Posts in Category: History Research
It’s Never too Late to Fulfil your Calling
Are you ready for your divine appointment with destiny? Are you ready to discover why certain doors have closed throughout your life? God will open divine doorways for your mission in the latter years of your life. The Bible reminds us that it is never too late to be reminded of your calling.
Anna was an established prophetess who devoted her life to serving in the Temple. She stepped into her power at the age of 84, accepting an important role from God. She was the first to recognize the infant Jesus as the Messiah when he was presented by Mary and Joseph at the Temple in Jerusalem. Her story appears in the Gospel of Luke:
📖 Luke 2:36–38
“And Anna, daughter of Phanuel, out of the tribe of Asher, was a prophetess. She was advanced in years, and had lived with a husband for seven years after her marriage. And she was an eighty-four-year-old widow who did not depart from the Temple, serving with fastings and prayers, night and day. And standing nearby at the same hour, she gave thanks to the Lord, and she spoke about Him to all those waiting for redemption in Jerusalem.”
The Keys of the Kingdom Holy Bible, Translated by Christopher Sparkes 2022
www.keysofthekingdombible.com
Her spiritual authority seems to have developed over time, rooted in her many decades of faithful worship, prayer, and fasting after her seven year marriage ended. In all of those years, she kept going and did not doubt herself even as she aged.
We, too, can follow her example and ask God to bestow upon us our calling and Soul Purpose.
Key points about Anna:
- She was from the tribe of Asher.
- She was a widow, advanced in years (84 years old or possibly a widow for 84 years, depending on translation).
- She was a prophetess, indicating a recognized spiritual role.
- She spent her life in devotion and prayer at the temple.
- She was among the first to publicly proclaim Jesus as the redeemer.
- Anna and Simeon are both seen in this scene as devout people who recognized Jesus’ divine identity very early in His life.
Watch this video for further inspiration about Biblical figures who were chosen by God for service in the latter years of their life.
Ancient Perspectives on Treason and Justice
The Book of Esther from the Apocrypha raises important themes about the punishment of treasonous public servants and the role of the feminine in revealing truth and influencing those in power.
Ancient Lessons in Dealing with Treason
This post explores how ancient kings addressed acts of treason committed by trusted members of their royal courts. The Book of Esther offers a powerful example through the story of Haman, a high-ranking public servant in a position of responsibility who misused his authority to act against the people. Driven by ego and pride, Haman was offended by Mordecai’s refusal to bow to him and sought revenge, not just on Mordecai, but on his entire people across the realm. Filled with anger, he manipulated the truth and deceived the king to serve his evil vendetta.
The Book of Esther offers relevant insights for our times, especially as we are witnessing increasingly unlawful and treasonous abuses of power by our public servants, including councils, courts, police, government officials, and their agents, such as debt collectors and solicitors. Like Haman, many use their position to oppress the people rather than to serve them.
Guided by Esther’s bravery, King Ahasuerus, upon uncovering Haman’s deceit, acts decisively to restore justice. Haman is executed for his treachery, his estate is given to Mordecai as restitution, and the people who were the subject of Haman’s wrath are permitted to kill those who served Haman.
This ancient narrative offers a compelling example of how those who betray the public trust through manipulation, false accusations, or unlawful acts might be held accountable. The book of Esther also reveals how true leaders empower the people to directly deal with those who have oppressed them.
Woman as a Spiritual Redeemer
The prophecy of the Book of Esther is recommended in the book ‘Clothed with the Sun’, a collection of mystical visions and esoteric writings by Anna Bonus Kingsford (1846–1888), a pioneering English mystic, physician, and early advocate of animal rights and women’s spiritual empowerment.
In Chapter No. IX ‘Concerning the Prophecy of the Book of Esther’ she predicts that the future spiritual redeemer of the world will manifest through the feminine principle as a woman. She invites the reader to discover more about this by reading the Book of Esther, which is included in the Apocrypha; a book of ancient religious texts written between the Old and New Testaments around 400 BCE to 100 CE that is usually excluded from Protestant Bibles. Many ancient texts have been concealed from the public because of the powerful truths they contain, because those in control of the system are in fear that the people will be empowered.
In this Chapter, Kingsford introduces The Book of Esther, from the Apocrypha, as a mystic prophecy written in the form of actual history.
