NEW STUDY: Discovery of Chemical Means to Reverse Ageing and Restore Cellular Function! (26.7.2023)7/26/2023 Human Science Owes An Immeasurable Debt to Other Creatures! Mice in the Sinclair lab have been engineered to age rapidly to test the effectiveness of therapies to reverse the aging process. The mouse on the right has been aged to 150% that of its sibling on the left by disrupting its epigenome. Photo credit: D. Sinclair, Harvard Medical School. Rejuvenation and age reversal of senescent human skin cells by chemical means. Cells in the right two panels have restored compartmentalization of the red fluorescent protein in the nucleus, a marker of youth that was used to find the cocktails, before the scientists confirmed they were younger, based on how genes were expressed. Image credit: J. -H. Yang, Harvard Medical School. 07-12-2023 On July 12, 2023, a new priority research paper was published in Aging, titled, “Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging.” BUFFALO, NY- July 12, 2023 – In a ground-breaking study, researchers have unlocked a new frontier in the fight against ageing and age-related diseases. The study, conducted by a team of scientists at Harvard Medical School, has published the first chemical approach to reprogramme cells to a younger state. Previously, this was only achievable using a powerful gene therapy. On July 12, 2023, researchers Jae-Hyun Yang, Christopher A. Petty, Thomas Dixon-McDougall, Maria Vina Lopez, Alexander Tyshkovskiy, Sun Maybury-Lewis, Xiao Tian, Nabilah Ibrahim, Zhili Chen, Patrick T. Griffin, Matthew Arnold, Jien Li, Oswaldo A. Martinez, Alexander Behn, Ryan Rogers-Hammond, Suzanne Angeli, Vadim N. Gladyshev, and David A. Sinclair from Harvard Medical School, University of Maine and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) published a new priority research paper in Ageing, titled, “Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular ageing.” The team's findings build upon the discovery that the expression of specific genes, called Yamanaka factors, could convert adult cells into induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). This Nobel Prize-winning discovery raised the question of whether it might be possible to reverse cellular ageing without causing cells to become too young and turn cancerous. In this new study, the researchers screened for molecules that could, in combination, reverse cellular ageing and rejuvenate human cells. They developed high-throughput cell-based assays to distinguish young cells from old and senescent cells, including transcription-based ageing clocks and a real-time nucleocytoplasmic protein compartmentalization (NCC) assay. In an exciting discovery, the team has identified six chemical cocktails that restore NCC and genome-wide transcript profiles to youthful states and reverse transcriptomic age in less than a week. The Harvard researchers previously demonstrated that it is indeed possible to reverse cellular aging without uncontrolled cell growth by virally-introducing specific Yamanaka genes into cells. Studies on the optic nerve, brain tissue, kidney, and muscle have shown promising results, with improved vision and extended lifespan observed in mice and, recently, a report of improved vision in monkeys. The implications of this new discovery are far-reaching, opening avenues for regenerative medicine and, potentially, whole-body rejuvenation. By developing a chemical alternative to age reversal via gene therapy, this research could revolutionize the treatment of ageing, injuries and age-related diseases and offers the potential for lower costs and shorter timelines in development. On the heels of positive results in reversing blindness in monkeys in April 2023, preparations for human clinical trials of the lab’s age reversal gene therapy are in progress. “Until recently, the best we could do was slow ageing. New discoveries suggest we can now reverse it,” said David A. Sinclair, A.O., Ph.D., Professor in the Department of Genetics and co-Director of the Paul F. Glenn Center for Biology of Ageing Research at Harvard Medical School and lead scientist on the project. “This process has previously required gene therapy, limiting its widespread use.” The team at Harvard envisions a future where age-related diseases can be effectively treated, injuries can be repaired more efficiently, and the dream of whole-body rejuvenation becomes a reality. “This new discovery offers the potential to reverse ageing with a single pill, with applications ranging from improving eyesight to effectively treating numerous age-related diseases,” Sinclair said. Original English Language Article: Click HERE DISCLAIMER: The Owner of this Daoist Blog does not necessarily condone the use of animals by humans in scientific experimentation. Although I fully understand the reason animals are used - and appreciate the advances made for humanity in so doing - my personal inclinations tend to divert away from such practices. For instance, one mouse lost his youth (and 'life') through being made to be artificially 'older'. Having made this clear, my advice is to think for yourselves and make-up your own minds. ACW (26.7.2023)
0 Comments
How long we live is partly genetic and partly environmental. An important question is whether this balance can be altered through will-power? It may be that longevity - as in continuing to live - may have to be integrated with the development of 'enhanced' awareness regarding how life is to be perceived. This suggests that 'Immortality' is not just about living physically longer (as individuals can live longer simply through genetic 'luck') - but also cultivating a deeper and more profound understanding of what it is to be 'alive'. Conversely, an 'enlightened' being might not always possess a perfect body and could well have to inhabit a living vehicle not always optimised. Immortality must then be a relative concept and cannot be used to suggest, denote or support any form of intolerance or artificial (and superficial) standards of purity. Seeing through the fabric of physical existence at the very least allows an individual to suitably 'adjust' to physical circumstances as they inevitably 'change'. Indeed, 'change' is the essence of physical existence and the agency through which we - as individuals - acquire life in the first place! It is also the agency through which life will come to an end. The point is that physical life - regardless of how long it may last - still comes to an end. Therefore, immortality cannot be merely about a continued (cellular) existence and must include a transformation of consciousness. Even so, we all know people who have passed away young - or who have lived (and are still living) a relatively long time! On this note I am pleased to report that my father has turned 80-years old today!
Original Chinese Language Article by Master Zhao Ming Wang (赵明旺) (Translated by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD) The history of China flows from the distant past – like a long river without a discernible beginning. The family of practices (which comprise the body of Chinese Daoist teachings) have their roots firmly entangled within historical obscurity, but out of this body of knowledge evolved the set of techniques known today as the ‘Essential Mind-Body Cultivation’ (性命双修 - Xing Ming Shuang Xiu). Although these teachings still exist within certain Daoist lineages preserved within Chinese society, the modern way of life tends to ensure that there is less interest in the learning, practice and preservation of this methodology. Life in a modern society is far too quick-paced, erratic, and lacks stability and a firmed rootedness in nature. The human attention has become highly superficial, which, when combined with a poor diet and a lack of adequate or meaningful exercise, leads to a diminishing of psychological and physical health and fitness! Invariably, such a repeating, negative cycle leads to a shortened lifespan with ‘worry’ about the work situation in an uncertain present (and future) - serving as the catalyst for a further spiralling out of control of well-being!
Today, we can discuss the significance of the ‘neidan’ (内丹) - or ‘Field of Inner Energy Centre Self-cultivation' - as defined through the specific techniques of the ‘Essential Mind-Body Cultivation’ methodology, Again, Daoist ‘neidan’ history in China is long, complex and full of twists and turns! This is why such knowledge is considered a brilliant and splendid pearl of Chinese history and culture! This is why ‘Essential Mind-Body Cultivation’ is comprised of ‘Yin-Yang’ (阴阳) theory, the ‘Five Phases’ (五行 - Wu Xing), ‘Medical Science’ (医理 - Yi Li), ‘Divine-Sky Scholarship’ [Astronomy] (天文 - Tian Wen) and many other related sciences and arts. This includes the patterns of ‘Energy Channels’ (经脉 - Jing Mai) and how they flow and run throughout length and breadth of the body – across the surface and deep into the inner tissue-structures (which nourish the inner-organs). One issue with the ideas and practices of the past, is that each Daoist lineage was comprised of one fully qualified Master and suitably qualified Disciple – with no other students or interested parties being allowed to know, understand, practice or teach these methods! Therefore, should a disaster befall the Master or the chosen Disciple – then an entire lineage of Daoist knowledge completely disappeared! Furthermore, as only one chosen Disciple could benefit from these teachings, Chinese society as a whole could not benefit from this expert body of knowledge! Although the expertise of these Daoist methods was built-up and strengthened by these isolatory methods – times have changed, the world has developed and moved on, and therefore the structures of Daoism must reflect these changes. During the Late Qing Dynasty and Early Republic of China Period – there lived Master ‘Liao Kong (了空) [together with Master Liao Ran (了然)]. He was the Tenth Generation, Outside the Temple, Lineaging Inheriting Disciple of the ‘Quanzhen’ (全真) - or ‘Complete Reality’ and ‘Longmen’ (龙门) - or ‘Dragon Gate’ School of Daoist Self-cultivation (passed through the ‘Wu Liu’ [伍柳] lineage). The Patriarch advised his Chief Disciple – Zhao Bichen (赵避尘) - to change this exclusionary tradition associated with the Daoist School, so that ‘everyone’ could be taught the longevity techniques so that society in general can benefit as a result! This is how the teachings associated with the ‘Essential Mind-Body Cultivation’ methods became better-known amongst the general public through the efforts of my great grandfather – Zhao Bichen! Indeed, Zhao Bichen achieved this extraordinary success through the formation of the Qianfeng (千峰) or ‘Thousand Peaks’, ‘Xiantian’ (先天), ‘Prenatal’ (literally ‘Earlier Divine-Sky') - School (派- Pai), or a ‘preserved body of knowledge that flows from the past to present, and on to the future’! The function of the Qianfeng Prenatal School is to preserve, teach and spread the genuine Daoist teachings not only across China – but also across the world! The Qianfeng Prenatal School exists to build robust health amongst the general public and to increase the longevity of the average lifespan! In today's society, people should actually strive to know more about traditional Daoist health preservation culture. Through cultivating (and circulating) the ‘essential nature’ (精 - Jing), the ‘vital force’ (炁 - Qi), a robust mind and body is developed, and longevity is secured! This Daoist teaching strengthen the individual, the family, the community, the nation and the world! Through the Qianfeng Prenatal School, Grand Master Zhao Bichen taught many techniques that encompass both the ‘external’ (外 - Wai) and ‘internal’ (内 - Nei) methods of Daoist self-cultivation! A primary example of this is the ‘Sweating Ox’ (汗牛 - Han Niu) self-cultivation. If a practitioner performs this exercise regularly, those in your forties and fifties will feel ten years younger and be full of energy and masculinity! Master Zhao Ming Wang (赵明旺) Beijing (Zhao) Bichen Culture Qianfeng Hermitage Chinese Language Article: 中国古老的养生传承 (360doc13.net) 中国古老的养生传承 在历史长河中,中国的一部道家养生性命双修文化在华夏大地上默默无闻的传承至今。 在如今的社会,道家性命双修养生文化更不被人们所关注,在这快节奏的社会我们大多数人变得积极向上,饮食起居无常,工作压力过重造成身体健康问题。 今天我们来聊聊道家内丹性命双修文化传承和其中的意义,道家内丹文化有着悠久的历史,她是中国历史文化的一颗灿烂明珠,其中内丹性命双修包涵阴阳,五行,医理,天文,人体经脉走向等诸多文化,在古老的传承中大多都以单传为主,所以普通人很难了解其中奥秘。 一直到清末民初时期,由全真龙门派庙外第十代弟子(了空)祖师命其弟子千峰老人(赵避尘)普传大众,才有了面向大众普及道家内丹性命双修神秘玄妙养生功夫。 千峰先天派自成立以来,其宗旨是普传大众,愿人人健康位位可得为宗旨,愿我国人健康长寿为要。 而这一改变打破了历史道家以单传为普传大众的历史先河,让大众了解道家性命双修内丹文化,让爱好者不在迷茫,有了了解学习的方向,千峰老人赵避尘所著性命法决明指,以及其胞兄赵魁一所著三字法决经,以问答方式详细介绍道家性命双修内丹功夫,后人称此书如同大海的标灯,为爱好者指明修炼方向。 在当今社会人们其实更应该了解道家养生文化,为自己的身体健康添加精炁,您的健康就是全家的幸福。 在千峰先天派,千峰老人赵避尘的传承功夫中,有许多强身健体增补精炁的内外功夫,其中外练功夫(汗牛功)如果您经常来炼习,四五十岁者,可感觉年轻十来岁,精炁足满阳刚之气充足。 北京避尘文化,千峰草堂赵明旺 Dear Gillian
