA: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-05689-3.
• Paxman, Jeremy (2011). Empire. London: Viking. ISBN 978-0-670-91957-4.
• Pope, Dudley (1978) [1977 (in the UK, as Harry Morgan's Way)]. The Buccaneer King: The Biography of the Notorious Sir Henry Morgan 1635–1688. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co. ISBN 978-0-396-07566-0.
• Pringle, Patrick (2001) [1953]. Jolly Roger: The Story of the Great Age of Piracy (Kindle ed.). Mineola, NY: Dover Publications. ISBN 978-0-486-14759-8.
• Rogoziński, Jan (1995). Pirates!: Brigands, Buccaneers, and Privateers in Fact, Fiction, and Legend: An A-Z Encyclopedia. New York: Facts on File. ISBN 978-0-8160-2761-3.
• Snelders, Stephen (2005). The Devil's Anarchy: The Sea Robberies of the Most Famous Pirate Claes G. Compaen, and The Very Remarkable Travels of Jan Erasmus Reyning, Buccaneer. Brooklyn, NY: Autonomedia. ISBN 978-1-57027-161-8.
• Talty, Stephan (2007). Empire of Blue Water: Henry Morgan and the Pirates Who Ruled the Caribbean Waves. London: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-0293-7.
• Thomas, Graham (2014). The Buccaneer King: the Story of Captain Henry Morgan (Kindle ed.). Barnsley, South Yorkshire: Pen & Sword Maritime. ISBN 978-1-4738-3522-1.

Online resources

• "The Black Swan". American Film Institute. Retrieved 16 November 2016.
• Blalock, Glenn (2000). "Morgan, Sir Henry". American National Biography. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 10 October 2016. (subscription required)
• Burnard, Trevor (2004). "Lynch, Sir Thomas (d. 1684)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/17260. Retrieved 10 November 2016. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
• "Captain Blood". American Film Institute. Retrieved 16 November 2016.
• "Captain Morgan's Retreat". Islands Magazine: 94. November 2005.
• "Diageo Company History". Archived from the original on 4 April 2007. Retrieved 13 April 2007.
• Firaxis (15 November 2004). "Pirates of Pirates!". IGN. Retrieved 17 November 2016.
• Folliott, Kathryn (30 October 2014). "Orlando tailors promotion to Canadians Picks of the Week". The Toronto Star. p. T4.
• "Historic Earthquakes: Jamaica: 1692 June 07 UTC". U.S. Geological Survey. 6 April 2016. Retrieved 13 November 2016.
• Knighton, C. S. (2008). "Myngs, Sir Christopher (bap. 1625, d. 1666)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/19708. Retrieved 11 January 2017. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
• Matson, John (26 November 2008). "What Would Blackbeard Do? Why Piracy Pays". Scientific American. Retrieved 14 November 2016.
• "Monmouthshire". Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved 6 January 2017.
• Tortello, Rebecca. "The People Who Came". Jamaica Gleaner. Retrieved 17 November 2016.
• Williams, David (1959). "Morgan, Henry (1635? – 1688), Buccaneer". Dictionary of Welsh Biography. National Library of Wales. Retrieved 10 October 2016.
• Zahedieh, Nuala (2004a). "Morgan, Sir Henry (c.1635–1688)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/19224. Retrieved 10 October 2016. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
• Zahedieh, Nuala (2004b). "Modyford, Sir Thomas, First Baronet (c.1620–1679)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/18871. Retrieved 13 October 2016. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)

