1658
The Milkmaid
(Dutch: De Melkmeid or Het Melkmeisje), sometimes called The Kitchen Maid, is an oil-on-canvas painting of a "milkmaid", in fact, a domestic kitchen maid, by the Dutch artist Johannes Vermeer. It is now in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, which regards it as "unquestionably one of the museum's finest attractions".[1]
The exact year of the painting's completion is unknown, with estimates varying by source. The Rijksmuseum estimates it as circa 1658. According to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, it was painted in about 1657 or 1658.[2] The "Essential Vermeer" website gives a broader range of 1658–1661.[3]
1658
Dutch: [vərˈmeːr], see below; also known as Jan Vermeer; October 1632 – 15 December 1675) was a Dutch Baroque Period[3] painter who specialized in domestic interior scenes of middle-class life. During his lifetime, he was a moderately successful provincial genre painter, recognized in Delft and The Hague. Nonetheless, he produced relatively few paintings and evidently was not wealthy, leaving his wife and children in debt at his death.[4]
Vermeer worked slowly and with great care, and frequently used very expensive pigments. He is particularly renowned for his masterly treatment and use of light in his work.[5]
"Almost all his paintings", Hans Koningsberger wrote, "are apparently set in two smallish rooms in his house in Delft; they show the same furniture and decorations in various arrangements and they often portray the same people, mostly women."[6]
His modest celebrity gave way to obscurity after his death. He was barely mentioned in Arnold Houbraken's major source book on 17th-century Dutch painting (Grand Theatre of Dutch Painters and Women Artists) and was thus omitted from subsequent surveys of Dutch art for nearly two centuries.[7][a] In the 19th century, Vermeer was rediscovered by Gustav Friedrich Waagen and Théophile Thoré-Bürger, who published an essay attributing 66 pictures to him, although only 34 paintings are universally attributed to him today.[2] Since that time, Vermeer's reputation has grown, and he is now acknowledged as one of the greatest painters of the Dutch Golden Age.
Similar to other major Dutch Golden Age artists such as Frans Hals and Rembrandt, Vermeer never went abroad. Also, like Rembrandt, he was an avid art collector and dealer.
1662
the royal societe
Formally The Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge,[1] is a learned society and the United Kingdom's national academy of sciences. The society fulfils a number of roles: promoting science and its benefits, recognising excellence in science, supporting outstanding science, providing scientific advice for policy, education and public engagement and fostering international and global co-operation. Founded on 28 November 1660, it was granted a royal charter by King Charles II as The Royal Society and is the oldest continuously existing scientific academy in the world.[2]
The society is governed by its Council, which is chaired by the Society's President, according to a set of statutes and standing orders. The members of Council and the President are elected from and by its Fellows, the basic members of the society, who are themselves elected by existing Fellows. As of 2020, there are about 1,700 fellows, allowed to use the postnominal title FRS (Fellow of the Royal Society), with up to 52 new fellows appointed each year. There are also royal fellows, honorary fellows and foreign members, the last of which are allowed to use the postnominal title ForMemRS (Foreign Member of the Royal Society). The Royal Society President is Adrian Smith, who took up the post and started his 5 year term on 30 November 2020,[3] replacing the previous president Venki Ramakrishnan.
Since 1967, the society has been based at 6–9 Carlton House Terrace, a Grade I listed building in central London which was previously used by the Embassy of Germany, London.
1665
robert hook
(/hʊk/; 18 July 1635 – 3 March 1703)[3][a] was an English polymath active as a scientist, natural philosopher and architect, who is credited to be one of the first two scientists to discover microorganisms in 1665 using a compound microscope that he built himself,[4] the other scientist being Antoni van Leeuwenhoek in 1674.[5][6][7][8] An impoverished scientific inquirer in young adulthood, he found wealth and esteem by performing over half of the architectural surveys after London's great fire of 1666. Hooke was also a member of the Royal Society and since 1662 was its curator of experiments. Hooke was also Professor of Geometry at Gresham College.