What is interesting is that after decades of effective inner and outer martial arts practice, I have arrived at a profound 'stable' state of mind, body and spirit (whatever that is). This journey has traversed many inner and outer levels or states of being. Mostly, this has included a logical approach to physical training motivated by 'doubt' a) in the process itself, and b) in my ability to keep-up the practice or c) to carry-out the prescribed practice correctly. This 'doubt' was inward whilst the physical 'outer' Chinese martial arts techniques were superb and highly effective. This 'doubt' (which ceased to function about 14-years-ago in c. 2007) acted like a force of magnetism drawing my 'uncertain' inner-being toward to the solid and stable outer-structure of the martial arts techniques and how they might be used in self-defence (function) and mind and body health and fitness (longevity). There is now a great awareness. A great all-embracing sense of psychological being that appears to be united with mind, body and environment. This unity I term 'spiritual' because all this seems 'transcendent'. Of course, whilst being driven on by the inner doubt to practice physical martial arts (as a form of 'armouring' against external attack), I also committed myself to intense Ch'an meditative practice as a means to 'uproot' this doubt which all motivating throughout my entire life to 'take action' in many different arenas - it also contained an element of 'weakness'. As I interpreted this 'weaknesses' as a major problem that a) held me back in a state of fearful 'non-action', or b) sabotaged physical actions so as to render all exertion completely pointless! The mind 'cleared' and 'expanded' - it became all-embracing so that the body stopped appearing to be 'outside' of it and took its place entirely within psychological awareness. Although I had my initial experiences of the realisation of a 'still' and 'empty' mind with its awareness expanding and embracing all things around 1990 - it took another 15-years for this experience to settle-down (2005), and about another two or three years for all vestiges of 'doubt' to completely dissolve (2007/8). What did happen around 1990, however, is that my physical use of outer Chinese martial arts technique deepened, expanded and matured, and since the time of 'teaching' in my own right (as opposed to 'training' under a teacher) - I have never lost a fight in the training hall. (Around a year before this experience, I was following a strict Chinese (Mahayana) Buddhist 'monastic' regime and sitting in meditation for hours a day practicing the hua tou 'Who is hearing?' Suddenly, whilst sitting in my 'cell' and without warning, my mind 'ceased to move' becomingly utterly and completely 'still'. This was accompanied by deep sense of permanent ecstasy! My Chinese teachers correctly taught me with 'silence' - whilst my Western teacher Richard Hunn (1949-2006) - my Western Ch'an teacher - correctly taught me with words! Ironically, he drew my attention to the authentic Chinese Ch'an texts. 'Neither be attached to the (realised) inner void - nor hindered by (the 'external') hindering phenomena'. It was deep within the 'silence' of my Chinese Ch'an Masters (including Chan Tin Sang [1924-1993] that I discovered the poignant meaning of Richard Hunn's spiritually 'vibrant' words. This is how I knew that Richard Hunn was correct in his understanding. Later, this dual instruction [into non-duality] led to the next shift in perspective This occurred a year later after a further period of intense practice, and was a product of a complete change or 'turning about' [see the 'Lankavatara Sutra'] at the deepest essence of the mind. It was such a profound and important 'first principle' that I nearly omitted it from the list of all the important events! I was once meditating sat on the ground outside 'returning' all sensory data 'back to its 'empty ground' essence - when a cool and refreshing Summer's freeze blew gently across my face. Suddenly, my mind instantaneously 'turned the right way around' immediately abandoning its previous 'inverted' functionality and appeared to 'expand', assume an 'all-embracing' position of being, whilst this 'new awareness' thoroughly permeated the physical-body and penetrated the physical universe throughout the past, present, and future! This permanent shift in psychological and physical manifestation changed 'me' from the DNA-chemical foundation upward and influenced all the views and opinions I now hold!) This includes not only transforming the experience of sparring with students (which is now unified experience premised upon wisdom, loving kindness and compassion) - but also manifested within the otherwise 'brutal' realm of 'honour fights' whereby unknown and unfamiliar individuals suddenly turn-up at my training hall and (disrespectfully) ask to spar! They wish to gain fame and fortune through 'out of control' violence which involves (for them) the 'beating' and 'exposing' a local (Chinese) gongfu teacher! How did this happen? I think whereas my opponents were still motivated by a deep and profound sense of 'doubt' (often involving a profound 'self-hatred') - I no longer experienced this 'doubt' which 'divides' human-beings during combat. Doubt by this time in my life had become nothing more than a profound sense of enhanced 'awareness' full of compassion and understanding. This is all held in place by a physical (martial) ability that can use 'gentleness' just as easily as 'harshness' to 'control' or 'regulate' physical interactions. Signed: Adrian Chan-Wyles [陳恒豫 - Chan Heng Yu] (22.11.2021) - '釋大道' (Shi Da Dao) Witnessed and Authenticated by Yau, Gee-Cheuk [邱芷芍] (22.11.2021) - 'Gee Wyles' - Wife of Adrian Chan-Wyles A firm foundation is produced through self-cultivation which requires both intense meditate and the practice of the physical exercises without interruption.
In this way, reman ‘aware’ of each subtle strand of change which permeates the inner and outer fabric of the mind and body. Use the ‘real truth’ to verify the continuously ‘changing’ interactions of the dragon and tiger. Persevere in this training for a number of years – but have no concern for the passing of time. Perhaps in (over) ten-years' time – a better place will (soon) be entered. This is the realm of Daoist ‘Essential Life Mind-Body' Self-Cultivation. Those who inhabit the central path of exact-being will leave the suffering of the ‘world of dust’. This is the genuine method which, if followed correctly, will grant endless gains – and if followed incorrectly – will inflict many losses. 修者要不间断的去打坐炼功,感受其中丝丝缕缕变化,用真法验证龙虎变化,待几年, 十几年我们就进入佳境,这是道家性命双修之境界,而世尘感觉与我们不在一条路中, 得与失就在于此。 Translator’s Note: The provenance of this story is difficult to pin-down. Although published online in China on the 9.4.2021 – as part of an interesting text for ‘Reading in May Read’ - and despite it containing contemporary photographs of recently living individuals, I suspect it is an old (true) story preserved within a family from before the 1949 Revolution (as after the Revolution ‘monogamy’ became the norm throughout Chinese society). The titles used ‘avoid’ real names and rely instead upon the old feudal designators not in common usage today, designed to act as both a ‘social’ and ‘military’ rank according to a) order of birth, and b) the ‘closeness’ or ‘farthest’ away an individual happens to be from the main male life of inheritance. Although once prevalent throughout the entirety of Chinese feudal society, this is behaviour typical of traditional Hakka Chinese social structure, which advocates that a local village is also a military unit - with both deploying in exactly the same hierarchical fashion! ‘Er Ye’, for example, refers to a ‘second son’, whilst Er Nia Nia (‘Mistress’ or ‘Lady of the House’) refers to a ‘secondary wife’ or ‘concubine’ whose main task is that of ‘giving milk’ to the children of much more important ‘number one’ wife (that is, to serve as a ‘wet nurse’ as the designation ‘’Er Nai Nai’ or ‘second milk milk’ implies). This would suggest a pre-1949 era when Chinese society was still subject to patriarchy and Chinese men granted themselves the right to have at least ‘four’ wives at any given time! On the other hand, ‘Er Nai Nai’ can also refer to a ’maternal grandmother’, but obviously this woman is not likely to be the grandmother of the already elderly ‘Er Ye’. Another interpretation to consider is that ‘Er Ye’ may have married twice after 1949 – having two wives separately and at different times, etc. ACW (17.11.2021)
More than ten years ago, the elderly gentleman known as ‘Er Ye’ (二爷) or the ‘Second Lord’ within English translation was already in his seventies. At this time, however, his body was very tough, he moved vigorously, and when he walked his feet appeared to cleanly ‘strike’ the ground with a "boom-like" sound. As his teeth were white, hard and complete (something that baffled us children back then), he preferred to eat the harder type of fried popcorn – and would always consume a large amount without damaging his pristine teeth! People who knew ‘Erh Ye’ back then, were of the opinion that he must be a ‘long-lived’ person due to his obvious robust psychological and physical health! Just over ten days before his death, his faintly observed that his speech suddenly became a little strange and difficult to understand. I remember that in the first months of winter of that year, Er Ye's son - Uncle Liang (亮) - (who was away from home at the time), asked someone local to provide Er Ye with extra winter clothes – but when he received the clothing – he avoided looking at the bundle and made no attempt to acknowledge the gift or to put-on the extra-layers. He merely picked-up the bundle and placed it onto a nearby chair – with his movements being both swift and precise – whilst remaining unrushed or unduly influenced by outside events. He then muttered ‘I no longer require clothing and have no reason to wear new garments!’ He then walked away complaining that his smoking-pipe was ‘dry’ and that he might need something useful – such as a pouch of ‘new’ tobacco! He then sat quietly for a long-time – with those present being astonished by his behaviour! The Mistress (二奶奶 - Er Nai Nai) of the house (probably ‘Er Ye’s’ ‘second’ wife) attempted to ‘break the silence’ by stating ‘Just look at all this “old man” nonsense!’ As far as every present was concerned, Er Ye was muttering ‘half-sentences’ and acting in an incomprehensible manner! The observable fact was, however, that Er Ye was quite happy and content. Three days before his death, however, he became agitated with the Mistress of the house whom he said was not dedicating enough time toward his personal care. This was because she had given-up trying to understand his ‘half-sentences’ and often did not prioritise his needs or properly arrange his meals times. On that day, however, the Mistress heard that a visiting salesman was selling small native chickens in the village. There were not many pure native chickens left in those days, with broiler and egg-laying chickens of foreign descent had flooded the market. The Mistress still missed the taste of the native chickens from the old days. When she heard that there was a dealer selling these chickens, she happily opened the savings-box, found the right amount of money, and urged Er Ye to buy her a native chicken and raise it in their garden! The usually very diligent Er Ye, was acting uncharacteristically on this day. He sat motionless in his chair, not nodding but dozing off and looking indifferent to events. The Mistress urged him several times but he did not move. Then the Mistress became annoyed and shook Er Ye roughly by his shoulders demanding that he pull himself together! Er Ye angrily replied ‘I cannot eat ‘meat’ again – my time is complete!’ The still angry Mistress replied ‘Are you so selfish that you are about to die right away?’ She then ran outside to purchase a ‘new’ chicken! Without looking back Due to the continuing anger between the couple – the Mistress stopped cooking for Er Ye and he went hungry! No one expected the demise of Er Ye to be so close at hand. In the morning three days later, most of the people in the village were still in bed, but this is exactly the early time that Er Ye used to rise in the morning! He would wash and dress, and then sit on a small bench outside his house and start the day by weaving a mat! Indeed, he was a recognised ‘Master’ of mat-weaving, and he would often walk down the mountain to chop bamboo and walk back again. His craftwork was sought-after far and wide but the local people were reluctant to ask him for mats. When Er Ye heard this, he stepped-up his individual output and made enough mats so that he could give them out ‘free’ to the local people! The Mistress soon started calling for Er Ye to get-up from inside the house – but her pleas were met only with silence. Local villagers then ran over to find Er Ye lying peacefully on his side in his yard - after having just passed away. Er Ye had fulfilled his intentions of ‘talking less’, ‘not wearing’ new clothes and never eating meat again! It would seem that some elderly people are able to ‘sense’ the approach of physical death and prepare themselves accordingly. https://www.163.com/dy/article/GJ1SER890543VRV0.html 老人临终前,常说半头话 2021-09-04 09:51:51 来源: 五月读书汇 十多年前,那时的二爷七十多岁,身子板十分的硬朗,走路虎虎生风,直踩得地上“咚咚”直响,特别是吃那种炒的比较硬的玉米花时,他一次可以来个一斤多,直让当年我们这些小孩子们瞠目结舌,无不佩服他的牙齿。 