Journals and magazines

• Barbour, Violet (April 1911). "Privateers and Pirates of the West Indies". The American Historical Review. 16 (3): 529–566. JSTOR 1834836.
• Dawdy, Shannon Lee; Bonni, Joe (June 2012). "Towards a General Theory of Piracy". Anthropological Quarterly. 85 (3): 673–699. doi:10.1353/anq.2012.0043. JSTOR 41857267.
• Galvin, Anne M. (Summer 2012). "Caribbean Piracies/Social Mobilities: Some Commonalities Between Colonial Privateers and Entrepreneurial 'Profiteers' in the 21st Century". Anthropological Quarterly. 85 (3): 755–784. doi:10.1353/anq.2012.0049. JSTOR 41857270.
• Lane, Kris (2000). "The Sweet Trade Revived". New West Indian Guide. 74 (1 & 2): 91–97. doi:10.1163/13822373-90002571. JSTOR 41850027.
• Patel, Samir S. (March–April 2013). "Pirates of the Original Panama Canal". Archaeology. 66 (2): 30–37. JSTOR 41804641.

External links

• "Henry Morgan", Data Wales
• "Henry Morgan", 100 Welsh Heroes
Site Admin
Posts: 31201
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:02 am

Robert Dale Owen
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 1/28/20

Robert D. Owen
Robert Dale Owen as he appeared in the 1840s.
U.S. Minister to the Two Sicilies
In office: 1853–1858
President Franklin Pierce
Preceded by Edward Joy Morris
Succeeded by Joseph Ripley Chandler
Member of the Indiana House of Representatives
from the 76th district
In office
In office
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives
from Indiana's 1st district
In office
March 4, 1843 – March 3, 1847
Preceded by George H. Proffit
Succeeded by Elisha Embree
Personal details
Born: November 7, 1801, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
Died: June 24, 1877 (aged 75), Lake George, New York, U.S.
Nationality: British-American
Political party: Working Men's (1829–1831)
Democratic (1832–1858)
Spouse(s) Mary Jane Robinson
(m. 1832; her death 1871);
Lottie Walton Kellogg
(m. 1876; his death 1877)[1]
Children Florence
Julian Dale
Parents Robert Owen and Ann (or Anne) Caroline Dale Owen

Robert Dale Owen (November 7, 1801 – June 24, 1877) was a Scottish-born social reformer who immigrated to the United States in 1825, became a U.S. citizen, and was active in Indiana politics as member of the Democratic Party in the Indiana House of Representatives (1835–39 and 1851–53) and represented Indiana in the U.S. House of Representatives (1843–47). As a member of Congress, Owen successfully pushed through the bill that established Smithsonian Institution and served on the Institution's first Board of Regents. Owen also served as a delegate to the Indiana Constitutional Convention in 1850 and was appointed as U.S. chargé d'affaires (1853–58) to Naples.

Owen was a knowledgeable exponent of the socialist doctrines of his father, Robert Owen, and managed the day-to-day operation of New Harmony, Indiana, the socialistic utopian community he helped establish with his father in 1825. Throughout his adult life, Robert Dale Owen wrote and published numerous pamphlets, speeches, books, and articles that described his personal and political views, including his belief in spiritualism. Owen co-edited the New-Harmony Gazette with Frances Wright in the late 1820s in Indiana and the Free Enquirer in the 1830s in New York City. Owen was an advocate of married women's property and divorce rights, secured inclusion of an article in the Indiana Constitution of 1851 that provided tax-supported funding for a uniform system of free public schools, and established the position of Indiana Superintendent of Public Instruction. Owen is also noted for a series of open letters he wrote in 1862 that favored the abolition of slavery and supported general emancipation, as well as a suggestion that the federal government should provide assistance to freedmen.