As an assistant to physical scientist Robert Boyle, Hooke built the vacuum pumps used in Boyle's experiments on gas law, and himself conducted experiments. In 1673, Hooke built the earliest Gregorian telescope, and then he observed the rotations of the planets Mars and Jupiter. Hooke's 1665 book Micrographia, in which he coined the term "cell", spurred microscopic investigations.[7][8] Investigating in optics, specifically light refraction, he inferred a wave theory of light. And his is the first recorded hypothesis of heat expanding matter, air's composition by small particles at larger distances, and heat as energy.
In physics, he approximated experimental confirmation that gravity heeds an inverse square law, and first hypothesised such a relation in planetary motion, too, a principle furthered and formalised by Isaac Newton in Newton's law of universal gravitation.[9] Priority over this insight contributed to the rivalry between Hooke and Newton, who thus antagonized Hooke's legacy. In geology and paleontology, Hooke originated the theory of a terraqueous globe, disputed the literally Biblical view of the Earth's age, hypothesised the extinction of species, and argued that fossils atop hills and mountains had become elevated by geological processes.[10] Thus observing microscopic fossils, Hooke presaged the theory of biological evolution.[11][12] Hooke's pioneering work in land surveying and in mapmaking aided development of the first modern plan-form map, although his grid-system plan for London was rejected in favour of rebuilding along existing routes. Even so, Hooke was key in devising for London a set of planning controls that remain influential. In recent times, he has been called "England's Leonardo".[13]
1667
The Raid on the Medway
During the Second Anglo-Dutch War in June 1667, was a successful attack conducted by the Dutch navy on English warships laid up in the fleet anchorages off Chatham Dockyard and Gillingham in the county of Kent. At the time, the fortress of Upnor Castle and a barrier chain called the "Gillingham Line" were supposed to protect the English ships.
The Dutch, under nominal command of Willem Joseph van Ghent and Lieutenant-Admiral Michiel de Ruyter, over several days bombarded and captured the town of Sheerness, sailed up the Thames estuary to Gravesend, then sailed into the River Medway to Chatham and Gillingham, where they engaged fortifications with cannon fire, burned or captured three capital ships and ten more ships of the line, and captured and towed away the flagship of the English fleet, HMS Royal Charles.
Politically, the raid was disastrous for the war plans of Charles II of England. It led to a quick end to the war, and a favourable peace for the Dutch. It was one of the worst defeats in the Royal Navy's history, and one of the worst suffered by the British military.[3] Horace George Franks called it the "most serious defeat it has ever had in its home waters."[4]
1672
The naval Battle of Solebay
took place on 28 May Old Style, 7 June New Style[1][2] 1672 and was the first naval battle of the Third Anglo-Dutch War.
The battle began as an attempted raid on Solebay port where an English fleet was anchored and largely unprepared for battle, and ended at a hard-fought draw. The battle however prevented a planned allied naval invasion of the Dutch Republic and boosted the morale of the Dutch population. Both sides claimed victory.
1674
Shivaji I
(Shivaji Bhonsle; Marathi pronunciation: [ʃiʋaˑd͡ʒiˑ bʱoˑs(ə)leˑ]; c.19 February 1630 – 3 April 1680[5]), also referred to as Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, was an Indian ruler and a member of the Bhonsle Maratha clan.[6] Eventually, Shivaji carved out his own independent kingdom from the declining Adilshahi sultanate of Bijapur which formed the genesis of the Maratha Empire. In 1674, he was formally crowned the Chhatrapati of his realm at Raigad Fort.[7]
Over the course of his life, Shivaji engaged in both alliances and hostilities with the Mughal Empire, the Sultanate of Golkonda, Sultanate of Bijapur and the European colonial powers. Shivaji's military forces expanded the Maratha sphere of influence, capturing and building forts, and forming a Maratha navy. Shivaji established a competent and progressive civil rule with well-structured administrative organisations. He revived ancient Hindu political traditions, court conventions and promoted the usage of the Marathi and Sanskrit languages, replacing Persian in court and administration.[7][8]
Shivaji's legacy was to vary by observer and time, but nearly two centuries after his death, he began to take on increased importance with the emergence of the Indian independence movement, as many Indian nationalists elevated him as a proto-nationalist and hero of the Hindus.[9][10]
1676
Antonie Philips van Leeuwenhoek
[note 2] FRS (/ˈɑːntəni vɑːn ˈleɪvənhuːk, -hʊk/ AHN-tə-nee vahn LAY-vən-hook, -huuk; Dutch: [ˈɑntoːni vɑn ˈleːuə(n)ˌɦuk] (listen); 24 October 1632 – 26 August 1723) was a Dutch microbiologist and microscopist in the Golden Age of Dutch science and technology. A largely self-taught man in science, he is commonly known as "the Father of Microbiology", and one of the first microscopists and microbiologists.[5][6] Van Leeuwenhoek is best known for his pioneering work in microscopy and for his contributions toward the establishment of microbiology as a scientific discipline.