This book starts with Queen Vasthi being deposed from her Royal seat for being disobedient to King Ahasuerus, creating a need to find a new Queen who ends up being Esther.
She explains that Mordecai, Esther’s guardian, represents the spirit of intuitive reason and understanding and Mordecai’s enemy, Haman, represents the spirit of materialism.
Kingsford summarises the plot as follows: Esther, under the care and tuition of Mordecai, is brought up pure and virgin, and has the spirit of love and sympathetic interpretation, which shall redeem the world. To reach the point of being ready, Esther had six years of severe and bitter study and training to become proficient in intellectual knowledge. Two dragons fight and tear each other until there arises a star, a fountain of light, a queen who is Esther. The two dragons are Haman and Mordecai.
In preparation for pleading with the King on behalf of Mordecai, she places her trust in God and asks the people in the capital to pray and fast with her for three days. Esther shows great bravery when she risks death by appearing before the King without being summoned. The King is so favourably impressed with her beauty and courage that she can ask for anything, and she chooses to set a trap for Haman.
Apocrypha, King James Version, Reader’s Edition, Hendrickson Publishers, 2009
This is our summary of The Book of Esther as taken from the King James Version of the Apocrypha:
Mordecai discovered that two eunuchs, Bigthana and Teresh, were planning to kill the King.
Mordecai was rewarded by the King and asked to serve in the court.
Queen Vashti refuses King Ahasuerus’ command, which angers him, and she loses her position as his wife.
Mordecai, a Benjaminite (from Jacob’s line and one of the twelve tribes of Israel), brought up his uncle’s daughter (his cousin) Esther.
King Ahasuerus seeks a new, younger wife.
Esther was given twelve months of purification: six with oil of myrrh, and six with sweet odours before the King chose her to be the new queen.
Haman was promoted by the King, and Mordecai was the only servant who refused to bow to him, because he did not want to glorify a man above the glory of God.
Haman sought to take revenge on Mordecai. He was so angered that he sought to harm all the Jews by telling the King they were malicious people in opposition to the laws and commandments of the King.
Mordecai was upset, and Esther tried to assist him. He asked her to speak to the King on behalf of her people.
She broke the rules by going to the King without being called, but he was kind to her.
She invites the King and Haman to a banquet she has prepared.
The King reads the record in the chronicles that explains how Mordecai saved the King’s life from Bigthana and Teresh.
The King asks Haman ‘What shall be done unto the man whom the King deligheth to honour?’, without saying who it is until Haman answers. Then the King tells him it is Mordecai, and Haman has to follow through with the good plan.
Haman is upset and then has to go to the banquet the Queen has prepared.
The Queen asks the King to save her and her people from Haman.
The King hanged Haman on the gallows he had prepared for Mordecai.
The King gives the Queen Haman’s possessions, and she gives them to Mordecai.
The King reverses Haman’s decree against the Jews with an official letter to the people.
Esther: Chapter 16
Chapter 16 of The Book of Esther contains the official letter from King Ahasuerus reversing the decree that Haman had sent out to destroy Mordecai’s people. It follows the dramatic revelation of Haman’s dark plot against the people and Esther’s brave intervention. This letter seems applicable today, in a society that is full of ego, narcissism, and corruption, where the people holding public office in government and other public bodies regularly commit treason against the people.
I have highlighted in bold the text that seems relevant to the behaviour we are witnessing today.
Esther 16 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition
16 The great King Ahasuerus, from India to Ethiopia, to the governors and princes of a hundred and twenty-seven provinces, which obey our command, sendeth greeting.
2 Many have abused unto pride the goodness of princes, and the honour that hath been bestowed upon them:
3 And not only endeavour to oppress the king’s subjects, but not bearing the glory that is given them, take in hand to practise also against those who gave it.
4 Neither are they content not to return thanks for benefits received, and to violate in themselves the laws of humanity, but they think they can also escape the justice of God who seeth all things.
5 And they break out into so great madness, as to endeavour to undermine by lies such as observe diligently the offices committed to them, and do all things in such manner as to be worthy of all men’s praise.
6 While with crafty fraud they deceive the ears of princes that are well meaning, and judge of others by their own nature.