Early life and education

Robert Dale Owen was born on November 7, 1801, in Glasgow, Scotland, to Ann (or Anne) Caroline Dale and Robert Owen. His mother was the daughter of David Dale, a Scottish textile manufacturer; his Welsh-born father became part-owner and manager of the New Lanark Mills, his father-in-law's textile mill at New Lanark, Scotland.[2][3] Robert Dale was the eldest surviving son of eight children; his younger siblings (three brothers and three sister) were William, Ann (or Anne) Caroline, Jane Dale, David Dale, Richard Dale, and Mary.[4]

Owen grew up in Braxfield, Scotland, and was privately tutored before he was sent at the age of sixteen to Philipp Emanuel von Fellenberg's school at Hofwyl, Switzerland. The Swiss school exposed Owen to Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi's method of education. After completing his formal education, Owen returned to Scotland to join his father in the textile business at New Lanark.[5][6]

Owen's father, a successful textile manufacturer and philanthropist, became a noted socialist reformer whose vision of social equality included, among other projects, the establishment of experimental utopian communities in the United States and the United Kingdom.[7] Robert Dale Owen, who shared many of his father's views on social issues immigrated to the United States in 1825, became a U.S. citizen, and helped his father manage the socialistic community at New Harmony, Indiana. Owen's three surviving brothers (William, David, and Richard) and his sister, Jane, also immigrated to the United States and became residents of New Harmony.[8][9]

Early career

Between 1825 and 1828, Owen managed the day-to-day operations of the socialistic community at New Harmony, Indiana, while his father returned to Britain to resume his social reform and philanthropic work in Europe.[10] In addition to his other work, Owen and Frances Wright, a wealthy, Scottish philanthropist and radical reformer, published articles in the New-Harmony Gazette, the town's liberal weekly newspaper, and served as its co-editors. Established in 1825, the Gazette was one of Indiana's earliest newspapers; however, it ceased publications in February 1829.[11][12]

After the New Harmony utopian community dissolved in 1827, Owen traveled in Europe before returning to the United States in 1829. During this period Owen wrote Moral Physiology; or, A Brief and Plain Treatise on the Population Question (1830), a controversial pamphlet on the topic of population control.[13] It was the first book in the United States to advocate birth control.[14][15]

Owen moved to New York City, where he and Wright co-edited the weekly Free Enquirer until 1831–32.[16][17] As they had done in the New Harmony Gazette, the Free Enquirer continued to express their radical views on a variety of subjects, including abolition of slavery, women's rights, universal suffrage, free public education, birth control, and religion. Owen returned to New Harmony, Indiana, in 1833, after he and Wright discontinued their editorship of the New York newspaper.[16]

Marriage and family

Owen and Mary Jane Robinson were married before a justice of the peace on April 12, 1832, in New York City. After an extended trip to Europe, they relocated to New Harmony, Indiana. The couple had six children, two of whom died at an early age. Their surviving children were Florence (b. 1836), Julian Dale (b. 1837), Ernest (b. 1838), and Rosamond (b. 1843).[18][19]

On June 23, 1876, five years after the death of his first wife, Owen married Lottie Walton Kellogg at Caldwell, New York; he died a year later.[1]

Politician and statesman

Working Men's Party leader

During 1829–30, Owen became an active leader in the Working Men's Party in New York City. In contrast to other Democrats of the era, Owen was opposed to slavery, although his radical partisanship distanced him from the leading abolitionists of the era.[20]

Indiana legislator

After Owen's return to New Harmony, Indiana, in 1833, he became active in state politics.[16] Owen served in the Indiana House of Representatives (1835–38; 1851–53).[6] He distinguished himself as an influential member of the Indiana General Assembly during his first term by securing appropriations for the state's tax-supported public school system.[17] In addition, Owen was instrumental in introducing legislation and argued in support of widows and married women's property rights, but the bill was defeated. He also proposed laws granting women greater freedom of divorce.[14]

In addition to serving in the state legislature, Owen was elected as a delegate from Posey County, Indiana, to the Indiana Constitutional Convention in 1850.[21] At the convention, Owen initiated a proposal to include provisions for women's property rights in the state constitution. Although it was not approved, this early effort to protect women's rights led to later laws that were passed to secure women's property, divorce, and voting rights.[22] One of Owen's lasting legacies was his authorship and efforts to secure the inclusion of an article in the Indiana Constitution of 1851 that provided state funding for a uniform system of common schools that are free and open to all and established the office of the state's superintendent of public instruction.[23]