Raised in Delft, Dutch Republic, van Leeuwenhoek worked as a draper in his youth and founded his own shop in 1654. He became well recognized in municipal politics and developed an interest in lensmaking. In the 1670s, he started to explore microbial life with his microscope. This was one of the notable achievements of the Golden Age of Dutch exploration and discovery (c. 1590s–1720s).
Using single-lensed microscopes of his own design and make, van Leeuwenhoek was the first to observe and to experiment with microbes, which he originally referred to as dierkens, diertgens or diertjes (Dutch for "small animals" [translated into English as animalcules, from Latin animalculum = "tiny animal"]).[7] He was the first to relatively determine their size. Most of the "animalcules" are now referred to as unicellular organisms, although he observed multicellular organisms in pond water. He was also the first to document microscopic observations of muscle fibers, bacteria, spermatozoa, red blood cells, crystals in gouty tophi, and among the first to see blood flow in capillaries. Although van Leeuwenhoek did not write any books, he described his discoveries in letters to the Royal Society, which published many of his letters, and to persons in several European countries.
1683
The Great Turkish War
(German: Großer Türkenkrieg), also called the Wars of the Holy League (Turkish: Kutsal İttifak Savaşları), was a series of conflicts between the Ottoman Empire and the Holy League consisting of the Holy Roman Empire, Poland-Lithuania, Venice, Russia, and Habsburg Hungary. Intensive fighting began in 1683 and ended with the signing of the Treaty of Karlowitz in 1699. The war was a defeat for the Ottoman Empire, which for the first time lost large amounts of territory, in Hungary and the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, as well as part of the western Balkans. The war was significant also by being the first time that Russia was involved in an alliance with Western Europe.
The French did not join the Holy League, as France had agreed to reviving an informal Franco-Ottoman alliance in 1673, in exchange for Louis XIV being recognized as a protector of Catholics in the Ottoman regime.
Initially, Louis XIV took advantage of the start of the war to extend France's eastern borders in the War of the Reunions, taking Luxembourg and Strasbourg in the Truce of Ratisbon. However, as the Holy League made gains against the Ottoman Empire, capturing Belgrade by 1688, the French began to worry that their Habsburg rivals would grow too powerful and eventually turn on France. The Glorious Revolution was also a matter of concern for the French, as William III of Orange-Nassau was being invited by English nobles in the Invitation to William letter to take control of England as king. Therefore, the French besieged Philippsburg on 27 September 1688, breaking the truce and triggering the separate Nine Years' War, which relieved the Turks.
As a result, the advance made by the Holy League stalled, allowing the Ottomans to retake Belgrade in 1690. The war then fell into a stalemate, and peace was concluded in 1699 which began following the Battle of Zenta in 1697 when an Ottoman attempt to retake their lost possessions in Hungary was crushed by the Holy League.