7 Now this is proved both from ancient histories, and by the things which are done daily, how the good designs of kings are depraved by the evil suggestions of certain men.
8 Wherefore we must provide for the peace of all provinces.
9 Neither must you think, if we command different things, that it cometh of the levity of our mind, but that we give sentence according to the quality and necessity of times, as the profit of the commonwealth requireth.
10 Now that you may more plainly understand what we say, I Aman the son of Amadathi, a Macedonian both in mind and country, and having nothing of the Persian blood, but with his cruelty staining our goodness, was received being a stranger by us:
11 And found our humanity so great towards him, that he was called our father, and was worshipped by all as the next man after the king:
12 But he was so far puffed up with arrogancy, as to go about to deprive us of our kingdom and life.
13 For with certain new and unheard of devices he hath sought the destruction of Mordecai, by whose fidelity and good services our life was saved, and of Esther the partner of our kingdom, with all their nation:
14 Thinking that after they were slain, he might work treason against us left alone without friends, and might transfer the kingdom of the Persians to the Macedonians.
15 But we have found that the Jews, who were by that most wicked man appointed to be slain, are in no fault at all, but contrariwise, use just laws,
16 And are the children of the highest and the greatest, and the ever living God, by whose benefit the kingdom was given both to our fathers and to us, and is kept unto this day.
17 Wherefore know ye that those letters which he sent in our name, are void and of no effect.
18 For which crime both he himself that devised it, and all his kindred hang on gibbets, before the gates of this city Susan: not we, but God repaying him as he deserved.
19 But this edict, which we now send, shall be published in all cities, that the Jews may freely follow their own laws.
20 And you shall aid them that they may kill those who had prepared themselves to kill them, on the thirteenth day of the twelfth month, which is called Adar.
21 For the almighty God hath turned this day of sadness and mourning into joy to them.
22 Wherefore you shall also count this day among other festival days, and celebrate it with all joy, that it may be known also in times to come.
23 That all they who faithfully obey the Persians, receive a worthy reward for their fidelity: but they that are traitors to their kingdom, are destroyed for their wickedness.
24 And let every province and city, that will not be partaker of this solemnity, perish by the sword and by fire, and be destroyed in such manner as to be made unpassable, both to men and beasts, for an example of contempt, and disobedience.
Esther: Chapter 8
Chapter 8 of The Book of Esther explains how the official letter from King Ahasuerus is distributed to all the people throughout the realm, and they celebrate with joy and gladness.
Esther: Chapter 9
In Chapter 9, the people decide that they hate those who wanted to have power over them, and seek them out to kill them. Through fear of Mordacai, the governors and officers of each town and city assist the people to seek out the bad people so that they can slaughter them with swords. Esther ordered Haman’s ten sons to be hanged on the gallows. The people celebrated again with feasts and gifts to the poor.
Insight
A man in a position of power will be influenced by a woman of a pure heart. His decisions will bring justice and restitution to a group of oppressed people. Their oppressors will be punished, and their illicit gains will be redistributed. Those representing the truth with be rewarded.
Rembrandt
Rembrandt van Rijn was inspired to paint Ahasveros and Haman at the Feast of Esther by a play about Esther by Johannes Serwouters in 1659.
The painting depicts Esther and the King as a united front opposed to Haman. The King’s lips are pursed in anger, and Haman’s stooped pose suggests a sense of impending doom.
Guy Fawkes Night – A Celebration of Rebellion
In early 17th-century England, there was significant tension between Protestants and Catholics. King James was Protestant, and Catholics faced persecution, including restrictions on practicing their faith. A group of Catholic conspirators, led by Robert Catesby, hatched a plan to kill the king, overthrow the government, and install a Catholic monarch. They planned to do this by blowing up the House of Lords during the State Opening of Parliament, which the King and other prominent figures would attend.
Guy Fawkes, a former soldier with explosives experience, was tasked with overseeing the gunpowder. The conspirators had rented a cellar beneath the House of Lords and filled it with 36 barrels of gunpowder.
On October 26, 1605, an anonymous letter warning of the plot reached Lord Monteagle, a Catholic peer. Authorities investigated, and on the night of November 4th, Guy Fawkes was discovered in the cellar with the explosives. He was arrested and tortured, leading him to reveal the names of his co-conspirators. Fawkes and several of his fellow conspirators were tried, convicted of treason, and executed. The failure of the Gunpowder Plot was celebrated by the king and Parliament, and an annual day of thanksgiving was declared for November 5th.