认识二爷的人,都说按他目前的身体状况,一定是个长寿的人。 就在去世的前十多天时间里,我们都隐隐感觉他说话突然变得有些莫名其妙起来,让人听起来怪怪的。记得那年初冬,二爷远在外地的儿子亮叔,托人给二爷带回了几件冬天的衣服,谁知道,二爷接过后,拿在手上别说试穿,他硬是看也没有看,就“呼”的一下,丢在一旁的凳子上,嘴里咕嘟道:“我不要,我又穿不到了!”,说完,叨着他的旱烟袋走开了。一句话只说得在场的我们一头雾水,愣愣的半天没有反应过来。 二奶奶为了打破这僵局,笑着指着他离去的背影轻声地骂道:“瞧死老头子,尽胡说!” 不能仅这次二爷说了一句半头话,不久后,也就是在他 去世的前三天,他的一句半头话气得二奶奶有大半天懒得搭理他,还让不会做饭的他饿了一顿肚子。 那天,二奶奶听说村头来了一个卖小土鸡的人,当年纯土鸡已不多,洋系血统的肉鸡蛋鸡已冲斥了市场。二奶奶总还是怀念着当年土鸡的味道。一听说有卖土小鸡的贩子,她高兴地打开箱子,找出钱,催促二爷快去买些回来自己饲养。 平时很勤快的二爷这天却一反常态,坐在椅子上一动不动,还不是地点头打着瞌睡,一幅无精打彩的样子。 二奶奶催了好几次他也没有挪动身子。最后二奶奶发飙,连推带拉非让他去,没想到二爷竟没好气地白了二奶奶一眼说道:“我又吃不到了的,我卵得去搞!” 二奶奶一听气得七窍生烟,指着二爷的鼻子骂道:“怎么吃不到?你难道马上去死!”说完,不再理二爷,自己一个人“咚咚”地跑出门亲自买去。 为此事,二奶奶生了二爷大半天的气,硬是一句话也没有和他说,害得不会做饭的二爷饿了一顿肚子。 大家都没有料到,二爷的大限之期就到了,而且来得让人瘁不及防。三天后的那个早上,村里人大多都还没有起床,二爷闲不住,他有个早起的习惯,起来后没事,他就会坐在一个小板凳上,伏下身子,开始蹲在地上编织蔑席。 他是远近有名的蔑匠,大家都找他编织蔑器,后来年岁大了,左邻右舍也就不好意思请他,都纷纷从很远的地方请篾匠。但是二爷却不管这些,自己下山砍竹子,编织一些竹器,乐呵呵地免费送给大家用…… “快起来!快起来!老头子不行了!”二奶奶的惊呼声,清晨的寂静,将大家从睡梦中惊醒。 大家急匆匆地披衣下床,慌慌张张地跑到二爷院子里一看,只见二爷侧身卧在地上,很平静的躺着,就仿佛是在熟睡中…… 二爷就这样走了。真应验了他的话,亮叔给他带回的新衣服他没有穿上,二奶奶买回的小土鸡他也没有吃到。难道在冥冥之中,二爷真的是已感知到了死神的到来? Author: Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD Katherine (née FitzGerald), Countess of Desmond (1504-1604) - By John Lodge - Line Engraving, Late 18th Century - A Copy of the Authentic Portrait of the Countess of Desmond Held in the Collection of the Earls of Grandison at Dromana, County Waterford. The Picture, On An Oak Panel, Was Painted in the Late 16th. Century. ‘They tell a tale of the old Countess of Desmond, who lived till she was seven score years old, that she did dentire twice or thrice: casting her old teeth, and others coming in their place.’ Sir Francis Bacon – Natural History (1627) Being both ‘British’ and ‘Chinese’ - I possess a healthy respect for a) longevity as a rational concept and b) claims to extraordinary longevity that many treat with incredulity! Although I fully endorse the logic and reason that underlies modern science, I do not always consider the contemporary mania for ‘debunking’ as being the product of rational science, or indeed, the consequence of ‘good’ or even ‘convincing’ academic vigour! Many theories of debunking are as unconvincing as many of the claims to longevity such activities appear to be deconstructing. As ‘disbelief’ is no grounds for the construction of a scientific fact, it is incredible that the assumed age of England’s longest living man – Thomas Parr (1483-1635 CE) - thought to have been 152 years and 9 months at his death, should be reduced to a mere ‘70-years’ by the debunkers, on the ‘research’ grounds that such a plausibly ‘low’ age possesses the advantage of simply ‘sounding better’! Of course, there is no definitive evidence Thomas Parr was 70-years-old at the point of his death – just as there is no convincing evidence, he was indeed 152-years-old when he drew his last breath. What we do possess is a) his body (proving he ‘existed’ before the debunkers declare him a myth), b) his grave-stone stating his ‘disputed’ birth year - and his definite year of death, and c) the fact King Charles I met him (being convinced after an investigation that Thomas Parr’s birthdate was correct) and had him buried in Westminster Abbey as a consequence. (1) A similar situation exists for a woman (of Anglo-Norman descent) born in Dromana, County Waterford, Eire (Ireland). This lady is known as ‘Katherine FitzGerald’ (Gaelic ‘Caitríona Nic Gearailt) and when alive she carried the aristocratic title of the ‘Countess of Desmond’ - as she was part of the Anglo-Norman FitzGerald Dynasty of Eire. This suggests that her male ancestors were of direct Viking-French (that is ‘Norman’) stock that had successfully invaded England in 1066 – with a possibility of a little Irish cultural (and even ‘genetic’) influence gathered along the way. Genetics are important as an individual’s lifespan is dependent to a greater or lesser degree upon the functionality of the genetic programming, social class and historical epoch of existence (as these things denote the standard of living experienced and the level of development of the society born within). Obviously, there is an optimum route through life within which an individual is born with a robust genetic programme which contains the lowest of possibilities for developing genetically inherited diseases at various points in one’s chronological growth, within a high social class that provides adequate or even excessive housing, clothing, food, education, leisure and culture, and experiences little or no political, cultural or social upheaval during an individual’s lifetime, brought about by invasion, war, famine, drought and even deadly diseases (such as the ‘plague’ of various sorts). (2) (3) (4) Whilst many people experience a mixture of good and bad genetics (and have to make do with an average life of struggle and hardship) - Katherine FitzGerald – despite successfully giving birth once (a potentially dangerous physical and psychological experience for any woman from any class in any country). She was married as a young woman to her first-cousin (once removed) - Thomas FitzGerald - 11th Earl of Desmond (1454–1534) who was 50-years her senior (as he had been married once before). Thomas FitzGerald died in 1534 – after which Katherine FitzGerald remained a chaste widow - never re-marrying. From this behaviour, she received much respect and admiration from all those she encountered or had heard of her, being considered immensely virtuous of character (as her chosen lifestyle possessed all the hallmarks of that pursued by a cloister Christian nun). What I find interesting here, is that the debunkers accept without question that a young woman would be compelled to marry a man at least 50-years her senior but do not accept the equally outrageous dates associated with the Old Countess (as she is known in various texts)! In this regard, if one of the ‘revised’ birth-dates for Katherine Fitzgerald’s in ‘1504’ - this means that when she was married in 1529-1530 - she would have been around 25-years-old, whilst her husband would have been 75-years-old! Other sceptical sources suggest that Katherine Fitzgerald was born in ‘1500’ which would suggest she was 29-years-old at the time of her marriage! Her husband died aged 80-years-old and the history suggest that he sired a daughter around the age of 78-years-old! This would suggest that a) Katherine FitzGerald was pregnant in the year 1532, and b) gave birth aged either 32-years-old or 28-years-old depending upon which ‘revised’ birth-date is preferred. Whereas, if the Old Countess was born in 1464 – then she would not only have conceived in 1532 at the incredible age of 68-years-old – but also successfully survived the process of giving birth! Although a 74-year-old Indian woman gave birth to twins in 1974, this was with the aid of modern science and advanced medical care – it was not a natural birth. However, a woman in China conceived naturally, and successfully gave birth in 2019 aged 67-years-old! (5) (6) (7) Discussing this case with a modern Midwife in the UK, I am advised that a woman approaching her mid to late twenties in the 1500s would almost certainly have died either during childbirth or shortly afterwards – even if the baby survived. Death would usually be the consequence of rapid and substantial bleeding from the womb that could not be medically stemmed. Although some women could have survived, the late twenties were not a good time to conceive a first baby in the 1500s, with the mid to late thirties being a definite death sentence for the women involved – and probably the child as well. I have not come across any of these issues being discussed by the debunkers who are too busy attempting to discredit any unusual longevity claims. As with the case of Thomas Parr, there is a definite death-date for Katherine FitzGerald (that is, ‘1604’ - although the much earlier date of ‘1575’ has also been suggested by certain historians) so that the debate around her age hinges entirely upon ‘when she was born’. Of course, stating that she was born in 1464 does not solve the birthing issues, but it does suggest that Katherine FitzGerald would have been just ten-years the junior of her husband Thomas FitzGerald (they shared the same surname as they were distantly related) who was born in 1454. From a logical point of view, obviously something is not right somewhere and regardless of this lady’s ‘age’ it seems to be within the usually accepted historical narrative itself! What most modern debunkers do in this case, even those who are published ‘historians’, is that they resort to the time-honoured misogynistic tactic of reducing, distorting, belittling and negatively deconstructing the life details of Katherine FitzGerald (so that the inconvenient facts are made to ‘disappear’ through ridicule into the ether), so that what is left of her life is used to service, bolster and support the life of her (male) husband – Thomas FitzGerald! Why should his life be assumed to be any more important than that of Katherine FitzGerald? (8) I certainly do not have all the answers when it comes to assessing this very interesting case. Quite often in situations such as these, the debunkers like to say that one or other of the characters are ‘fictitious’ and did not really exist! This approach has the advantage of sweeping away all the inconvenient facts in one fell swoop! In this case, however, it is clear from the material historical evidence that Katherine FitzGerald did physically exist, as her body is believed to be buried, with her husband, in a Franciscan Friary at Youghal (County Cork). I would assume that this has been checked and confirmed, although it is quite often the case that burials before 1700 are very difficult to track down. Record-keeping of deaths was not as consistent or efficient as it is today – with old grave grave-markers from the 1500s not always surviving and quite often either not containing any engraved details, or losing what inscriptions they may have carried due to ‘weathering’ over 500-years! It is also true, however, that many old graves are simply lost, destroyed or reused by the Churches within which they lay. There any number of reasons why a grave may have once existed but does not now exist. Unfortunately, Katherine FitzGerald, despite being a member of the aristocracy, only managed a routine (local) burial of a religious nature – whilst the Commoner Thomas Parr ended-up in Westminster Abbey (the latter being much easier to check for authenticity)! Despite the lack of a body, it must be admitted that the documented evidence for the existence of Katherine FitzGerald is a) extensive and b) convincing. Furthermore, there are at least eleven pictures and portraits of Katherine FitzGerald in existence, with two painted portraits (and a disputed third) which are considered ‘authentic’ – and taken as definitive proof of her worldly existence by most historians. The remaining eight portraits are now referred to as ‘formerly’ being of Katherine FitzGerald – Countess of Desmond, despite all looking like they are variations upon a theme (probably the products of a copy of a copy), and with many containing convincing annotations stating their assumed authenticity from the time of their creations, etc. (9) (10) (11) In her youth, some history books suggest that Katherine FitzGerald danced with the future King Richard III (1452-1485) - then Duke of Gloucester – who apparently attended her wedding to Thomas FitzGerald (which is chronologically problematic, as the two were wed in 1530)! Richard was Duke of Gloucester between 1461–1483 – from the age of 9-years-old to the age of 30-31-years-old. Given that he was married in 1472 (aged around 20-years) he probably danced with Katherine FitzGerald (in this alternative time-line) when she was very young. As she is said to have been born in 1464 – this means that by 1472 (the year of the Duke of Gloucester’s marriage) she would have been just 8-yesrs-old! Such happenings are not unusual in themselves – but whether this happened to Katherine FitzGerald is another matter. If born in 1464 - when she married Thomas FitzGerald in 1529-1530 - Katherine FitzGerald would have been 64-years-old, whilst her husband was 75-years-old! This is a normal and acceptable age range and difference between ages, and is true might also suggest that Katherine had been married before (despite there being no evidence for this) and that this is where her