The war largely overlapped with the Nine Years' War (1688–1697), which took up the vast majority of the Habsburgs' attention while it was active. In 1695, for instance, the Holy Roman Empire states had 280,000 troops in the field, with England, the Dutch Republic, and Spain contributing another 156,000 specifically to the conflict against France. Of those 280,000, only 74,000, or about one quarter, were positioned against the Turks; the rest were fighting France.[3] Overall, from 1683 to 1699, the Imperial states had on average 88,100 men fighting the Turks, while from 1689 to 1697, they had on average 127,410 fighting the French.[4]
1683
The Battle of Vienna
took place at Kahlenberg Mountain near Vienna on 12 September 1683[2] after the imperial city had been besieged by the Ottoman Empire for two months. The battle was fought by the Holy Roman Empire (led by the Habsburg monarchy and the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, both under the command of King John III Sobieski) against the Ottomans and their vassal and tributary states. The battle marked the first time the Commonwealth and the Holy Roman Empire had cooperated militarily against the Ottomans, and it is often seen as a turning point in history, after which "the Ottoman Turks ceased to be a menace to the Christian world".[21][Note 3] In the ensuing war that lasted until 1699, the Ottomans lost almost all of Hungary to the Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I.[21]
The battle was won by the combined forces of the Holy Roman Empire and the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, the latter represented only by the forces of the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland (the march of the Lithuanian army was delayed, and they reached Vienna after it had been relieved).[22] The Viennese garrison was led by Feldzeugmeister of the Imperial Army (Holy Roman Empire) Ernst Rüdiger Graf von Starhemberg, an Austrian subject of Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I. The overall command was held by the senior leader, the king of Poland, John III Sobieski, who led the relief forces.
The opposing military forces were those of the Ottoman Empire and its vassal states, commanded by Grand Vizier Merzifonlu Kara Mustafa Pasha. The Ottoman army numbered approximately 90,000[5] to 300,000[6][7][8][9] men (according to documents on the order of battle found in Kara Mustafa's tent, initial strength at the start of the campaign was 170,000 men[4]). They began the siege on 14 July 1683. Ottoman forces consisted, among other units, of 60 ortas of Janissaries (12,000 men paper-strength) with an observation army of some 70,000[23] men watching the countryside. The decisive battle took place on 12 September, after the arrival of the united relief army.
Historians maintain that the battle marked the turning point in the Ottoman–Habsburg wars, a 300-year struggle between the Holy Roman and Ottoman Empires. During the 16 years following the battle, the Austrian Habsburgs gradually recovered and dominated southern Hungary and Transylvania, which was largely cleared of Ottoman forces. The battle is noted for including the largest known cavalry charge in history.
1685
The Edict of Fontainebleau
(22 October 1685) was an edict issued by French King Louis XIV and is also known as the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. The Edict of Nantes (1598) had granted Huguenots the right to practice their religion without state persecution. Protestants had lost their independence in places of refuge under Cardinal Richelieu on account of their supposed insubordination, but they continued to live in comparative security and political contentment. From the outset, religious toleration in France had been a royal, rather than popular, policy.[1]
The Edict of Fontainebleau in the Archives Nationales
The palace at Fontainebleau as it now stands
1687
Philosophiæ naturalis principia mathematica
(English: The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy)[1] often referred to as simply the Principia (/prɪnˈsɪpiə, prɪnˈkɪpiə/), is a book by Isaac Newton that expounds Newton's laws of motion and his law of universal gravitation. The Principia is written in Latin and comprises three volumes, and was first published on 5 July 1687.[2][3]
The Principia is considered one of the most important works in the history of science.[4] The French mathematical physicist Alexis Clairaut assessed it in 1747: "The famous book of Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy marked the epoch of a great revolution in physics. The method followed by its illustrious author Sir Newton ... spread the light of mathematics on a science which up to then had remained in the darkness of conjectures and hypotheses."[5]
A more recent assessment has been that while acceptance of Newton's laws was not immediate, by the end of the century after publication in 1687, "no one could deny that" (out of the Principia) "a science had emerged that, at least in certain respects, so far exceeded anything that had ever gone before that it stood alone as the ultimate exemplar of science generally".[6]
The Principia forms the foundation of classical mechanics. Among other achievements, it explains Johannes Kepler's laws of planetary motion, which Kepler had first obtained empirically. In formulating his physical laws, Newton developed and used mathematical methods now included in the field of calculus, expressing them in the form of geometric propositions about "vanishingly small" shapes.[7] In a revised conclusion to the Principia (see § General Scholium), Newton emphasized the empirical nature of the work with the expression Hypotheses non fingo ("I frame/feign no hypotheses").[8]
1688
The Glorious Revolution
[a] is the term first used in 1689 to summarise events leading to the deposition of James II and VII of England, Ireland and Scotland in November 1688, and his replacement by his daughter Mary II and her husband and James's nephew William III of Orange, de facto ruler of the Dutch Republic. Known as the Glorieuze Overtocht or Glorious Crossing in the Netherlands, it has been described both as the last successful invasion of England as well as an internal coup.[1][2][3]
Despite being Catholic, James became king in February 1685 with widespread support from the Protestant majority in England and Scotland. Many feared his exclusion would cause a repetition of the 1639–1653 Wars of the Three Kingdoms,[4] while it was viewed as a short-term issue, since the heir presumptive was his Protestant elder daughter Mary. James soon lost popular support by suspending the Parliaments of Scotland and England in 1685, and thereafter ruling by personal decree.[5]
Two events in June 1688 turned dissatisfaction into a political crisis. The first was the birth on 10 June of a male heir, James Francis Edward, displacing Mary and creating the prospect of a Catholic dynasty. The second was the prosecution for seditious libel of seven bishops from the Protestant Church of England. Many saw this as the latest in a series of attacks on the state church; their acquittal on 30 June sparked widespread anti-Catholic riots and destroyed James's political authority, since his presence as king now seemed a greater threat to stability than his removal. A coalition of English politicians, soldiers and religious leaders issued the Invitation to William, asking him to intervene militarily and "protect the Protestant religion".