In the years following the failed plot, November 5th was celebrated with bonfires, fireworks, and church services thanking God for the king’s safety, however, I believe that they were misled. People would burn effigies of Guy Fawkes on bonfires as a symbolic punishment, not realising that the King was oppressing the people and they had their rights under Magna Carta. This ‘celebration’ was a form of control, to put fear into the people that if they acted against the King they would lose their lives. Having an annual day of commemoration meant that this idea remained in the minds of the people.
Little did the people know about the treason being committed by the government against the people. Perhaps it would be better remembered as an uprising against the tyrannical King, in the same way the people stood up to King John. This resulted in Magna Carta 1215, which is our constitutional document, which protects the rights of the people. This document has been ignored by successive governments as they ride roughshod over the people charging excessive taxes and bringing in more control.
Over time, children began creating effigies or “Guys” out of old clothes, which they would parade around town asking for “a penny for the Guy.” This tradition evolved into a form of trick-or-treating in some areas. While the political and religious significance has faded, the night is enjoyed as a fun, social tradition with large firework displays. Some communities still burn “Guys” as a nod to history, though the practice has become less common.
The image of Guy Fawkes has come to represent rebellion and protest in popular culture. The 1980s graphic novel and 2005 film V for Vendetta portrayed Fawkes as a symbol against tyranny, inspiring protest movements worldwide to adopt the iconic Guy Fawkes mask. This was performed publicly in 2020, in the London Million Mask March.
We know that there are more ways than gunpowder to bring down our politicians.
Here is a contemporary rap celebrating the gunpowder plot:
Was St Peter’s Church Built by Peasants?
In my last post, I researched the early history of Petersfield and St Peter’s church. But there is a detail that has been niggling away at me which has caused me to start questioning the validity of what we are being told.
The ‘Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Plan‘ on the East Hampshire District Council website states that St Peter’s Church was built ‘In the 12th century, probably between 1125 and 1150, when the earliest part of St Peter’s Church was built’.
Yet, I find it very odd that this is the only website that will commit to a date for the building of the church. None of the other sites covering the early history of St Peter’s offer a specific date, they all gloss over it. Why would there not be official records giving the construction dates?
Having seen the detailed craftsmanship and the large amount of stone used to build the structure of St Peter’s, I wondered how this would be possible for people who at that time were peasants living in timber structures and surviving by working on the land.
The Anglo-Saxon period continued until 1066, which was the start of the Norman Conquest. BBC Bitesize confirms what our children are taught for GSE History about life in Anglo-Saxon times, which in contrast to this church building seems very primitive.
Yet, our historians would have us believe that around fifty years after the Norman Conquest, these same peasants were building stone churches and castles.
But there is no mention that Anglo-Saxon men were master craftsmen capable of the detailed stonework as seen on what is known as the ‘Norman Chancel Arch’ as described by the Hampshire History website. How did these farm peasants manage to find the time to focus on learning the craftsmanship and building skills required to build a church such as this? Who taught them those skills? And how were there enough men to both tend the fields and carve ornate detail like this with a hammer and chisel?
According to BBC Bitesize, our children are taught for GSE History that in Norman times everyone lived a short walk from a castle or church, which means there must have been a lot of castles and churches. But who had the time to build such large-scale structures to such a high level of workmanship when everyone was busy working on the land? What changed in the fifty years between the Norman Conquest and the building of Norman churches?
The answer is nothing, and BBC Bitesize confirms that the people were still living off the land during Norman times.
Then, we are told that approximately fifty years later the local peasants rebuilt and greatly enlarged the church, which does not make any sense. My feeling is that the church was already larger and because there were no records as evidence they made up the narrative that it was gradually extended over time to make it seem like it had been built by our civilisation.
‘Towards the end of the twelfth century, a second period of building added the north and south aisles, taking the walls out to the north and south ends of the transepts and building a west tower to replace the central one.’ https://stpeterspetersfield.org.uk/about_stpeters/the-history-of-st-peters-church/
It doesn’t make sense that farm workers built stone structures with detailed carving such as this when the housing at that time was of timber construction. I wonder if these castles and buildings that are said to have been built in Norman times were actually the remnants of a previous civilisation.