U.S. Congressman

After his first term in the Indiana legislature and two unsuccessful campaigns for election to the U.S. Congress in 1838 and in 1840, Owen was elected as a Democrat to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1842. He served from 1843 to 1847 in the Twenty-eighth and Twenty-ninth Congresses. Owen was chairman of the Committee on Roads and Canals during the Twenty-eighth Congress. He was also involved in the debates about the annexation of Texas and an Oregon boundary dispute in 1844 that led to the establishment of the U.S-British boundary at the 49th parallel north, the result of the Oregon Treaty (1846).[24]

While serving as a member of Congress, Owen introduced and helped to secure passage of the bill that founded the Smithsonian Institution in 1846.[25] Owen was appointed to the Smithsonian Institution's first Board of Regents and chaired its Building Committee, which oversaw the construction of the Smithsonian Institution Building in Washington, D.C., and recommended James Renwick, Jr. as architect, James Dixson and Gilbert Cameron as the contractors, and the Seneca Quarry for its distinct, dark-red sandstone.[26]

Robert Dale Owen as he appeared in his later years.

Owen, his brother David Dale Owen, and architect Robert Mills, were involved in developing preliminary plans for the Smithsonian Building. These early plans influenced Renwick's choice of the Romanesque Revival architectural style (sometimes referred to as Norman-style architecture) and his three-story design for the building, which was finally selected, although not without controversy.[27] Owen's book Hints on Public Architecture (1849) argued the case for the suitability of Renwick's Romanesque Revival (Norman) architectural style for public buildings such as the Smithsonian "Castle," which he discussed in detail. Seven full-page illustrations and details of the building's architectural elements were prominently featured in the book, leading some to criticize Owen for his bias toward Renwick and his preference for Norman-style architecture over other popular styles.[28][29]

U.S. diplomat

Owen was defeated in his bid for re-election to Congress in 1846; however, he remained active in public service and was once again elected to serve in the Indiana General Assembly.[6] On May 24, 1853, while Owen was serving as a state legislator in Indiana, President Franklin Pierce appointed him as U.S. minister (Chargé d'Affaires and Minister Resident) to the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies at Naples.[30] Owen served in the diplomatic post until September 20, 1858, and then retired from political life, although he remained actively interested in public affairs and social reform issues.[6]

Other political activities

During the American Civil War, Owen served in the Ordnance Commission to supply the Union army; on March 16, 1863, he was appointed to the Freedman's Inquiry Commission. The commission was a predecessor to the Freedmen's Bureau.[17][31]

In 1862 Owen wrote a series of open letters to U.S. government officials, including President Abraham Lincoln and U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase, to encourage them to support general emancipation. Owen's letter of July 23, 1862, was published in the New York Evening Post on August 8, 1862, and his letter of September 12, 1862, was published in the same newspaper on September 22, 1862. In another open letter that Owen wrote to President Lincoln on September 17, 1862,[32] he urged the president to abolish slavery on moral grounds. Owen also believed that emancipation would weaken the Confederate forces and help the Union army win the war.[16] On September 23, 1862, Lincoln issued a preliminary version of the Emancipation Proclamation[33] (as he had first resolved to do in mid-July[34]). In Emancipation is Peace, a pamphlet that Owen wrote in 1863, he confirmed his view that general emancipation was a means to end the war. In The Wrong of Slavery, the Right of Emancipation, and the Future of the African Race, a report that Owen wrote in 1864, he also suggested that the Union should provide assistance to freedmen.[16]

Toward the end of his political career, Owen continued his effort to obtain federal voting rights for women. In 1865 he submitted an initial draft for a proposed Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would not restrict voting rights to males. However, Article XIV, Section 2, in the final version of the Amendment, which became part of the U.S. Constitution in 1868, was modified to limit suffrage to males who were U.S. citizens over the age of twenty-one.[35]