Louis XIV of France launched the Nine Years War in September 1688, and on 5 November William landed in Brixham, Devon, with 20,000 men. He advanced on London, while the Royal Army disintegrated, and after negotiations broke down, James went into exile in France on 23 December. In April 1689, Parliament made William and Mary joint monarchs of England and Ireland. A separate but similar Scottish settlement was made in June.
While the Revolution itself was quick and relatively bloodless, pro-Stuart revolts in Scotland and Ireland caused significant casualties.[6] Although Jacobitism persisted into the late 18th century, the Revolution ended a century of political dispute by confirming the primacy of Parliament over the Crown, a principle established in the Bill of Rights 1689.[7] The Toleration Act 1688 granted freedom of worship to nonconformist Protestants, but restrictions on Catholics contained in the 1678 and 1681 English and Scottish Test Acts remained in force until 1828. Religious prohibitions on the monarch's choice of spouse were removed in 2015, but those applying to the monarch themselves remain.
The Seven Bishops
were members of the Church of England tried and acquitted for seditious libel in June 1688, an act viewed as a significant element in the events that led to the November 1688 Glorious Revolution and deposition of James II.
In November 1685, James II dismissed the Parliament of England for refusing to pass measures removing legal restrictions on Catholics and Protestant Nonconformists. In August 1686, the Parliament of Scotland suffered the same fate and neither body met again until 1689. The measures were imposed in April 1687 by issuing a Declaration of Indulgence which was widely opposed by the majority in both countries, including Nonconformists who feared this would jeopardise their hopes of being readmitted to the Church of England.
The Declaration was reissued in April 1688 and James ordered the bishops to have it read in every church in England. The seven 'petitioned' to be excused, arguing it relied on an interpretation of Royal authority declared illegal by Parliament. After the petition was printed and publicly distributed, the bishops were charged with seditious libel and held in the Tower of London. They were tried and found not guilty on 30 June.
Most Protestants had been willing to tolerate James' personal Catholicism, since he seemed unlikely to produce more children and the heir was his Protestant daughter Mary II of England. The unexpected birth of his son James Francis on 10 June meant the prospect of a Catholic dynasty, with the trial of the bishops seen as part of a wider attack on the Church of England. Their acquittal led to anti-Catholic riots throughout England and Scotland and ultimately the deposition of James in November 1688, although five of the seven were subsequently removed from office for refusing to swear allegiance to his successors.
The Seven Bishops prosecuted for seditious libel in 1688
The Trial of the Seven Bishops by John Rogers Herbert
The Prince of Orange landing at Torbay as depicted in an illustration by Jan Hoynck van Papendrecht . After 10 years of peace the Dutch Republic and France were again at war. To prevent a much feared Anglo-French alliance(as had existed in 1672) the Dutch states general send William of Orange to invade and take control of the British kingdoms. This event would be known to history as the Glorious Revolution
William III of England, stadtholder of Guelders, Holland, Zealand, Utrecht and Overijssel
The coronation of William and Mary, by Charles Rochussen
The Welcome by the Mayor of Rotterdam of William IV, Prince of Orange and his Consort Anna of Great Britain, 1734 by Jacob Spoel
An 18th-century engraving, based on a drawing by Samuel Wale, of the Bill of Rights being presented to William III and Mary II
This is a low-resolution scan or photo of the English Bill of Rights of 1689.