The History of St Peter’s Church in Petersfield: Anglo Saxons, Wolves, & Magna Carta
The first church in Petersfield was built before the establishment of Petersfield as a town, in an area of fields which was part of the extensive Anglo-Saxon Manor of Mapledurham, also known as Malpedresham, and now known as the village of Buriton, which was in the centre of the estate.
The Saxon origins of Mapledurham were first recorded in the time of the Saxon King Edward the Elder, son of King Alfred the Great. He was the King of the West Saxons, or Wessex, between 870 and 924.
At this time the manor was held by a woman, Wulfeva Beteslau otherwise known as Wulfgifu Beteslau. The Domesday books recorded that she owned 23 valuable manors across the south-west in Hampshire, Sussex, Wiltshire, and Dorset.
Wulfgifu is an Old English name derived from the Old Saxon language of North West Germany comprising the elements of ‘wulf’ and ‘giefu’ meaning ‘wolf gift’. Wulfeva was an Anglo-Saxon name with the other forms including Ulveva, Ulveiva, Ulvevia, Ulueua, Vlueua, Vlueue, Wlueua, Wlviva.
Giefu is a rune from the Younger Futhark with the alternate Anglo-Saxon rune being Gyfu. The old runic poems give it the meaning of ‘gift’ and it is now associated with generosity and gratitude in all aspects of giving and receiving, both for the giver and the recipient.
The link with wolves comes up again in 1302 when The Testa de Nevill, a compilation of early records of feudal landholdings made between 1198 and 1292, says that Malpedresham was included in the hundred of Wlputta. Wlputta is linked to place names in Europe and North America, such as the town of Wolfput in Belgium, and in Suffolk, England the village of Woolpit was formerly known as Wolfpit.
Twenty-two of Wulfgifu’s estates, including Mapledresham were taken by William the Conqueror during the Norman Conquest (1066-1154 ) after the Anglo-Saxon forces of Harold Godwinson were defeated at the Battle of Hastings. When he became King William I of England he gave the valuable Manor of Mapledurham to his wife Queen Matilda of Flanders, also known as Maud. She owned the Manor for several years but died in 1083, shortly before the Domesday survey was published.
The survey shows that in 1086, Ida of Lorraine, the wife of Count Eustace II and the Countess of Boulogne, was the holder of the other manors in Hampshire and Dorset previously owed by Wulfeva.
St Peter’s Church and Petersfield are not mentioned in the Domesday Book because the area was open fields, but it mentions a ‘church’ in the centre of the Mapledurham estate, which is now the site of the Norman Church St Mary’s in the village of Buriton. It is possible that the original Saxon building was rebuilt by the Catholic Queen so that she could attend Mass, but there are no records to prove this happend. St Mary’s church has some features which are said to be Norman such as the font, medieval stone seats, and the Norman/Romanesque arches bearing carvings of water lilies, foliage and scallops. It was clearly important to the people as it remained the mother church of the local area until 1886.
In Norman times the Petersfield area, situated in the north of the Manor, was isolated from the parish church in Mapledurham by swamps and marshes, so a chapel of ease, or chapelry, was said to be built on a gravel ridge between two streams to enable the farm labourers to worship when they were out working in the fields. It was called St Peter-in-the-Veld and later St Peter in the Fields because ‘veld’ means open space. It is thought that the earliest part of St Peter’s dates from the late Norman period between 1125 and 1150.
On the death of Queen Matilda in 1083 the Manor of Mapledurham reverted to King William who gave it to Robert Fitzhamon for services rendered in suppressing the revolt of Odo of Bayeux. His wife Sibyl of Montgomery Fitzhamon did not bear a son, so his property passed with his daughter Mabel when she married Robert de Caen Fitzroy. He was William’s nephew, and the illegitimate son of King Henry I who became the First Earl of Gloucester.
Robert’s son, William FitzRobert, the Second Earl of Gloucester, founded the town of Petersfield in the early 12th century after he started a market in front of St Peter’s church and subsequently sold parcels of the surrounding land to the merchants so they could build houses.