In The authenticity of the Bible (1833), Owen remarked :

For a century and a half, then, after Jesus' death, we have no means whatever of substantiating even the existence of the Gospels, as now bound up in the New Testament. There is a perfect blank of 140 years; and a most serious one it is.[36]

Like his father, Owen converted to Spiritualism and was the author of two books on the subject: Footfalls on the Boundary of Another World (1859) and The Debatable Land Between this World and the Next (1872).[37]

Later years

Although he retired from active public service at the conclusion of his work as a member of the Freedman's commission on May 15, 1864, Owen continued his writing career.[38] Major writing projects in retirement included Beyond the Breakers (1870), a novel;[39] The Debatable Land Between this World and the Next (1871), one of his two books on spiritualism;[39] and Threading My Way (1874), his autobiography.[40] Owen also wrote several articles that were published in the Atlantic Monthly and Scribner's Monthly.[41]

In 1875 Owen suffered a mental breakdown that was severe enough for him to be hospitalized at the Indiana Hospital for the Insane in Indianapolis, where he underwent three months of treatment. Owen recovered from the illness, was released from the hospital, and resumed writing.[42] On June 23, 1876, a year before his death, Owen married Lottie Walton Kellogg at Caldwell, New York.[1]

Death and legacy

On June 24, 1877, Owen died at his summer home at Crosbyville on Lake George, New York. Initially he was buried in the town of Lake George in Warren County, New York.[6] Later, his remains were exhumed and interred at New Harmony, Indiana, beside his first wife, Mary Jane Owen.[1]

One of Owen's most significant legacies in Indiana was to secure the inclusion of an article in the Indiana Constitution of 1851 that provided tax-supported funding for a uniform system of free public schools and established the position of Indiana Superintendent of Public Instruction.[23] His early efforts to protect women's rights were another of his political legacies.[16] Although he was unsuccessful in adding provisions to protect women's rights to Indiana's state constitution of 1851, his efforts paved the way for others to follow. Eventually, Indiana laws granted women's property and voting rights, as well as greater freedom in divorce.[22]

As a U.S. Congressman, Owen introduced federal legislation that founded the Smithsonian Institution in 1846.[25] He was also a member of the Smithsonian Institution's first Board of Regents and its Building Committee. His vision for the Smithsonian Institution Building, along with the preliminary plans and suggestions made by his brother, David Dale Owen, and architect Robert Mills, influenced architect James Renwick Jr.'s design for the Romanesque Revival-style building in Washington, D.C.[27]

Owen's impact on the issues of slavery and emancipation is less direct. In a series of open letters he wrote in 1862 and in publications that followed, Owen encouraged the abolition of slavery on moral grounds, supported general emancipation, and suggested that the federal government should provide assistance to freedmen.[16] Some historians have concluded that these open letters and Civil War-era pamphlets "helped immeasurably to solidify public opinion" in favor of emancipation.[43]

Honors and tributes

The town of Dale, Indiana, was named in Owen's honor.[44]

In 1911, the women of Indiana dedicated a memorial to Owen on the grounds of the Indiana Statehouse in Indianapolis that included a bronze bust of the statesman created by New Castle, Indiana native Frances Goodwin. The bust of Owen disappeared in the early 1970s; only its pedestal remains.[44][45]

Selected published works

Owen's published works included pamphlets, speeches, tracts, books, and numerous articles for periodicals and newspapers.[46]