daughter - ‘Katherine’ - originated. One of the odd stories circulating about her suggests that she left Ireland for England in 1603-1604 arriving in Bristol and ‘walking’ the road to London whilst pushing her disabled daughter in a wooden-cart! Her daughter at this time was said to be ‘90-years-old' and to be ‘disabled’. If this is correct, then her daughter would have been born in 1514 when Katherine FitzGerald was around ‘50-years-old' in one version of her life (born in ‘1464’) or ‘6-years-old' in another (born in ‘1509’). Why was Katherine FitzGerald travelling to London? This matter evolved around the castle she was given to live in by her late husband. Her husband had granted her a life tenancy in Inchiquin Castle, around five miles Southwest of the town of Youghal, in Munster (County Court). Upon the Countess Desmond's death, the castle was to revert to the line of the Earls of Desmond. In 1575, she passed the title to the castle and lands in trust, by deed, to the incumbent Earl - Gerald FitzGerald - who then passed it in trust to his servants. (This is why some historians believe that these events were triggered by the ‘death’ of Katherine FitzGerald in 1575 – rather than the situation being a ‘willed’ transaction on her part whilst still alive. This position is undermined by the mentioning of ‘Katherine FitzGerald’ as ‘still living’ on a deed dated to 1590). Following the Earl's attainder in 1582 - whereby his estate fell to the Crown after the Second Desmond Rebellions - Inchiquin Castle and its lands were granted to New England colonist Sir Walter Raleigh. Sir Walter Raleigh then leased out some of the land while preserving the life interest of the Countess of Desmond who was still living in the castle. She survived far beyond Raleigh's expectations, however, and Sir Richard Boyle - who subsequently purchased Raleigh's colonial possessions in Ireland (including the castle) - initiated proceedings to evict the old lady. Whilst in London – Katherine FitzGerald successfully petitioned King James I for a just settlement before returning home to Inchiquin Castle – where she died later the same year. (12) Sir Walter Raleigh’s writings on the life of Katherine FitzGerald are one of the major records (and proof) of her existence and life stories. Raleigh reports that not only did her teeth all suddenly regrow into a perfect and youthful set around 1602 – but that it was also common knowledge that Katherine FitzGerald walked every week to (and from) her local market town - a distance of 4–5 miles each way - even after her return from London in 1604! Every year Katherine FitzGerald used to be seen by the local people ‘climbing’ various types of fruit trees and picking the ripe fruit during the spring and summer months! In 1604, however, she was seen to suffer a fall when picking cherries – injuring her hip. The injury became infected and she suffered a fever and swiftly passed away. When Sir Walter Raleigh used his influence in investigate the history of this extraordinary woman, he was astonished to be shown ‘proof’ (lost today) that she was born in 1464! Based on these observations, Raleigh considered, this lady was aged 140-years old at her death! Sir Walter Raleigh, it should be noted, was made to gather ‘legally’ binding evidence of Katherine FitzGerald – who was his sitting ‘tenant’ - for use in the Courts. The excellent periodical entitled the ‘Dublin Review’ (dated February 1862) expresses a pristine logic manifested by its learned authors. It asserts, with good reason, that the tales of the longevity of Katherine FitzGerald is nothing but a ‘fable’ even though she was obviously a genuine and living historical figure not without her peculiarities (as she probably did live to nearly 100-years-old or even older). Through the vigour of sound academic research, the chain of evidence regarding this story is as follows: I have deciphered, translated (Latin into English), corrected where necessary, and generally expanded this work by adding substantial historical fact designed to clarify the rational historical narrative being expressed. This process will allow the modern reader to access this wonderfully ‘antique’ material more readily. I have not, however, ‘altered’ or ‘diverted’ the original narrative as developed and expressed by the ‘Dublin Review’ in anyway). (13) The earliest mention of the strange stories surrounding the Countess of Desmond originate with Sir Walter Raleigh’s book entitled ‘History of the World’ (1614). An Itinerary (1617) is a three volumes travelogue recording the author’s travels throughout Europe (written in Latin) by the British explorer Fynes Moryson - who quoted Sir Walter Raleigh regarding the story of Katherine FitzGerald. Historia Vitae et Mortis (History of Life and Death) [1623] - written in Latin by Sir Francis Bacon who says (in translation) ‘The Irish, especially the wild Irish, even at this day, live very long; certainly they report that within these few years the Countess of Desmond lived to a hundred and forty years of age, and bred teeth three times.’ Sylva Sylvarum (Natural History in Ten Centuries) [1627] was written by Sir Francis Bacon (in English) and covers the concept of longevity produced through humanity constructing a better world by developing a new science that produces a vastly improved nutrition, medical care, education, culture, leisure and political system, etc. The Latin title ‘Sylva Sylvarum’ literally translates as ‘forest’ and ‘wood’ - and probably means something like ‘make use of the material in the natural environment to build a new world’. Trees are cut-down to make wood which constructs all kinds of useful objects that make human life better. Yet again, Bacon quotes Raleigh with regards to Katherine FitzGerald (quoted at the top of this article). Robert Sydney (Sidney) – 2nd Earl of Leicester (1595-1677). Whilst English Ambassador to France (resident in Paris), Robert Sydney wrote (in 1640) the following observations (original spelling and grammar retained): “The old Countess of Desmond was a marryed woman in Edw IV.s time, of England, and lived till towards the end of Q. Elizabeth, so she must needes be neere 140 yeares old. She had a new sett of teeth not long before her death, and might have lived much longer had she not mett with a kinde of violent death; for she would needes climbe a nut tree, to gather nutts; so falling down she hurt her thigh, which brought a fever, and that fever brought death. This my cousin Walter FitzWilliam told me. “ This old lady, Mr. Harriot told me, came to petition the Queen; and, landing at Bristoll, she came on foot to London, being then so old that her daughter was decrepit, and not able to come with her, but was brought in a little cart, theyr poverty not allowing means for better provision; and, as I remember, Sir Walter Rawleigh in some part of his story speakes of her, and sayeth that he saw her in England in anno 1589.” Her death was strange and remarkable, as her long life was, having seen the death of so many descended of her, and both her and her husband’s house ruined in the rebellions and wars. - the scholars associated with the ‘Dublin Review’ state ‘The Earl of Leicester is incorrect to assert that that Sir Walter Raleigh states that he met Katherine FitzGerald in England in 1589! Sir Walter Raleigh does NOT say this. Indeed, both Sir Walter Raleigh and Katherine FitzGerald were living near one another in Youghal (Eire) at this time, and probably saw one another on regular occasions. The Earl is also incorrect to assume that Katherine FitzGerald was the progenitor of the FitzGerald lineage – which she obviously was NOT.’ Sacred Chronology (Chronologia Sacra) written by Archbishop James Usher (Ussher) published in 1660. Whilst quoting Raleigh and Bacon – and confirms that Katherine FitzGerald was born during the reign of King Edward IV (1442-1483). He adds, however, that this fact is preserved in the genealogical records pertaining to the Desmond family of Cork, Eire. Sir William Temple (1628-1699) – in his essay entitled ‘of Health and Life’ published in ‘Miscellanies’ (1689) - reiterates the above work of the 2nd Earl Leicester - whom he knew personally. Robert Sydney, whilst in conversation with William Temple, explained the entire story relating to Katherine FitzGerald. Temples states that a) the Countess of Desmond lived during the reign of King Edward IV (1442-1483) during which time she was married. B) she lived into the reign of King James 1 (1566-1625), and c) she died a number of years ‘beyond’ the age of 140-years. Temple also mentions her journey to London via Bristol – which many historians doubt. Horace Walpole (1717-1797) - in his book entitled ‘Historic Doubts on the life and Reign of Richard III’ (1768) states that Katherine FitzGerald lived during the reign of King Edvard IV (1442-1483) and ‘danced’ with the future King Richard III (1452-1485) when he was still the Duke of Gloucester. Horace Walpole states that he gained this knowledge from his friend ‘Mrs Cholmondeley’ who was the sister of Lord Henry St John (1652-1742) the father of the great Lord Henry St John, 1st Viscount Bolingbroke (1678-1751). The father of Lord Henry St John (1652-1742) was Sir Walter St John, 3rd Baronet (May 1622–1708). Sir Walter St John’s great uncle was Sir Oliver St John, 1st Viscount Grandison (1559-1630). As President of Munster (Eire) and later the Lord Treasurer of Ireland – it is possible that he was familiar with Katherine FitzGerald – Countess of Desmond – and that the knowledge he gained about her extraordinary life filtered through his family down through the ages, before being told to his descendent who knew Horace Walpole - about a hundred years later. ‘Mrs Cholmondeley’ is Anne St John (1650-1742) who married ‘Thomas Cholmondeley’ (1627-1701). Anne Cholmondeley (St John) lived into her 92nd year of life and passed away when Horace Walpole was just 25-years-old. She was probably some type of ‘mentor’ to Horace Walpole who states in numerous letters (and other writings) that a person known as ‘old Lady Dacre’ personally spoke to an ‘old’ Katherine FitzGerald who told her about the youthful experience she had ‘dancing’ with the future King Richard III – as the Duke of Gloucester. Lady Dacre is believed to be ‘Anne Sackville’ (1544-1595) - who married Gregory Fiennes, 10th Baron Dacre (1539-1594). As Anne Sackville, Baroness Dacre appears to have lived her life exclusively in Chelsea (on the opposite side of the opposite side of the Thames). Given that she spent virtually all her life in London, and that she never travelled to Eire, it is difficult to see ‘where’ or even ‘how’ she could have crossed paths with Katherine FitzGerald. Given that Lady Dacre died in 1595 (being buried in Chelsea) she was not ‘alive’ to witness the supposed visit to London Katherine FitzGerald made in 1604. (14) James Granger (1723–1776) - in his book entitled ‘Biographical History of England from Egbert the Great to the Revolution (1769) - he states that Katherine FitzGerald was born during the reign of King Edvard IV (1442-1483) and that she also ‘danced’ with the future King Richard III (1452-1485) when he was still the Duke of Gloucester. For this ‘fact’ he quoted Horace Walpole (1717-1797). Mr Sharon Turner (1768-1847) - the famous historian - wrote a poem entitled ‘Richard the Third’ which was published in 1845. Sharon Turner adds this note to the end of his poem “ Mr. Paynter, the magistrate, hearing of the announcement of the preceding poem, related to my son, the Rev Sydny Turner, the following particulars: “When a boy, about the year 1810, he heard the old Lord Glastonbury, then at least ninety years of age, declare that when he was a young lad he saw, and was often with the Countess of Desmond, then living, an aged woman. She told him that when she was a girl, she had known familiarly and frequently seen, an old lady who had been bought up by the former Countess of Desmond, who became noted for her extraordinary longevity, as she lived to be above one hundred and twenty years of age. This lady mentioned that this aged Countess of Desmond had declared that she had been at a court banquet when Richard was present and that he was in no way personally deformed or crooked. Edward IV was deemed, in his day, to be the most handsomest man of his court. It is a fair reference from her impression that his personal appearance could not be much as the Tudor partisans and our Shakespeare have described: and it is an instance how much they have misrepresented him.” In fact, Lord Glastonbury (1742-1825) was in his 82nd-year when he passed away – not living long enough to reach his 90s. In 1810, therefore, Lord Glastonbury was actually 67-years-old and not ‘ninety years of age’ as the above story suggests. The authors of the ‘Dublin Review’ state that ‘the last person to hold the title of ‘Earl of Desmond’ was ‘William Fielding’ (1640-1685) - a title he gave-up in 1675 when he became ‘3rd Earl of Denbigh’.’ This statement is only partially correct and potentially historically misleading. ‘William Fielding’ (1640-1685) DID NOT give up the title of ‘2nd Earl of Desmond’ when he assumed the new title of ‘3rd Earl of Denbigh’ - as his family were permitted to combine the two titles. Today, (this 1622 ‘fourth’ creation of the title of ‘Earl of Desmond’) is currently held by Alexander Stephen Rudolph Feilding, 12th Earl of Denbigh, 11th Earl of Desmond. Katherine FitzGerald, by way of comparison, was married (in 1530) to Thomas FitzGerald, 11th Earl of Desmond (1454-1534) who held the title during its ‘first’ creation which existed between 1329-1582 – when all lands and titles were forfeited to the English crown due to the Second Desmond Rebellion of the Irish against the English. In this first creation there were sixteen Earls of Desmond. The second creation of this title existed between 1600-1601 and had just one holder. The third creation existed between 1619-1622 and had only one holder (although this holder - Richard Preston, 1st Earl of Desmond) is recorded as living to 1628 without any mention of his title being annulled. The fourth creation of this title was established in 1622 and is still in existence today. Lord Glastonbury mention above, lived well into the fourth creation of this title – whilst the long-lived lady he is discussing – Katherine FitzGerald – lived well within the ‘first’ creation of this title. The ‘Dublin Review’ continues: ‘But we have heard of another line of tradition in which a Countess of Kildare is mentioned, who may possibly have been the lady meant by Lord Glastonbury, - from confusing the two great lines of the FitzGeralds. A clergyman of high birth, now living in the county of Rutland, has been heard to relate that he knew old Lady Stanhope, who knew old Lady Kildare, who knew the old Countess of Desmond, who knew and danced with Richard Duke of Gloucester. The old Lady Stanhope was Grizel (Hamilton); she died in 1811, in her ninety-third year. The old Lady Kildare was Elizabeth (Jones), widow of John eighteenth Earl of Kildare; she died in 1757, also in her ninety-third year. But this carries us to a period no further than the reign of Charles the Second, and another long life is required to take us to the days of the Old Countess of Desmond.’ The first known written record of ‘Rutland’ is found in the Will of Edward the Confessor (1003-1066) where it is referred to as the ‘King’s soc of Roteland’ - a ‘soc’ being a vaguely defined term found within the ‘Danelaw’ - extant throughout the Northern and Eastern areas of Britain controlled by the invading ‘Vikings’ (from Scandanavia) – whose long-boats once traversed the River Welland that flows through Rutland. A ‘soc’ refers to an area of land within which the ruling monarch (and-or their designated representatives) reserve the right to hold a judicial ‘court’ should they so desire. The ancient village of Duddington – the ancestral village of the ‘Wyles’ family (the Viking-derived surname carried by the author of this article) - used to reside in ‘Rutland’ before boundary changes shifted its location to being within ‘Northamptonshire’. Today, the boundary between ‘Northamptonshire’ (within which Duddington now resides) and ‘Rutland’ now runs along the left-bank of the River Welland. The inscription upon Mr Herbert’s picture (of the Old Lady Desmond) held at Muckross carries an inscription which reads as follows (original spelling and grammar retained): ‘CATHERINE, COUNTESSE OF DESMONDE – As she appeared at ye Court of our Souraigne Lord King James in thys preasent AD 1614, and ye 140th yeare of her age. She came from Bristol to seek Reliefe, ye house of Desmonde having been rvined by Attainder. SHE was married in in ye reigne of King Edward IV. and in ye Course her long Pilgramage renewed her teeth twice. - HER PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE is at INCHIQVIN IN MUNSTER, WITHER SHE undavntedlye proposeth (her Purpose accomplished) incontinentlie TO RETURN. - LAVS DEO’ Within modern (British) English, ‘Lavs Deo’ is written as ‘Laus Deo’ and literally translates as ‘Praise God’ - but was often used by convention to be an accepted contraction of the phrase ‘Praise (Be) to God’. Within old written English a ‘u’ is often substituted for a ‘v’ as can be seen above. When this inscription has been checked for authenticity of language expression (to check if the writing used is consistent with the historical period the text is believed to have been generated within), the authors of the ‘Dublin Review’ state that this text has been declared ‘genuine’ with the only criticism being that the word ‘hath’ (have) could have been added before the words ‘renewed her teeth’ if the Countess of Desmond was still living when the inscription was commissioned - but this is countered by the recognition that this would not be necessary if the Old Lady had already passed (as indeed, she is recorded as doing in 1604 – with the text being composed ten-years later in 1614 – although the portrait was painted of her whilst she was alive and sat in person for the artist. Why the inscription would be composed ten-years after her death and not at the time of the painting is a mystery, unless, of course, Katherine Fitzgerald lived beyond the usually stated ‘1604’). The ‘Mr Herbert’ mentioned by the authors of the ‘Dublin Review’ is either ‘The Right Honourable Henry Arthur Herbert’ (1815-1866), or possibly his son ‘Henry Arthur Herbert DL MP (1840-1901) - with the ancestral home of the Herbert family being situated in ‘Muckross’, County Kerry (Eire). It is within this stately home that the above portrait of the Countess of Desmond is held – which is affixed with the above inscription. Within the Journal Article entitled ‘The Old Countess of Desmond. An Inquiry: Did She Seek Redress at the Court of Queen Elizabeth, as Recorded in the Journal of Robert Sydney, Earl of Leycester? And Did She Ever Sit for Her Portrait? By Richard Sainthill [Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy (1836-1869) Vol. 7 (1857 - 1861), pp. 429-473 (45 pages)] - states (as a footnote on Page 460) that the assumed portrait of the Old Countess of Desmond was commissioned by Queen Elizabth I – who sent Rembrandt to Inchiquin Castle (in Munster) Eire - to paint a portrait of the Old Countess of Desmond which is now preserved at Windsor Castle. Eire was rife with rebellions and uprisings against England’s rule at this time, and many doubt that a ‘foreign’ visitor could have safely traversed the country in search of ‘a very old woman’. It is thought that all the other portraits of the Old Countess of Desmond (including the portrait held at Muckross) are simply ‘copies’ of this original made with small alteration (here and there) so as to appear ‘original’ or ‘unique’ in one way or another. Some art critics suggest, however, that the ‘original’ Rembrandt (that hangs in Windsor Castle), is in fact the ‘mother’ of Rembrandt – or simply a non-descript ‘old lady’. As Sir Walter Raliegh’s account of the Old Countess of Desmond was published in 1614 – it is interesting to observe that the Muckross portrait is said to have been painted (or at least ‘rediscovered’) in the year that this story became generally well-known. In 1750, in the book entitled the ‘Natural and Civil History of County and City of Corke’ by Dr Charles Smith [1715-1762] (also known as ‘The Ancient and Present State of the County and City of Cork - Containing a Natural, Civil, Ecclesiastical, Historical, and Topographical Description Thereof – in Two Volumes) it states ‘1534: Thomas, the 13th Earl of Desmond, brother to Maurice the 11th earl, died this year, at Rathkeale, in the County of Limerick, being of very great age, and was buried at Youghal...The earl’s second wife was Catherine FitzGerald, daughter of the FitzGeralds of the house of Drumands, in the county of Waterford. This Catherine was the countess of that lived so long, of whom Sir Walter Raleigh makes mention in his History of the World, and was reported to have lived to 140 years of age.’ If Katherine FitzGerald lived between 1464-1604 (104-years) - then she would have observed at least eight to ten individuals within her family assume the position of the Earl of Desmond – given that her husband was Thomas FitzGerald, 11th Earl of Desmond (1454–1534). This process would have spanned the first (1329) and second (1600) creations of the title of the Earl of Demond (with the first creation being abolished and ‘attainted’ in 1582 due to Gerald FitzGerald, 16th Earl of Desmond [1533–1583] - leading the Second Desmond Rebellion). As Katherine FitzGerald lived until 1604 – her life spanned two incarnations of the title of the Earl of Desmond, albeit with the majority of her time being spent within the first creation. Therefore, she would have experienced the following men either holding (or assuming) to hold the title: 1) John FitzGerald, 12th Earl of Desmond (1460-1536) - brother of Thomas FitzGerald, 11th Earl of Desmond and his wife – Katherine Fitzgerald - Countess of Desmond, 2) James FitzGerald, 13th Earl of Desmond (1513-1540) Great Grandson of Thomas FitzGerald, 11th Earl of Desmond and his wife – Katherine Fitzgerald - Countess of Desmond. 3) James FitzJohn FitzGerald, 14th Earl of Desmond (1504-1558) - son of John FitzGerald, 12th Earl of Desmond – nephew of Thomas FitzGerald, 11th Earl of Desmond and his wife – Katherine Fitzgerald - Countess of Desmond. 4) Gerald FitzGerald, 15th Earl of Desmond (1533 – 1583) - son of James FitzJohn FitzGerald, 14th Earl of Desmond – was the great-nephew of Thomas FitzGerald, 11th Earl of Desmond and his wife – Katherine Fitzgerald - Countess of Desmond. Now, James FitzJohn FitzGerald, 14th Earl of Desmond (1504-1558) mentioned above (see number ‘3’) - married ‘Joan Roche’ (1512-1565) and sired one son named ‘Thomas FitzJames Fitzgerald’ (1529-1595) - also known as ‘Sir Tomás Ruadh (Thomas the ‘Red’) of Conna – a FitzGerald who may have been known to the Old Countess of Desmond but who would never assume the role of Earl. Irish historical records state that this coupling also produced two daughters - Joan FitzGerald (d. 1596) and Eleanor FitzGerald (d. 1569). However, during the time of Henry VIII (r. 1509-1547) the legitimacy of this marriage was questioned in high places. The English monarchy declared that the marriage between James FitzJohn FitzGerald and Joan Roche to be ‘annulled’ on the grounds that it is improper for a ‘granduncle’ to marry his ‘grandniece’ (consanguinity). Joan Roche is often described as ‘being very young’ when she married James FitzJohn FitzGerald. Given that James FitzJohn FitzGerald remarried in 1533, his son from his first marriage (he would marry four times throughout his life) - Thomas FitzJames Fitzgerald – must have been born well before this date, particularly considering that he had two younger sisters! Although English Law set the age of (sexual) consent at 12-years-old in 1275 – this does not seem to have applied within Medieval Ireland (whose legal elements appear to have been regulated by the Catholic Church as ‘conventions’ preferred by a) the Anglo-Norman settlers and b) the indigenous Irish Gaels). A young woman considered to be ‘of age’ (often in her early teenage years) by two families could be manoeuvred into marriage with a relative ease that the girl in question was brought-up to accept without question. Of course, Joan Roche could have been around 16-years-old when she married James FitzJohn FitzGerald (which would have been 1528). Using this model, then Joan Roche could have had her son - Thomas FitzJames Fitzgerald – in the year 1529 (when she was aged 17-years-old). Her two daughters could then have followed over the next two-years – with Joan Roche giving birth two more times in 1530 and 1531. Her marriage with James FitzJohn FitzGerald could then have been annulled in 1532 - with James FitzJohn FitzGerald remarrying in 1533. This situation means that their son - Thomas FitzJames Fitzgerald – was automatically ‘disinherited’ from the lineage and title of the ‘Earl of Desmond’. Technically speaking, Thomas FitzJames Fitzgerald should have inherited his father’s title (as the oldest son) and assumed the role of the ‘15th Earl of Desmond’ - but this was not allowed to happen. Instead, Thomas had to settle with being knighted in 1569 by Sir Henry Sidney, Lord Deputy of Ireland. Sir Thomas died on the 18th January, 1595 at the Castle of Connagh [probably Counagh] in Eire. Sir Thomas married ‘Ellice le Poer’ and sired five children. James, the eldest son, who became the 17th "Sugan" Earl of Desmond who died in the Tower of London in 1607. Gerald, the second son, who became a Count in Spain. Ada, his eldest daughter who married Donough – the 2nd son of Sir Owen MacCarthy Reagh, 16th Prince of Carbery. Margaret, the second daughter who married Donal na Pipi MacCarthy Reagh, 17th Prince of Carbery (their son - Cormac - married Ellinor, daughter of Edmund FitzGibbon, the 11th White Knight). John, the third son who migrated to live in Spain in 1615 - where he was styled Conde de Desmond. He died in Barcelona. He married a daughter of Richard Comerford of Dangenmore, Co. Kilkenny. (Irish records suggest that Sir Thomas may also have married his cousin - a daughter of David Roche, 2nd Viscount Roche – with no known offspring). 