During the reign of Henry II, he granted the burgesses of Petersfield all of the liberties and free customs enjoyed by the citizens of Winchester and allowed them to have a merchant guild. These privileges were rewritten in 1198 by his widow Hawise de Beaumont in the Charter of Petersfield, which was confirmed by King John and is preserved in the archives of Petersfield Town Council.
“Know all men, present and to come, that I, Countess of Gloucester have granted and confirmed to my Burgesses of Petersfield, who have built and are settled and who shall build in it, all liberties and free customs in the same Borough which the citizens of Winchester have in their city, who are in a guild of merchants and let them have the same in a guild of merchants as my husband, William Earl of Gloucester, granted to them by his charter.”
Harissa founded the Abbey of Nuneaton, and a further link between the Chapel of St Peters and the St Mary’s parish church of Mapledresham was recorded when William granted free alms from them both to the nuns of St Mary of Nuneaton in Warwickshire.
William died in 1183, leaving three daughters Mabel, Amice, and Isabel. Henry II gave Isabel in marriage to Prince John along with all of the possessions of the earldom which he had himself retained for six years, and which John retained after his accession and divorce from Isabel.
In 1205 King John then granted the manors of Mapledurham and Petersfield to Aumary Count of Evereux also known as Earl Evereux, who had married Mabel one of Isabella’s sisters. On his death, King John grated it to Geoffrey de Mandeville, Isabella’s second husband.
These were turbulent times and before the year was out Geoffrey was in revolt against John in the winter of 1215, the year John was forced to sign Magna Carta by the barons of England who were greatly annoyed by his poor treatment of the people, so they wrote our English constitution which still applies to the Monarcy and our politicians today.
In 1331 the Bishop of Winchester linked the chapel of Petersfield and the church of Mapledurham with the prior and convent of St Swithun, Winchester.
After this date, the Manor of Mapledurham again reverted to the Honour of Gloucester, with the sole surviving heiress of William, Earl of Gloucester being Amice, wife of Richard de Clare, Earl of Hertford. Their grandson, Richard de Clare the Earl of Gloucester and Hertford, granted the manor to his brother William de Clare and his heirs.
The family of Hanbury held the manor until 1691 when they sold the estate to John Barkesdale, who shortly afterwards sold it to Ralph Bucknel, whose heirs conveyed it to Edward Gibbon Director of the South Sea Company. His son Edward Gibbon inherited it in 1736 and passed it on to his son, the historian Edward Gibbon.
In 1789, he sold it to Lord Stawell, who then sold it to Henry Bonham of Petersfield. Henry Bonham died in 1800; his brother and heir died in 1826, leaving his Buriton estates to his cousin John Carter, who assumed the name of Bonham and was the first John Bonham-Carter. He died in 1838, leaving a son and heir John Bonham-Carter, who died in 1884, leaving a son and heir John Bonham-Carter who died in December 1905, leaving the Buriton estates to his brother Lothian George Bonham-Carter.
References
Malpedresham; Mapeldoreham; Mapeldereham, Mapledreham, Mapeldurham, Mapeldeham and Appeldoueham; Mapuldrham; Mapylderham; Mapel-Dereham.
https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/hants/vol3/pp85-93
https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Matilda-of-Flanders/
https://cdn.easthants.gov.uk/public/documents/Petersfield-Conservation-Area-Character-Appraisal-and-Management-Plan-ilovepdf-compressed.pdf
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Robert-Earl-of-Gloucester
https://opendomesday.org/place/SU7321/mapledurham/
http://www.domesdaybook.co.uk/hampshire2.html
https://stpeterspetersfield.org.uk/about_stpeters/the-history-of-st-peters-church/
http://buriton.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/The-Old-Rectory-whole-doc-final-web.pdf
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/8375320/matilda-of_flanders
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesday_Book
https://archive.org/stream/victoriahistoryo03page/victoriahistoryo03page_djvu.txt
https://archive.org/stream/historyofhampshi03doubuoft/historyofhampshi03doubuoft_djvu.txt
https://www.british-history.ac.uk/search?query=petersfield
https://www.history.ac.uk/research/victoria-county-history
https://archive.org/stream/historyofhampshi03doubuoft/historyofhampshi03doubuoft_djvu.txt
0