• An Outline of the System of Education at New Lanark (1824)[13]
• Popular Tracts (1830)[13]
• Moral Physiology; or, A Brief and Plain Treatise on the Population Question (1830)[13][47]
• Discussion on the Existence of God, and The Authenticity of the Bible (1833), co-written with Origen Bacheler[36]
• Labor: Its History and its Prospects (1848), an address delivered at Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1841; republished in 1851.[13][48]
• Hints on Public Architecture (1849)[49]
• Footfalls on the Boundary of Another World (1859)[50]
• The Policy of Emancipation: In Three Letters (1863)[51]
• Emancipation is Peace (1863)[16]
• The Wrong of Slavery, the Right of Emancipation, and the Future of the African Race (1864)[16]
• Beyond the Breakers. A Story of the Present Day. Village Life in the West (1870), a novel that was initially published serially in Lippincott's Magazine in 1869.[39]
• The Debatable Land Between this World and the Next (1871)[39]
• Threading My Way: Twenty-Seven Years of Autobiography (1874)[39][40]
• "Touching Visitants from a Higher Life," published in The Atlantic Monthly, v. 35, no. 207, January 1875, pp. 57–69.[52]

See also

• Freedmen's town
• Josiah Warren
• Birth control movement in the United States


1. Elinor Pancoast and Ann E. Lincoln (1940). The Incorrigible Idealist: Robert Dale Owen in America. Bloomington, Indiana: The Principia Press. p. 106. OCLC 2000563.
2. "Robert Owen Timeline". Robert Owen Museum. 2008. Retrieved 29 August2017.
3. Linda C. Gugin and James E. St. Clair, eds. (2015). Indiana's 200: The People Who Shaped the Hoosier State. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society Press. pp. 269–70. ISBN 978-0-87195-387-2. See also: Arthur H. Estabrook (1923). "The Family History of Robert Owen". Indiana Magazine of History. Bloomington: Indiana University. 19 (1): 63–64, 69, 72. Retrieved August 29, 2017. See also: Frank Podmore (1907). Robert Owen: A Biography. I. New York: D. Appleton and Company. pp. 2, 4.
4. Estabrook, pp. 72, 80, 83.
5. Estabrook, p. 72. See also: Robert Dale Owen (1874). Threading My Way, Twenty-Seven Years of Autobiography. New York; London: G. W. Carleton and Company; Trubner and Company. p. 56.
6. "Owen, Robert Dale (1801–1877)". Biographical Directory of the United States Congress. U.S. Congress. Retrieved September 12, 2017.
7. Estabrook, p. 68.
8. Estabrook, pp. 72–73.
9. Donald E. Pitzer (Spring 2014). "Why New Harmony is World Famous". Traces of Indiana and Midwestern History. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society. 26 (2): 11.
10. Estabrook, p. 72.
11. Pitzer, "Why New Harmony is World Famous," p. 13.
12. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 11.
13. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 145.
14. Pitzer, "Why New Harmony is World Famous," p. 12.
15. Pancoast and Lincoln, pp. 19–20.
16. Allison Brown and Kisha Tandy (Summer 2014). "To Be Morally Just: Robert Dale Owen and Abolitionism". Traces of Indiana and Midwestern History. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society. 26 (3): 54–55.
17. Gilman, D. C.; Peck, H. T.; Colby, F. M., eds. (1905). "Owen, Robert Dale" . New International Encyclopedia (1st ed.). New York: Dodd, Mead.
18. Estabrook, pp. 73–78.
19. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 23.
20. Eric Lott (1993). Love and Theft: Blackface Minstrelsy and the American Working Class. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 129. ISBN 9780199717682.
21. Estabrook, pp. 72–74.
22. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 22.
23. Pancoast and Lincoln, pp. 56–57.
24. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 40–41.
25. Kenneth Hafertepe (1984). America's Castle: The Evolution of the Smithsonian Building and Its Institution, 1840–1878. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Press. pp. 15–17. ISBN 0-87474-500-4.
26. Hafertepe, pp. 17, 27, 37
27. Hafertepe, p. 47, 60–61.
28. Garrett Peck (2013). The Smithsonian Castle and the Seneca Quarry. The History Press. pp. 43–53.
29. Hafertepe, pp. 83–84.
30. "Robert Dale Owen". Department History. U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian. Retrieved 6 September 2017.
31. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 91.
32. "Robert Dale Owen's Letter to President Lincoln". University of Evansville. Retrieved 6 September 2017.
33. Pancoast and Lincoln, pp. 87–89, and note 15, p. 135.
34. "Emancipation Proclamation". Lincoln Papers. Library of Congress and Knox College. 2002. Retrieved 2013-06-28.
35. "The Constitution: Amendments 11–27". National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved September 12, 2017.
36. Origen Bacheler and Robert Dale Owen (1833). Discussion on the Existence of God, and The Authenticity of the Bible. A.J. Matsell. p. 247. For a century and a half, then, after Jesus' death, we have no means whatever of substantiating even the existence of the Gospels, as now bound up in the New Testament. There is a perfect blank of 140 years; and a most serious one it is.
37. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 100.
38. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 98–99.
39. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 149.
40. Robert Dale Owen (1874). Threading My Way: Twenty-seven Years of Autobiography. New York: G. W. Carleton and Company.
41. Pancoast and Lincoln, pp. 149–50.
42. Pancoast and Lincoln, pp. 104–5.
43. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 109.
44. Burford, William (1920). Yearbook of the State of Indiana for the Year 1919. Indiana: Legislative Bureau Division of Accounting and Statistics and The State Board of Accounts.
45. Glory-June Greiff (2005). Remembrance, Faith and Fancy: Outdoor Public Sculpture in Indiana. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society Press. p. 165. ISBN 0-87195-180-0. See also: "The Indiana Statehouse: A Self-Guided Tour" (PDF). Indiana Department of Administration. Archived from the original (pdf) on 2011-06-14. Retrieved 27 October 2010.
46. Pancoast and Lincoln, pp. 145– 50.
47. Multiple editions of Moral Physiology were published in the United States and elsewhere. For a digital version, see: Owen, Robert Dale (1842). Moral Physiology; or, A Brief and Plain Treatise on the Population Question. London: J. Watson.
48. "Labor: Its History and Its Prospects". Electronic Texts in American History. Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Retrieved 6 September 2017.
49. David Dale Owen (1849). Hints on Public Architecture; Containing, among other illustrations, views and plans of the Smithsonian Institution; Together with an Appendix Relative to Building Materials. New York: George P. Putnam. See also: Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 147.
50. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 147.
51. Pancoast and Lincoln, p. 148.
52. "Making of America". Cornell University Library. Retrieved 5 September 2017.