1689
The Bill of Rights
(sometimes known as the Bill of Rights 1688)[1] is an Act of the Parliament of England that set out certain basic civil rights and clarified who would be next to inherit the Crown. It remains a crucial statute in English constitutional law.
Largely based on the ideas of political theorist John Locke,[3] the Bill sets out a constitutional requirement for the Crown to seek the consent of the people as represented in Parliament.[4][5] As well as setting limits on the powers of the monarch, it established the rights of Parliament, including regular parliaments, free elections, and freedom of speech.[6] It also listed individual rights, including the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment and the right not to pay taxes levied without the approval of Parliament. Finally, it described and condemned several misdeeds of James II of England.[4] The Bill of Rights received royal assent on 16 December 1689. it is a restatement in statutory form of the Declaration of Right presented by the Convention Parliament to William III and Mary II in February 1689, inviting them to become joint sovereigns of England.
In the United Kingdom, the Bill is considered a basic document of the uncodified British constitution, along with Magna Carta, the Petition of Right, the Habeas Corpus Act 1679 and the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949. A separate but similar document, the Claim of Right Act 1689, applies in Scotland. The Bill was one of the models used to draft the United States Bill of Rights, the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.[6] Along with the Act of Settlement 1701, it remains in effect within all Commonwealth realms, as amended by the Perth Agreement.
1689
John Locke
FRS (/lɒk/; 29 August 1632 – 28 October 1704) was an English philosopher and physician, widely regarded as one of the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers and commonly known as the "father of liberalism".[14][15][16] Considered one of the first of the British empiricists, following the tradition of Francis Bacon, Locke is equally important to social contract theory. His work greatly affected the development of epistemology and political philosophy. His writings influenced Voltaire and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and many Scottish Enlightenment thinkers, as well as the American Revolutionaries. His contributions to classical republicanism and liberal theory are reflected in the United States Declaration of Independence.[17] Internationally, Locke’s political-legal principles continue to have a profound influence on the theory and practice of limited representative government and the protection of basic rights and freedoms under the rule of law.[18]
Locke's theory of mind is often cited as the origin of modern conceptions of identity and the self, figuring prominently in the work of later philosophers such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, David Hume, and Immanuel Kant. Locke was the first to define the self through a continuity of consciousness.
He postulated that, at birth, the mind was a blank slate, or tabula rasa. Contrary to Cartesian philosophy based on pre-existing concepts, he maintained that we are born without innate ideas, and that knowledge is instead determined only by experience derived from sense perception, a concept now known as empiricism.[19]
A Letter Concerning Toleration
by John Locke was originally published in 1689. Its initial publication was in Latin, and it was immediately translated into other languages. Locke's work appeared amidst a fear that Catholicism might be taking over England, and responds to the problem of religion and government by proposing religious toleration as the answer. This "letter" is addressed to an anonymous "Honored Sir": this was actually Locke's close friend Philipp van Limborch, who published it without Locke's knowledge.[1]
Two Treatises of Government
(or Two Treatises of Government: In the Former, The False Principles, and Foundation of Sir Robert Filmer, and His Followers, Are Detected and Overthrown. The Latter Is an Essay Concerning The True Original, Extent, and End of Civil Government) is a work of political philosophy published anonymously in 1689 by John Locke. The First Treatise attacks patriarchalism in the form of sentence-by-sentence refutation of Robert Filmer's Patriarcha, while the Second Treatise outlines Locke's ideas for a more civilized society based on natural rights and contract theory. The book is a key foundational text in the theory of Liberalism.
This publication contrasts former political works by Locke himself. In Two Tracts on Government, written in 1660, Locke defends a very conservative position; however, Locke never published it.[1] In 1669, Locke co-authored the Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina, which endorses aristocracy, slavery and serfdom.[2][3] Some dispute the extent to which the Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina portray Locke's own philosophy, vs. that of the Lord proprietors of the colony; the document was a legal document written for and signed and sealed by the eight Lord proprietors to whom Charles II had granted the colony. In this context, Locke was only a paid secretary, writing it much as a lawyer writes a will.