5) In the meantime, the title of ‘15 Earl of Desmond’ was transmitted to Gerald FitzJames FitzGerald (1533-1583) - the eldest son of James FitzJohn FitzGerald, 14th Earl of Desmond and his second wife - More O'Carroll. As Gerald FitzJames FitzGerald (1533-1583) took a prominent role in the Second Desmond Rebellion – the forces loyal to the English Crown eventually hunted him down after many months of hard fighting – which saw the 15th Earl of Desmond stand his ground and die bravely on the battlefield wielding his ancestral sword - surrounded by the bodies of his enemies and the fallen of his own loyal ‘Irish’ clansmen! As a punishment for this effrontery – Queen Elizabeth 1 abolished and attainted the entire lineage associated with the first creation of the title of the Earl of Desmond, and confiscated all lands and incomes to the control of the English Crown. 6) The eldest son of Sir Thomas and Ellice le Poer was ‘James FitzThomas Fitzgerald’ (1560-1607) - was the nephew of Gerald FitzJames Fitzgerald, 15th Earl of Desmond. The family title of the Earl of Desmond had been abolished in 1582 – but in 1598, exasperated at seeing his ancestral territories now being in the hands of English settlers, and at the efforts made to extirpate Catholicism - he joined Hugh O'Neill, 3rd Earl of Tyrone, in his war, and by him was created the ‘17th Earl of Desmond’. This is why the English Crown mockingly bestowed upon him the fallacious title of ‘Sugan Earl’ - or an ‘Earl of straw’ (with ‘sugan’ being the Irish-Gaelic word for ‘straw’) or an imposter assuming a ‘rank’ not appointed the ‘correct’ or ‘legitimate’ authority. Despite this English propaganda - James FitzThomas Fitzgerald soon gathered at least eight-thousand Irish-Gaelic warriors to his banner – becoming a distinguished Commander in Munster against the best soldiers Queen Elizabeth could put in the field! However, due to betrayal and English persistence, the Irish-Gaelic warriors were defeated and James FitzThomas Fitzgerald was captured on the 29th of May, 1601, where he was clapped in irons and deported to England where he was placed in the Tower of London. Irish Peerage Records record that he died in early 1607, and was buried in St Peter’s Chapel within the Tower on April 28th of that year. Although Katherine FitzGerald – Countess of Desmond died in 1604, she could well have been aware of most of this information presented above. 7) If the ‘Dublin Review’ is correct to assert that Katherine FitzGerald should have known at least eight to ten members of her family assume the role of ‘Earl of Desmond’ throughout her long-life – then we must account for why it is that only ‘six’ inheritors are obvious in the above list – with one of those not existing within the official lineage. This may well be due to problems of family lineages and the concepts of ‘de jure’ (in law) Earls – and ‘de facto’ (in fact) Earls. For instance, Maurice FitzGerald was the 1st Earl of Desmond (1293-1357) - with his eldest son sired with his first wife (Katherine de Burgh) - Maurice FitzGerald (1336–1358) - inherited the title of 2nd Earl of Desmond. These two Earls represent the combined (and unbroken) pristine state of a ‘de jure’ (by law) and ‘de facto’ (in practice) reality. Both men are entitled by law (and convention) to be where they stand within the historical narrative and occupying the titles they possess. However, the youngest son of Maurice FitzGerald sired with his third wife (Aveline FitzNicholas, Countess of Desmond) - Gerald FitzMaurice FitzGerald (1335–1398) - assumed the title of the 3rd Earl of Desmond following the death of his half-brother in 1358. This represents a ‘de facto’ (in practice) inheritance but diverts away from a ‘de jure’ (in law) transmission. This situation stems from the fact that the eldest son sired by Maurice FitzGerald and his third wife - Nicholas FitzMaurice of Ossory (1337-1367) - who should have inherited (by law and convention) the title of 3rd Earl of Desmond - suffered from a cognitive disability and is disparagingly referred to in many history books as being an ‘idiot’. Due to his disability, it was decided by King Edward III that Nicholas FitzMaurice was not able to ‘defend’ the Earldom of Desmond, and so royal permission was granted to ‘pass over’ Nicholas in favour of his younger brother - Gerald FitzMaurice FitzGerald (the now ‘de facto’ but not ‘de jure’ 3rd Earl of Desmond) - with the proviso that Gerald provides for the needs and care of his older brother for life. As matters transpired, Nicholas lived for just 30-years. The reality is this, regardless of ‘who’ or ‘why’ a different individual assumes the title – Nicholas will always remain the ‘de jure’ and therefore ‘rightful’ 3rd Earl of Desmond when lineages are recorded and preserved on paper. This means that technically speaking, the lineage list treats the situation as Nicholas ‘de facto’ and ‘de jure’ holding the title before relinquishing in favour of his younger brother – who would theoretically assume the ‘de jure’ and ‘de facto’ title of ‘4th Earl of Desmond’. 8) Another example involves the disinheriting of Thomas FitzGerald, 5th Earl of Desmond (1386–1420) in 1418 by his paternal uncle - James FitzGerald the Usurper (1380-1463) who assumed the title of the ‘6th Earl of Desmond’ even though he possessed no ‘legal’ (or ‘de jure’) right to occupy this position in (de facto) practice. He was the third-son of Gerald FitzMaurice FitzGerald (1335–1398) and the younger brother of John FitzGerald, 4th Earl of Desmond (1366-1399) - who ‘drowned’ crossing the River Suir whilst returning from a retaliatory raid against the Earl of Ormond. Due to his young age being about 13 or 14-years-old when his father died (in 1399) – Thomas FitzGerald did not inherit the title straightaway – and this is exactly where all his trouble is thought to have begun. 9) Around 1400 – the English Crown (the Court of the ‘new’ King Henry V) - granted a temporary (de facto) custody of the title of the ‘Earl of Desmond’ to ‘Maurice FitzGerald’ - the 2nd son of the 3rd Earl of Desmond - Gerald FitzMaurice FitzGerald (1335–1398) - and paternal uncle of Thomas FitzGerald. (This could imply that ‘Maurice FitzGerald’ was the ‘de facto’ Earl of Desmond between 1400-1407). This arrangement was to last until Thomas FitzGerald reached ‘maturity’ of the age 20-years-old (in 1407) – when Maurice FitzGerald was required to transfer the title back to its rightful (de jure) holder. in 1411, James FitzGerald the Usurper (1380-1463) banished Thomas FitzGerald – 5th Earl of Desmond so that he had to flee to English where he petitioned the English Crown the assistance. This was eventually granted and Thomas FitzGerald returned to Eire in 1413 to reclaim his ancestral lands using a detachment of experienced English troops. However, but he was eventually captured and imprisoned by his uncle - Gerald FitzMaurice FitzGerald – and was released into the custody of the lieutenant, John Talbot, Lord Furnival and Earl of Shrewsbury. Thomas then travelled to France, where he joined the English king Henry V at the Siege of Rouen (1418-1419). He served in France, probably hoping to gain support for a second attempt at retaking his lands, but died in the summer of 1420 and was buried in Paris. Henry V was said to have attended his funeral. Gerald FitzMaurice FitzGerald the rejection of Thomas FitzGerald and himself accepted as the Earl of Desmond by suggesting that Thomas was a) illegitimate (and therefore, ‘unqualified’ to hold the title), and b) that he had broken the (racist) conventions associated with the Statutes of Kilkenny (which forbade the ennobled descendants of Anglo-Norman settlers in Eire such as the FitzGeralds from marrying anyone from the indigenous Irish-Gaelic population – to ‘prevent’ the mixing of blood and the ‘polluting’ of the assumed ‘superior’ Anglo-Norman race. Although ‘a’ is provably ‘false’, ‘b’ is a little more difficult to dismiss, as Thomas FitzGerald is said to had fallen in-love with an indigenous Irish-Gaelic woman (named Catherine MacCormack) and had even dared to marry her. This type of racist reaction is peculiar as many Anglo-Normans integrated into the Irish culture and learned to speak the Irish-Gaelic language – even if convention prevented ‘open’ intermixing and the pursuing of love affairs, etc. Furthermore, as many Earls of Desmond led ‘rebellions’ against the English Crown – it was the Irish-Gaelic clansmen who flocked to their banners in their thousands - willing to spill their own blood to secure the freedom of Eire! Interestingly, as Thomas was the ‘de jure’ and ‘de facto’ 5th Earl of Desmond, this suggests that the only legitimate heirs to his ancestral lands and title were his own sons. This means that although there has been a long line of ‘de facto’ Earls of Desmond since Thomas left Eire – not a single one that followed James FitzGerald can be considered ‘de jure’ - or that is ‘lawful’ holders of the title and occupiers of the ancestral lands – as they are all ‘usurpers’ and rendered ‘redundant’ by historical events. Although the case of Nicholas stands-out due to his disability, such lineage disputes occurred all the way through the first creation of the title of the Earl of Desmond (1329-1582) – with the disinherited ‘Thomas FitzJames Fitzgerald’ (1529-1595) being recorded on the lineage lists as the ‘de jure’ (in law) but not the ‘de facto’ (in practice) ‘16th Earl of Desmond’. This observation would allow for yet another ‘Earl’ related to Katherine FitzGerald (1464-1604) and explains why ‘James FitzThomas Fitzgerald’ (1560-1607) assumed the title of the ‘17th Earl of Desmond’ in 1598. With ‘Maurice FitzGerald’ holding the title at least in theory between 1400-1407 - this above analysis (which identifies ‘9’ relevant Earls of Desmond of the first creation which fit into the narrative of Katherine FitzGerald’s supposed long life of 1464-1604) - does tend to support the assertion made by the scholars of the ‘Dublin Review’ (1862) that at least eight to ten ‘Earls of Desmond’ would have traversed the senses of a very long-lived Katherine FitzGerald – Countess of Desmond. (15) The events minutely examined above, are just some of the incidents that Katherine FitzGerald – Countess of Desmond either witnessed or was affected by to a lesser or greater extent. Of course, the exact assessment of historical fact does render the idea any more convincing (or probable) that this venerable old lady may have lived into her 140th year. Sometimes, in cases such as these, a grandparent is chronologically confused with a grandchild or even with their own off-spring, so that a single person seeming to experience a very long-life time, is in fact an amalgamation of three separate and distinct (but usually related) individuals who used either identical or similar sounding names (which become muddled), and pursued oddly similar lives, so that at a certain distance in time, it becomes almost impossible to discern the actions of one generation from another! At this juncture in the evolution of humanity, life-spans are generally longer on average than at another time in human history, and this would suggest that human-beings possess a potentially limitless ability to exist in theory, even though in fact the human-body is still subject to the material limitations and environmental injustices that currently define human existence. The scientific reality is that as society continues to evolve – human longevity will generally increase across the species. There is natural longevity defined by a genetic lottery provided for an individual by two copulating parents – and there is the possibility of the development of scientific enhancement through medicines, technologies and procedures, etc. A barrier to human longevity is perpetual illnesses operating in the environment and this needs to be conquered by the human mind. Pharoah Ramesis II (1303–1213 BCE) - or ‘Ramesis the Great’ lived for 90-years when the average of mortality in ancient Egypt (for adults) was around 30-years! He must have seemed ‘immortal’ to the three generations of grandparents, parents and grandchildren who served him. When stories were told of his great age in those times, many must have scoffed at the idea that a human-being could live to such an incredible age – whilst three-thousand years later - such an eventually would be considered quite normal and of no particular interest or concern. (16) Who were the parents of Katherine FitzGerald? Her father is recorded as being Sir John Fitzgerald of Dromana, 2nd Lord of Decies (1482-1553) son of Gerald FitzJames FitzGerald of Dromnana and Margaret Fitzgerald Burke. Her mother is recorded as being ‘Ellen FitzGibbon’ (1490-1560) the daughter of Sir John FitzGibbon and Joan Barrymore. Both of these people are very near in birthdates and exhibited a similar longevity of around 70-years of age. I would suggest that for the 1400s and 1500s in Ireland this is a very long life (given that the Medieval mortality rate for an adult stood at around 31.1 years). A snapshot of Ireland’s history for 1447 states: ‘Great famine in the spring of this year (1447) throughout all Ireland, so that men were then wont to eat all manner of herbs for the most part. Great plague in summer, harvest, and winter, by which died the Prior of Ballyboggan and the Prior of Connell [Co. Kildare], and the Baron of Calatrym [Galtrim], and Gerott the sons [sic] of Walront, and the Listel, and many more in Meath, in Munster, in Leinster died of that plague, and it is difficult to get an account of the innumerable multitudes that died in Dublin by that plague.’ (Annals of Ireland 1443 to 1468) (17) Furthermore, as well as recurring plagues which often scythed through the Irish population, there were continuous droughts and famines to contend with, as well as bouts of extraordinary bad weather as can be seen by two accounts of the storms over Ireland between 1171-1172: ‘The storms raged so unceasingly and with such persistence that throughout that whole winter scarcely a single ship had succeeded in making the crossing to the island, and no one could get any news whatsoever from other lands’ (Gerald of Wales, The history and topography of Ireland, 1171-2) ‘Very bad weather this year, which killed the better part of the cattle of Ireland.’ (1172: Francis Ludlow) It is said that these extraordinary examples of bad weather over Ireland between 1171-1172 prevented the ships sent by England’s Henry II from crossing the sea and bringing supplies to the people of Ireland! This poor climate killed nearly all the cattle and generated a famine due to Ireland being completely cut-off from the outside world. Again, a similar situation is seen during 1471: 'Showers of hail fell each side of Beltaine [1 May], with lightning and thunders, destroying much blossom and beans and fruits in all parts of Ireland where they fell. One of these showers, in the east, had stones two or three inches long, which made large wounds on the people they struck and destroyed…and a dog in Mag Trega [Moytra, a plain in Co. Longford] and about Cluain Lis Beci [near Rathowen, Co. Westmeath] and in every place it visited. There was another, in the north, which did much damage in Moylurg [in Co. Roscommon] and at the monastery of Boyle [also Co. Roscommon]; and a boat could have floated over the floor of the great church of the monks, as we have heard from the folk of that place.' (Annals of Connacht – 1471) (18) It is interesting to note that England in 1086 supported a historically small population of just under two million people, which, by extrapolation, implies that Ireland's population was less than 0.75 million and quite possibly less than 0.5 million. Of course, this would dramatically increase with subsequent Anglo-Norman and English migration to the island – but an increase in population does not necessarily solve the inherent problems of living in a particular area when religious superstition, ignorance of science and rigid feudal conformity prevent any substantive shift in socio-economy development. Due to this tendency toward cultural conservatism – the people of Ireland spent hundreds of years simply ‘repeating’ cycles of existence that possessed no inherent capability of transforming society so that the ‘unexpected’ could be prevented from causing the usual level of devastation of death and destruction through forward planning. As religious thinking dominated European Medieval societies, the Irish answer to continuous and life-threatening calamity was that ‘perhaps God will not do this again.’ Although none of this is unique to Ireland, Ireland does appear to be positioned to receive particularly bad weather – or at least the climate that prevailed during the last one-thousand-years was particularly destructive. Obviously, all this taken together does suggest a relatively high mortality rate for medieval Ireland. In Eire today, according to UN Reports – Eire's mortality rate stands at just ‘2.201 - or 2 infant deaths occur at or near birth in every one-thousand births. As ‘birthing’ is a very dangerous process, women often die from the exertions and inevitable medical complications. A child within Medieval Europe had to survive birth, and then grow strong enough to reach safety usually marked as 10-years-old. This process involved avoiding abusive adults (as children were viewed as being ‘inherently’ evil and requiring regular purgatory beatings), finding adults that protected them whilst avoiding dangerous illnesses – or recovering from said illnesses once caught! Obviously, ‘class’ did matter, with working-class children working in dangerous factory environments from the age of 5-years-old, whilst their minds and bodies were systematically abused by adults. Aristocratic families, however, sired children designed to inherit noble titles, become well educated and marry well so that their dominant social system could continue uninterrupted. This latter background is the world Katherine FitzGerald was born into. (19) Burke’s Irish Family Records confirms the existence of the mother and father of the Old Countess (and by implication - of Katherine FitzGerald herself), and has this to say about the latter ‘John Fitzgerald (1482-1553) - of Dromana, 2nd Lord of Decies’: ‘John fitzGarret FITZGERALD Suffix: of Dromana [Lord of the Decies] Prefix: Baron 1 Sex: M Death: 17 APR 1583 1 Note: 2 Ormonde and the lord deputy, Sir William Fitzwilliam, marched on Munster, and put Desmond"s garrison at Derrinlaur Castle to the sword. Desmond submitted at Cork on 2 September, handing over his estates to trustees. Sir Henry Sidney marched on Munster in 1575, and affairs seemed to promise an early restoration of order. But Fitzmaurice had fled to Brittany in company with other leading Geraldines, John Fitzgerald, Seneschal of Imokilly, who had held Ballymartyr against Sidney in 1567, and Edmund Fitzgibbon, the son of the White Knight who had been attainted in 1571. In 1575 the castle, then called the castle of Ballymartyr, was garrisoned by John Fitzgerald, Seneschal of Imokilly, but was attacked by the Lord-Deputy Sidney and his forces, aided by 200 of the citizens of Cork, who, after a protracted and vigorous defence, compelled the garrison to surrender, and Fitzgerald narrowly escaped by flight. The Seneschal of Imokilly surrendered on 14 June 1583. After his submission, he acted loyally, but his lands excited envy and he was arrested in 1587, and died in Dublin Castle. Father: Garret (Gerot, Gerald) Mor fitzJames FITZGERALD Mother: Margaret BURKE Marriage 1 Ellen FITZGIBBON’ Given that the mother of Katherine FitzGerald was ‘Ellen FitzGibbon’ (1490-1560) - it is important to assess the possibility of realistic birthdates. If Katherine FitzGerald died in 1604 and was 140-years-old, then this suggests a birthdate of ‘1464’. Another death-date suggested for Katherine FitzGerald is 1614 – which would suggest a birth-date of 1474 if she was 140-years old at her demise. There is a definite problem with the ‘140-years’ assumption for each of these dates as her mother - Ellen FitzGibbon - was born until ‘1490’ according to Irish records. As it is impossible for a ‘daughter’ to be born before her ‘mother’ - this issue requires further investigation. As the age of consent was 12-years-old in England (and her Overseas Possessions) at this time, the earliest legal date she could have married Sir John Fitzgerald is ‘1502’. If Katherine FitzGerald was born in 1503 and died in 1604, then she would have been 101-years-old. If her birth-date was ‘1503’ and her death-date was instead ‘1614’ - then Katherine FitzGerald would have been 111-years-old at the time of her death. The next logical step in this process is to provide a sliding-scale to the calculations as to the age that her mother - Ellen FitzGibbon – gave birth to her daughter – Katherine FitzGerald. As the scale advances upwards through her mother’s age - the over-all age of Katherine FitzGerald correspondently decreases. Some records suggest that Katherine FitzGerald was born in 1509 – when her mother was 19-years-old – and that she died in 1604 aged 95-96-years-old. However, if the death-date happens to be ‘1614’ then Katherine FitzGerald would have been 105-106-years-old at her death. It is suggested that her mother married twice, firstly in 1508 (when she was 18-years-old), and secondly in 1515 (when she was 25-years-old). Why this was the case is difficult to ascertain, the details of both marriages are as follows: First Marriage - Ellen FitzGibbon (1490-1560) to John Fitzgerald (1482-1553) - of Dromana, 2nd Lord of Decies Married 1508 (18-years-old). Her children are as follows: Katherine Fitzgerald (1509-1604) - Countess of Desmond – Aged 95-years-old at death. Gerald McShane FitzGerald (1510-1553) - of Dromana, 3rd Lord of Decies – Aged 71-years-old at death. Second Marriage – 1515 of Ellen FitzGibbon (1490-1560) to John FitzJohn Barry (1480-1534) - 13th Lord Barry Married 1515 (25-years-old). Her Children are as follows: John FitzJohn Barry (1517-1553) - 1st Viscount Buttevant – Aged 36-years-old at death. Edmund FitzJohn Barry (1520-1556) 2nd Viscount Buttevant - Aged 36-years-old at death. James Fitzjohn Barry (1523-1557) 3rd Viscount Buttevant – Aged 34-years-old at death. An Encyclopaedia regarding prominent women agrees that the father of Katherine FitzGerald was John Fitzgerald of Dromana, 2nd Lord of Decies (1482-1553) - but makes no mention of her mother ‘Ellen FitzGibbon’. It does say, however that Katherine FitzGerald was the second wife of Thomas Fitzgerald, 12th earl of Desmond and sired him a daughter – giving the dates of Katherine FitzGerald as being ‘1500-1604’ and her age at death as being ‘104-years-old'! (20) Regarding the husband of Katherine FitzGerald - Thomas FitzThomas FitzGerald - 11th Earl of Desmond – it is not clear what happened to his first wife (Shela MacCarthy ) who seems to disappear from the historical record at some point between 1505 and 1529. He then married Katherine FitzGerald in 1530. The Cracroft Peerage Page states: ‘Thomas FitzThomas [FitzGerald], 11th Earl of Desmond born 1454 mar. (1) Shela MacCarthy (d. after 1505), dau. of Cormac "Laidir" McTeige MacCarthy, Lord of Muskerrym by his wife Mary FitzMaurice, dau. of Edmond [FitzMaurice], Baron of Kerry and Lixnaw children by first wife 1. Hon Maurice FitzThomas FitzGerald (dvp. from the plague Dec 1529; bur. at Jerpoint, co. Kilkenny), mar. his first cousin Joan FitzGibbon, dau. of John FitzMaurice FitzGibbon, the White Knight, son of Maurice "Mor" FitzGibbon, the White Knight, by his wife Ellice FitzGerald, widow of Thomas FitzJames [FitzGerald], 7th Earl of Desmond, and had issue: 1a. James FitzMaurice FitzGerald, later 12th Earl of Desmond mar. (2) his first cousin once removed Catherine FitzGerald, the celebrated "Old Countess of Desmond" (b. c. 1464; dspm. 1604), dau. of John FitzGerald, of Dromana, Lord of the Decies (by his wife Ellen FitzGibbon, dau. of John FitzGibbon, the White Knight), son and heir of Gerald "Mor" FitzJames FitzGerald, 2nd son of James [FitzGerald], 6th Earl of Desmond died 1534 (bur. at Youghal) suc. by Grandson.’ Grandson.’ This official peerage record uses the Latin term ‘Decessit Sine Prole Mascula’ (dspm) or ‘Died without Male Issue’ - whilst reiterating the claim that Katherine FitzGerald lived to 140-years-old (1464-1604)! Perhaps the year ‘1464’ is apocryphal in this instance - since ‘1464’ was a leap year and is one of eight years (CE) to contain each Roman numeral once - since it is written as ‘MCDLXIV’! Being a member of the aristocracy, ample evidence exists that confirms the presence of Katherine FitzGerald in the world. Given the meandering and snake-like nature of the genealogical data there is the continuous problem of ‘error’, ‘repetition’ and ‘mistaken identity’, not to mention outright ‘fraud’ and deliberate attempts at ‘deception’. Carefully gathering the evidence to together it is certain that Katherine FitzGerald a) existed – as Katherine Fitzgerald was definitely the ‘recorded’ Countess of Desmond, was also definitely the daughter of Sir John Fitzgerald, 2nd Lord Decies, and Ellen FitzGibbon, who in turn was the daughter of John FitzGibbon, the 9th White Knight, b) she was an Irish aristocrat who is recorded as marrying Thomas FitzThomas Fitzgerald, [11th] Earl of Desmond – both of whom sired a daughter who married Philip Barry Oge. After Thomas – her husband - died in 1534, the Old Countess would spend the rest of her life at the ancestral Inchiquin Castle, County Cork (near the South-coast of Eire, a few miles west of Youghal) - where would eventually encounter Sir Walter Raleigh. Indeed, according to Raleigh, he met the Old Countess personally when he participated in the Munster plantation in the late 1580s. After conversing with her, he discovered that she was married during Edward IV's reign, which ended in 1483. The problem with this narrative is that Thomas FitzThomas FitzGerald's first wife – Sheila MacCarthy – the daughter of Cormac Laidir McTeige MacCarthy, Lord of Muskery, was still alive in June 1505 - indicating that Katherine FitzGerald could not have married the Earl of Desmond during Edward IV's reign, and c) it is universally agreed that Katherine FitzGerald lived to an extraordinary age (dying in 1604) at a time within Eire that the average lifespan was just 31-years! The question historians strive to address is just how long that life was. The evidence is arranged such that the tantalising ideal that she was in fact ‘140-years-old’ is always present. Indeed, this is not a contrived or even deliberate outcome, but is merely inherent within structure of the story and texture of the details. Even if she was ‘95-years-old' - assumed by modern historians – then this is incredible in and of itself and appears almost as implausible as living to be ‘140-years-old'! What is odd (and wondrous) is the number of times the birth-dates for the ‘Old Countess’ are given as ‘1464-1604’ in what are otherwise considered ‘authoritative’ and ‘trustworthy’ historical and academic texts! As Katherine FitzGerald’s daughter – Katherine’ - married Philip Barry Oge, it would be interesting to research whether that genealogical line still exists. Cracroft Peerage quoted in the above text and Referenced below) states that ‘"Old Countess of Desmond" (b. c. 1464; dspm. 1604)’. Although I have explained the Latin-term ‘dspm’ above, I have left the appellation of ‘b. C.’ for this concluding section. If Katherine FitzGerald lived between ‘1464-1604 – then most of the established biography attributed to her is wrong and at least 50-years out of sync with the rest of her life. All the events described from her marriage onwards needs to have occurred 50-years earlier (so that her marriage took place around 1480). It is an interesting possibility to consider that the received biography is somehow incorrect. The history books inform us that there were indeed a number of women named ‘Katherine FitzGerald’ living in the 1400s and 1500s, either by birth or marriage. In this case, the evidence would shift back to a birth-date of ‘1464’. This is where the unusual abbreviation of ‘b. C.’ makes an entry as it is affixed in-front of the birth-date of ‘1464’ in the biographical data associated with Katherine FitzGerald. It does not stand for ‘Before Christ’ (which is written differently as either ‘BC’ or ‘bc’, etc, and affixed after or following a date). The ‘b. C.’ in question stands for ‘before the congregation’ - and suggests that the original compilers of these heraldic lists had accessed some type of Church document which ‘supports’ a birth-year of ‘1464’ for Katherine FitzGerald. (21) Footnotes: 1) THOMAS PARR (1483-1635 CE) – OLDEST MAN IN ENGLAND - By Adrian Chan-Wyles - (Accessed 18.10.2021) 2) Catherine Fitzgerald as the Old Countess of Desmond - By Niall C.E.J. O’Brien - (Accessed 17.10.2021) http://celtic2realms-medievalnews.blogspot.com/2015/01/catherine-fitzgerald-as-old-countess-of.html 3) Longevity gene' responsible for more efficient DNA repair - (Accessed 16.10.2021) 4) Life expectancy gap between rich and poor widens - (Accessed 16.10.2021) 5) Childbirth in Medieval and Tudor Times by Sarah Bryson - (Accessed 15.10.2021) 6) Am I Too Old to Have Kids? What to Know About Fertility and Aging - (Accessed 14.10.2021) 7) Oldest Women with Natural Pregnancies - (Accessed 14.10.2021) 8) Renaissance childbirth - (Accessed 13.10.2021) 9) Catherine (née FitzGerald), Countess of Desmond - (circa 1504-1604), Centenarian; wife of 11th Earl of Desmond - Sitter associated with 4 portraits - (Accessed 12.10.2021) 10) Who's who? Mystery at the gallery - By Mary Ireland - (Accessed 11.10.2021) 11) KATHERINE FITZGERALD, COUNTESS OF DESMOND - IRISH NOBLEWOMAN - (Accessed 10.10.2021) 12) The Old Countess of Desmond. An Inquiry: Did She Seek Redress at the Court of Queen Elizabeth, as Recorded in the Journal of Robert Sydney, Earl of Leycester? And Did She Ever Sit for Her Portrait - By Richard Sainthill - (Accessed 18.10.2021) 13) Dublin Review – February – 1862 - (Accessed 14.10.2021) 14) Anne and the Cholmondeley dilemma - (Accessed 15.10.2021) 15) Last of the Earls of Desmond - (Accessed 17.10.2021) 16) HEALTH IN ANCIENT EGYPT - (Accessed 17.10.2021) 17) Lady Catherine Fitzgerald, "Countess of Desmond" Genealogy - (Accessed 11.10.2021) 18) Climate, disease and society in late-medieval Ireland - Bruce M.S. Campbell and Francis Ludlow - (Accessed 14.10.2021) 19) Ireland Infant Mortality Rate 1950-2021 - (Accessed 18.10.2021) 20) Fitzgerald, Katherine (C. 1500–1604) - (Accessed 11.11.2021) 21) Genealogical Abbreviations and Latin Terms A to F (National Institute) - (Accessed 16.10.2021) Further Reading:
Immortality has not really got anything to do with a long life lived over many years. A genuine Daoist must a) perceive the eternal moment, and b) integrate with that insight. As perception folds in on itself at the point of physical death – this is the only immortality that truly matters! We dissolve into the ‘eternal moment’ - this is the genuine ‘immortality’! The side-effects of taking the journey that leads to this insight involves the ‘neidan’ self-discipline and the pursuance of psychological and physical science that comprises ‘Daoist’ methodology. In this case, the functionality of the mind and body is brought to a maximised frequency whereby a robust health and a certain sense of longevity are definitely incorporated. Although this type of immortality is important – it is not the most favoured or elaborate of those available. We may give-up our bodies at the point of death and merge with the timeless universe – or we may remain in our no longer functioning bodies which retain the upright, seated meditation position. In this case, the physical is ‘dead’ in one sense, and yet ‘living’ in another – again, this is a matter of ‘frequency’ of manifestation. Furthermore, there are people who possess bodies that are permanently ill or injured (for various reasons), and yet they are considered ‘immortal’ by their teachers. This being the case, health is not always the complete lack of illness, injury or disability, and is reliant upon what the mind is able to ‘perceive’ rather than the state of the cells of the physical body. Such insight carries with it the power to revitalise the cellular structure of the human-body even if it is carrying an illness, injury or disability. The point is that life will improve for such successful aspirants and they will certainly live longer than if they had never trained. Immortality, of course, is linked to the purification of insight rather than any notions of physical purity. Physical purity does not exist as the body certainly does not last forever – but forever is a very long time!
A number of my academic colleagues in Mainland China have discussed with me the necessity for the formation of a ‘new’ type of Daoism. The point of this is to move away from the pointless ‘dead-ends’ of superstitious teachings and empower Daoist practitioners with the most effective and efficient medicalised training programmes available. Without a shadow of a doubt, this redesigning will have to accommodate the rigours of modern medical science just as it should retain the elements of traditional Chinese thinking that was premised upon logic, practice, results and replication of those results. Indeed, there is much existing within Daoist (and TCM) methodology that is both ancient in construction and highly effective in practice! Of course, something of a ground-breaking foundation already exists within the teachings of the Qianfeng School of Beijing where its founder – Zhao Bichen (1860-1942) - was able to integrate Western medical science with tradition Daoist and TCM concepts. This modified the Quanzhen, Longmen and Wu Liu Daoist lineages and created a Daoist methodology that educated Chinese people about Western thinking – and Westerners about Chinese thinkers! What many Westerners do not know is that Zhao Bichen often replaced or enhanced a traditional Chinese Daoist term with its exact Western (biological) designate – for instance, for the ‘Ancestral Cavity’ (祖窍 - Zu Qiao) - Zhao Bichen would add the Chinese translation of the Western anatomical term ‘centre of the forehead’. Within his Daoist manuals (see: ‘Taoist Yoga’ translated by Charles Luk as an example), the Western concepts of the ‘centre of the brain’ is used to correspond to the ‘mud pill’ (泥丸 - Ni Wan) and the ‘solar plexus’ is used to describe the ‘middle dan tian’ ((中丹田 - Zhong Nei Dan), etc. All these terms are in Chinese translation and are presented alongside their traditional Chinese equivalent. When Zhao Bichen set about compiling an integrated glossary of Daoist and Western anatomical terms in the early 20th century, such phrases as ‘centre of the forehead’ was completely alien for all but the most well-travelled and well educated of Chinese people of the time. A point that has to be understood is that most traditional Daoist terms were considered ‘obscure’ even for native Chinese-speakers – as the techniques and methods were closely guarded through the descriptive use of metaphor and allegory. Zhao Bichen sought to ‘align’ formerly complicated Daoist terms with regular (modern) terms so that an understanding between the two cultures could be built, and misunderstanding ‘educated out’ of the process of communication. Zhao Bichen was also following the instructions of his two traditional Daoist Teachers who advised him to abandon the exclusivity usually associated with Daoist instruction, and teach any who asked. To modernise and strengthen China, Zhao Bichen decided to align the wisdom of ancient China with the highly effective thinking that formed the foundation of Western medical understanding. Since 1949, the literacy rates in China have sky-rocketed and many modern Chinese readers are now able to fully understand the Western medical terms employed by Zhao Bichen. This allows the average person in China to work backwards into the traditional Daoist codes and decipher the hidden meaning contained inside! The fruits of this labour are experienced by myself when I translate the Chinese-language blog posts of Master Zhao Ming Wang into English. Not only is my task made easier by the integration of Eastern and Western thinking, but this also gives me a firm theoretical understanding when purely ancient Chinese terms are introduced!
Dear Alex Very good! There is a point of awareness (and being) where 'to possess sexual desire' is no different to 'not possessing sexual desire'. Both states of being arise from the same fertile ground of non-perception (and 'non-being') and emerge into the material world of 'being' and take their proper place within the dialectical patterns (and cycles) that define human existence. Each has its place and only differ (not in essence but) in function. In the meantime, we can 'retain' sexual essence to build our own health and longevity - or we can 'emit' our sexual essence and contribute to building the body of a 'new' human in the womb! A third-option is emitting sexual essence for personal pleasure - which although enjoyable - runs the risks of weakening our own health and shortening our own longevity. At least this is the standard Daoist viewpoint. Another Daoist practice is that a man can 'absorb' the sexual essence of the woman - and benefit from sexual intercourse providing he does not 'emit' during the process. Even Zhao Bichen's manual ('Taoist Yoga') advises the elderly practitioners to 'stimulate' the genitalia on a daily basis to encourage and build sexual vigour - although this stops short of 'emitting'. The sexual essence must be both 'stimulated' and 'absorbed' back into the bodily system.
|
AuthorAdrian Chan-Wyles (內丹 - Shi Da Dao) - Qianfeng Lineage: Zhao Bichen (1860-1942), Charles Luk (1898-1978) and Richard Hunn (1949-2006). Acknowledges Master Zhao Ming Wang (赵明旺) of Beijing as the ONLY Lineage Head of the Zhao Family Lineage of Qianfeng Daoism in China and the world. Archives
February 2024
|