• Bacheler, Origen, and Robert Dale Owen (1833). Discussion on the Existence of God, and The Authenticity of the Bible. A.J. Matsell.
• Brown, Allison, and Kisha Tandy (Summer 2014). "To Be Morally Just: Robert Dale Owen and Abolitionism". Traces of Indiana and Midwestern History. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society. 26 (3): 50–55.
• Burford, William (1920). Yearbook of the State of Indiana for the Year 1919. Indiana: Legislative Bureau Division of Accounting and Statistics and The State Board of Accounts.
• Estabrook, Arthur H. (1923). "The Family History of Robert Owen". Indiana Magazine of History. Bloomington: Indiana University. 19 (1): 63–101. Retrieved August 29, 2017.
• Gilman, D. C.; Peck, H. T.; Colby, F. M., eds. (1905). "Owen, Robert Dale" . New International Encyclopedia (1st ed.). New York: Dodd, Mead.
• Greiff, Glory-June (2005). Remembrance, Faith and Fancy: Outdoor Public Sculpture in Indiana. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society Press. ISBN 0-87195-180-0.
• Gugin, Linda C., and James E. St. Clair, eds. (2015). Indiana's 200: The People Who Shaped the Hoosier State. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society Press. ISBN 978-0-87195-387-2.
• "The Indiana Statehouse: A Self-Guided Tour" (PDF). Indiana Department of Administration. Archived from the original (pdf) on 2011-06-14. Retrieved 27 October 2010.
• Labor: Its History and Its Prospects. Electronic Texts in American History. Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Retrieved September 6, 2017.
• Leopold, Richard William (1940). Robert Dale Owen: A Biography. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. OCLC 774894.
• Lott, Eric (1993). Love and Theft: Blackface Minstrelsy and the American Working Class. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199717682.
• "Making of America". Cornell University Library. Retrieved September 5, 2017.
• "Owen, Robert Dale (1801–1877)". Biographical Directory of the United States Congress. U.S. Congress. Retrieved September 12, 2017.
• Owen, Robert Dale (1874). Threading My Way, Twenty-seven Years of Autobiography. New York; London: G. W. Carleton and Company; Trubner and Company.
• Pancoast, Elinor, and Anne E. Lincoln (1940). The Incorrigible Idealist: Robert Dale Owen in America. Bloomington, Indiana: Principia Press. OCLC 2000563.
• Pitzer, Donald E. (Spring 2014). "Why New Harmony is World Famous". Traces of Indiana and Midwestern History. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society. 26 (2): 4–15.
• Peck, Garrett (2013). The Smithsonian Castle and the Seneca Quarry. The History Press.
• Podmore, Frank (1907). Robert Owen: A Biography. I. New York: D. Appleton and Company.
• "Robert Dale Owen". Department History. U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian. Retrieved September 6, 2017.
• "Robert Dale Owen's Letter to President Lincoln". University of Evansville. Retrieved September 6, 2017.