An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
is a work by John Locke concerning the foundation of human knowledge and understanding. It first appeared in 1689 (although dated 1690) with the printed title An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding. He describes the mind at birth as a blank slate (tabula rasa, although he did not use those actual words) filled later through experience. The essay was one of the principal sources of empiricism in modern philosophy, and influenced many enlightenment philosophers, such as David Hume and George Berkeley.
Book I of the Essay is Locke's attempt to refute the rationalist notion of innate ideas. Book II sets out Locke's theory of ideas, including his distinction between passively acquired simple ideas—such as "red," "sweet," "round"—and actively built complex ideas, such as numbers, causes and effects, abstract ideas, ideas of substances, identity, and diversity. Locke also distinguishes between the truly existing primary qualities of bodies, like shape, motion and the arrangement of minute particles, and the secondary qualities that are "powers to produce various sensations in us"[1] such as "red" and "sweet." These secondary qualities, Locke claims, are dependent on the primary qualities. He also offers a theory of personal identity, offering a largely psychological criterion. Book III is concerned with language, and Book IV with knowledge, including intuition, mathematics, moral philosophy, natural philosophy ("science"), faith, and opinion.
Some Thoughts Concerning Education
is a 1693 treatise on the education of gentlemen written by the English philosopher John Locke.[1] For over a century, it was the most important philosophical work on education in England. It was translated into almost all of the major written European languages during the eighteenth century, and nearly every European writer on education after Locke, including Jean-Jacques Rousseau, acknowledged its influence.
In his Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690), Locke outlined a new theory of mind, contending that the mind is originally a tabula rasa or "blank slate"; that is, it did not contain any innate ideas at birth. Some Thoughts Concerning Education explains how to educate that mind using three distinct methods: the development of a healthy body; the formation of a virtuous character; and the choice of an appropriate academic curriculum.
Locke wrote the letters that would eventually become Some Thoughts for an aristocratic friend, but his advice had a broader appeal since his educational principles suggested anyone could acquire the same kind of character as the aristocrats for whom Locke originally intended the work.
Of the Conduct of the Understanding
is a text on clear and rational thought by John Locke,[1] published in 1706, two years after the author's death, as part of Peter King's Posthumous Works of John Locke. It complements Locke's Some Thoughts Concerning Education, which explains how to educate children.[2]
The text espouses the importance of rational self-examination and its virtues when combating mental illness. Moral purity and sanity were, according to Locke, inextricably linked to self-scrutiny and mental freedom.[3]
1697
The Battle of Zenta
, also known as the Battle of Senta, was fought on 11 September 1697, near Zenta, Ottoman Empire (modern-day Senta, Serbia), between Ottoman and Holy League armies during the Great Turkish War. The battle was the most decisive engagement of the war, and it saw the Ottomans suffer an overwhelming defeat by an Imperial force half as large sent by Emperor Leopold I.
In 1697 a last major Turkish attempt to conquer Hungary was made; sultan Mustafa II personally led the invasion force. In a surprise attack, Habsburg Imperial forces commanded by Prince Eugene of Savoy engaged the Turkish army while it was halfway through crossing the Tisza river at Zenta, 80 miles northwest of Belgrade. The Habsburg forces inflicted thousands of casualties, including the Grand Vizier, dispersed the remainder, captured the Ottoman treasury, and came away with such emblems of high Ottoman authority as the Seal of the Empire which had never been captured before. The European coalition's losses, on the other hand, were exceptionally light.
As an immediate consequence, the Ottoman Empire lost control over the Banat. Eugene followed up this great victory by raiding deep into Ottoman Bosnia. The scale of the defeat forced the Ottoman Empire into the Treaty of Karlowitz (1699) ceding Croatia, Hungary, Transylvania and Slavonia to Austria. Zenta was one of the Ottoman Empire's greatest defeats and ultimately signalled the end of Ottoman dominance in Europe.[11]
1699
Treaty of Karlowitz