Further reading

• Elliott, Josephine Mirabella (December 1964). "The Owen Family Papers". Indiana Magazine of History. Bloomington: Indiana University. 60 (4): 331–52. Retrieved September 14, 2017.
• Epps, Garrett. Democracy Reborn: The Fourteenth Amendment and the Fight for Equal Rights in Post-Civil War America. New York: Henry Holt, 2006.
• Joshua R. Greenberg, Advocating The Man: Masculinity, Organized Labor, and the Household in New York, 1800-1840 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2008), 154-189.
• Himes, Norman E. "Robert Dale Owen, The Pioneer of American Neo-Malthusianism," American Journal of Sociology vol. 35, no. 4 (Jan. 1930), pp. 529–547. In JSTOR
• Humphreys, Sexson E. "New Considerations on the Mission of Robert Dale Owen to the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, 1853-1858," Indiana Magazine of History, vol. 46, no. 1 (March 1950), pp. 1–24. In JSTOR
• Lindley, Harlow. "Robert Dale Owen and Indiana's Common School Fund," Indiana Magazine of History, vol. 25, no. 1 (March 1929), pp. 52–60. In JSTOR
• Pawa, Jay M. "Workingmen and Free Schools in the Nineteenth Century: A Comment on the Labor-Education Thesis," History of Education Quarterly, vol. 11, no. 3 (Autumn 1971), pp. 287–302. In JSTOR
• Pessen, Edward. Most Uncommon Jacksonians: The Radical Leaders of the Early Labor Movement. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1967.
• Schlesinger Jr., Arthur M. The Age of Jackson. [1945] Boston: Little, Brown, 1953.
• Sears, Louis Martin. "Robert Dale Owen As A Mystic," Indiana Magazine of History, vol. 24, no. 1 (March 1928), pp. 15–25. In JSTOR
• Sears, Louis Martin. "Some Correspondence of Robert Dale Owen," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, vol. 10, no. 3 (Dec. 1923), pp. 306–324. In JSTOR
• Winther, Oscar Osburn. "Letters from Robert Dale Owen to General Joseph Lane," Indiana Magazine of History, vol. 36, no. 2 (June 1940), pp. 139–146. In JSTOR

External links

• United States Congress. "Robert Dale Owen (id: O000152)". Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.
• Transcript of Owen's letter to President Lincoln, University of Evansville, Indiana
Site Admin
Posts: 31201
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Return to Articles & Essays

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests