janilye on FamilyTreeCircles - journals

janilye on Family Tree Circles

sort: Date Alphabetical
view: full | list

Journals and Posts


Showing: (clear)
Category: Interest

All the kings and Queens since William 1st

Horrible Histories has found an easy way to remember all the Kings and Queens of England, just click on This song it's so much more fun!

Here are the lyrics:-
I'm William the Conqueror
My enemies stood no chance
They call me the first English king
Although I come from France

1066, the Domesday book
I gave to history
So fat, on death my body burst
But enough about me

To help remember all your kings
I've come up with this song
A simple rhyme and ditty
For you all to sing along!

Oh! William!
(Bit short, init? We need more kings. Who came next?)

William second, cheeks were red
Killed out hunting, so it's said
I took over, Henry one
That's my next eldest son

Then King Stephen, it's true, check it!
Hi, Henry two, killed Thomas Beckett
Richard Lionheart? That's right!
Always spoiling for a fight

Oh, King John! What a disaster!
Rule restrained by Magna Carta!

William, William, Henry, Stephen
Henry, Richard, John, oi!
Time for my mate, King Henry eight
To take up this song

Henry three built the abbey
Ed one hated Scots
A red hot poker killed Ed two
That must have hurt him lots!

Edward third was a chivalry nerd
Began the hundred years war
Then Richard two was king, aged ten
Then Henry, yes one more!

King Henry four, plots galore
Not least from Henry five, moi
I killed ten score at Agincourt
Then Henry six arrived!

Edward four, Edward five
Richard the third, he's bad
'Cause he fought wars with Henry seventh
First Tudor and my dad

So Henry eight, I was great
Six wives, two were beheaded
Edward the sixth came next, but he died young
And so my dreaded
Daughter Mary ruled, so scary
Then along came... me!
I'm Liz the first, I had no kids
So Tudors RIP!

William, William, Henry, Stephen
Henry, Richard, John, oi!
Henry, Ed, Ed, Ed, Rich two
Then three more Henrys join our song!
Edward, Edward, Rich the third
Henry, Henry, Ed again
Mary one, good Queen Liz
That's me! Time for more men!

James six of Scotland next
Is English James the first, he led
Then Stuarts ruled, so Charles the first
The one who lost his head

No monarchy until came me,
Charles two, I liked to party
King Jimmy two was scary, oooh!
Then Mary was a smarty

She ruled with Will, their shoes were filled
By sourpuss Queen Anne Gloria
And so from then, you were ruled by men
Till along came Queen Victoria!

William, William, Henry, Stephen
Henry, Richard, John, oi!
Henry, Ed, Ed, Ed, Rich two
Then three more Henrys join our song!
Edward, Edward, Rich the third
Henry, Henry, Ed again
Mary one, good Queen liz
Jimmy, Charles and Charles and then
Jim, Will, Mary, Anne Gloria
Still to come, it's Queen Victoria!

And so began the Hanover gang
George one and George two... grim!
Then George the third was quite absurd
Till I replaced old him

King George the fourth and known henceforth
As angry, fat and cross... hang on!
It's true you beat Napoleon
But were mostly a dead loss... bang on!

Old William four was a sailor... ahoy!
That's nearly the end of the storya
As onto the scene comes the best loved queen
Hail to Queen Victoria!

William, William, Henry, Stephen
Henry, Richard, John, oi!
Henry, Ed, Ed, Ed, Rich two
Then three more Henrys join our song!
Edward, Edward, Rich the third
Henry, Henry, Ed again
Mary one, good Queen Liz
Jimmy, Charles and Charles and then
Jim, Will, Mary, Anne Gloria
George, George, George, George
Will, Victoria!
Victoria!

(I ruled for sixty four years, you know!)

Ed seven, George five
Then Ed, George sixth
Liz two then reigned and how!
And so our famous monarch song
Is brought right up to now! Oh!

William, William, Henry, Stephen
Henry, Richard, John, oi!
Henry, Ed, Ed, Ed, Rich two
Then three more Henrys join our song!
Edward, Edward, Rich the third
Henry, Henry, Ed again
Mary one, good Queen Liz
Jimmy, Charles and Charles and then
Jim, Will, Mary, Anne Gloria
George, George, George, George
Will, Victoria!
Edward, George, Edward, George six
And Queen Liz two completes the mix!

That's all the English kings and queens
Since William first that there have been!




1066 King William the Conqueror 1066-1087

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1087 King William Rufus (son of William) 1087-1100

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1100 King Henry I (William Rufus brother) 1100-1135

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1135 King Stephen (nephew of Henry I) 1135-1154

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1154 King Henry II (grandson of Henry I) 1154-1189

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1189 King Richard I (third son of Henry II) 1189-1199

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1199 King John (fifth son of Henry II) 1199-1216

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1216 King Henry III (son of John) 1216-1272

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1272 King Edward I (son of Henry III) 1272-1307

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1307 King Edward II (son of Edward I) 1307-1327

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1327 King Edward III (son of Edward II) 1327-1377

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1377 King Richard II (grandson of Edward III, son of the Black Prince) 1377-1399

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1399 King Henry IV (grandson of Edward III, son of John of Gaunt) 1399-1413

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1413 King Henry V (son of Henry IV) 1413-1422

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1422 King Henry VI (son of Henry V) 1422-1461

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1461 King Edward IV ( youngest son of Edward III ) 1461-1483

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1483 King Richard III (uncle of Edward V) 1483-1485

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1485 Henry VII (grandson of Henry V) 1485-1509

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1509 Henry VIII ( son of Henry VII)
1509-1547

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1547 Edward V (Henry's son by Jane Seymour) 1547-1553

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1553 Mary (Henry's daughter by Queen Katherine of Aragon) 1553-1558

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1558 Elizabeth I (Henry's daughter by Anne Boleyn) 1558-1603

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1603 James I (great-great-grandson of Henry VII) 1603-1625

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1625 Charles I (second son of James) 1625-1649

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1649 The Commonwealth under the Cromwell rule 1649 - 1659

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1660 Charles II (oldest son of Charles I) 1660-1685

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1685 James II (brother of Charles II) 1685-1688

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1689 William of Orange (grandson of Charles I) and Mary (daughter of James II) 1689-1694

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1694 William III - Ruled alone after death of Mary 1694 - 1702

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1702 Anne (sister of Mary)
1702-1714

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1714 George I (great-grandson of James I) 1714-1727

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1727 George II (son of George I) 1727-1760

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1760 George III (grandson of George II) 1760-1820

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1820 George IV (son of George III)
1820-1830

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1830 William IV (brother of George IV)
1830-1837

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1837 Victoria (niece of William IV) 1837-1901

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1901 Edward VII (son of Victoria and Albert) 1901-1910

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1910 George V (second son of Edward VII) 1910-1936

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1936 Edward VIII (son of George V)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1936 George VI (second son of George V) 1936-1952

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1952 Elizabeth II (daughter of George VI)




I love Horrible Histories


Mine injuries and deaths Victoria

Another site for your favourites is the Victorian Mining Accident Index compiled by Dave Evans and presented by the Ballarat & District Genealogical Society. This is my way of introducing you to a most informative site. It isn't only these few John Smiths injured or killed in mining accidents, but 5,600 miners from the 1850s to the 1940s.

Smith, Jno
1888/09/13
Injured
Married, 33 Y. O.
Ballarat
Buninyong
(A.R.Sec.Mines)

Smith, John
1862/00/00
Killed
30 Y. O.
Accident drowned
Castlemaine
(Dig. Evans)

Smith, John
1885/09/12
Injured
Single, 21 Y. O.
Castlemaine
Tarrangower
(A.R.Sec.Mines)

Smith, John
1886/08/03
Killed
Married, 28 Y. O.
Sandhurst
Eaglehawk
(A.R.Sec.Mines)

Smith, John
1913/00/00
Injured
Ballarat
Wilkinson & Co Mine
(A.R.Sec.Mines)

Smith, John F.
1892/08/10
Killed
Compo
Sandhurst
Eaglehawk
(A.R.Sec.Mines)

Smith, Jonathon
1875/03/31
Killed
Married, 41 Y. O.
4
Injury in claim
Sandhurst
Sandhurst
(C.I.R.)(Dig. Evans)


This photograph below I took at a little town called Yapeen, Victoria last month December 2011.

I'm always filled with a mixture of excitement and suspicion when I see a John Smith.
I wasn't disappointed this time.

After I took the photo, (I swear there was not another living soul to be seen in this town) I went around to the Guildford Hotel.

As I was showing the photograph to a couple of the locals, this old man pipes up " He was me grand father!"

This is the excitement part.

"I'll have another beer and a beer for this man here too please". I order, as I fossick in my bag for pen and notepad.

"Tell me about him." I coax all smiles and pen poised.

" Well, it wasn't his real name," says my new found drinking partner.

"Oh! I'm not surprised. Most John Smith's were hiding", says pedantic know-it-all me. " What was his real name?" I ask excitement mounting.

"William", says my new friend as I order another two drinks.

"William what," I ask impatiently.

"William Smith!"

Suspicion finally kicks in but not before the laughter from my drinking partner and his friends.


Off Topic (1)

This site is essentially a family history site.

Often things posted 'off topic' are annoying when all we want to do is find the elusive ancestor or a record.

So... for all those who feel the need to share a thought an opinion or even an interesting website, which may have nothing to do with ancestry, or just want to get away from the endless search for a moment......

Since we have no chat room in here and we really don't want to send you packing.

Say it on this page.... Say what you like. Get it off your chest,

Keep it short!

keep it civilised!

Keep it clean!


132 comment(s), latest 7 months, 2 weeks ago

Did you Know?


12 comment(s), latest 6 years, 6 months ago

From INDIKA to MALDON

Now I know where Indika is!

Whilst walking down the main street of historic Maldon, in the central goldfields of Victoria, a Kombi van complete with herb garden and solar panels, pulled up and parked. Out of it came some gypsies. Hung up their trinkets to sell and proceeded to tell fortunes. Of course we went to look at the lovely trinkets;

"Where are these from?"

"Indika" answers one of the gypsies.

"Where is that?'

"indika" he says again'

SILENCE

" Ohhhhhhhhhh in the car!"

The above story appeared in the Tarrangower Times
Val Markham of Tarrangower Times snapped the pic.


The Laws Of Genealogy (updated by our members)

1. The document containing evidence of the missing link in your research has been lost due to fire, flood or war.

2. The keeper of the vital records you need will just have had an argument with a previous genealogist.

3. Your great, great grandfather's obituary states that he died leaving no issue.

4. The town clerk you wrote in desperation, and finally convinced to give to you the information you need, can't write legibly, and doesn't have a copying machine.

5. The will you need is in the safe on board the "Titanic."

6. The spelling of your European ancestor's name bears no relationship to its current spelling or pronunciation.

7. Copies of old newspapers have holes which only occur on last names.

8. No one in your family tree ever did anything noteworthy, they always
rented property, never sued, never went to gaol or were never named in anyone's will.

9. You learned that great aunt Matilda's executor just sold her life's
collection of family genealogical materials to a flea market dealer.

10. Yours is the ONLY last name not found among the three billion in the world-famous Mormon archives in Salt Lake City.

11. Ink fades and paper deteriorates at a rate inversely proportional to the value of the data recorded.

12. The 37 volume, 16,000 page history of your county of origin isn't
indexed.

13. The critical link in your family tree is named "Smith."

14. No matter how large the collection of special records, the one you are searching for is NEVER there!

15. You finally send away for that necessary certificate, and your aunt tells you she's had the original in a box under her bed for years.

16. The box of family photographs, you found in uncle Edgar's house after he died, have no names or dates on them

17. Your aunt can remember exactly how many times you missed sending her a birthday card, but not why her father went in gaol.

18. Everyone that shares your last name, but is not related is listed in great detail, your ancestor has nothing.

19. The family Bible that contains all the names you are researching was given to a person who doesn't care who any of his relatives are, and either misplaced, sold at a garage sale, or gave away the family Bible to his neighbor who is collecting Bibles to be sent to a mission in a non-English speaking nation.

20. The elderly great-aunt who could help you fill in the missing pieces says, "I don't believe in dredging up the past" and changes the subject - again.




Some of the above laws I found in The Hawkesbury Crier
of June 2006 (archived) author is unknown
The rest have been added by Family Tree Circle members


43 comment(s), latest 1 year, 2 months ago

Frequently asked Questions about Heraldry

Answered by The Heraldry & Genealogy Society of Canberra Inc.

Written by Administrator
Saturday, 04 December 2010 16:38

Q.1 What does the word 'Arms' mean in the context of heraldry?

A. The word 'Arms' in the heraldic context (as in 'coat of Arms') refers to a distinctive design worn on a knight's shield, his banner, and elsewhere on his clothing that enabled him to be identified in battle. A knight in full armor, including a face-covering helmet, was difficult to identify without these distinctive insignia. A coat of Arms is depicted on a shield, referring to the origin of the term.

Q.1 How did the term 'coat of Arms' originate and what does it mean?

A. The term 'coat of Arms' is derived from the cloth garment or surcoat that a knight wore over his armor. On the front and back of the surcoat there would often be displayed the knight's arms. Originally the surcoat was full length, reaching almost to the ankles; it was sleeveless and was split at front and back to allow the material to hang freely when the wearer was riding his horse.

Q.2 What is the connection, if any, among heraldry, genealogy and family history?

A. Heraldry can be regarded as the root from which genealogy and family history grew and developed. This is because genealogical studies developed from the work of Heralds in recording pedigrees in order to determine lines of succession and the rights of individuals to inherit arms. All modern library systems recognise this and regard genealogy and heraldry as two faces of the same genre; and similarly, all booksellers group the two together, usually in the reference section.

Q.3 Is there a family or clan coat of Arms, and can all people with the same surname use the same arms?

A. NO. There is no such thing as a coat of Arms for a family, clan or surname. A coat of Arms is a visual mark of identity of an individual. There is an ancient heraldic principle which states that each person's coat of Arms is unique to that individual and cannot be used by anybody else. In Scotland, a Chief of a Clan has his or her personal coat of Arms that belongs to that individual alone. A member of the clan or a person with the same surname may, with the Lord Lyon's approval, have a variation or a ?differenced? version of the Chief's Arms by way of different tinctures (colours), bordures or other devices to make the Arms unique to the individual seeking Arms. A clan member may also use the clan badge consisting of the Chief's ?crest? (see next Q.4) within a belt and buckle design containing the Chief's motto.

Q.4 Is the crest the same thing as a coat of Arms?

A. No. The word ?crest? is often misused, particularly by the popular press, as a general overall description for a coat of Arms. The word ?crest? has the same meaning in heraldry as in the dictionary, namely ?on the top of? as in ?crest of a wave? or ?crest of the hill? or a Cockatoo's crest. In heraldry it refers to the three-dimensional object on top of the helmet, which itself is on top of the shield on which the Arms are shown. The Arms themselves are depicted on the shield. The shield is the essential part of a coat of Arms. Without it the device may be more correctly called a badge, emblem or a logo.

Q.5 Is the 'Bar Sinister' a mark of illegitimacy?

A. In heraldry there is no such thing as the 'bar sinister'. When people talk about the 'bar sinister' they are referring to the couped (cut of at both ends) bendlet sinister. A bendlet sinister extends from the top left (sinister) to the bottom right of the shield. This is just one of the many marks of cadency to differentiate one coat of arms from another and does not necessarily mean illegitimacy. The origin of the 'bar sinister' may have come from the French 'barre' which is always in the sinister position, so the term 'bar sinister' is incorrect and is an example of heraldic tautology.

Q.6 Why are there marks of illegitimacy?

A. Where marks of illegitimacy were used, they were not used to denote punishment or disgrace. They were used simply to denote that the illegitimate child (particularly if he were a first born male) could not inherit his father's arms unchanged. He could carry his father's arms provided they were so marked to indicate that he was establishing a separate branch of the family without any right of succession to the unchanged arms. Some of the illegitimate sons of King Charles II bore the Royal Arms debruised by a 'baton sinister', as do the illegitimate male descendants of King William IV. (The term 'debruised' indicates a charge in front of or obscuring another).

Q.7 Why is the description of coats of Arms made in what seems to be an arcane or technical language instead of plain English so that everyone can understand it?

A. Blazon, which is the technical term for describing the details of a coat of Arms, evolved so that heralds, in whatever country they may be, could describe a coat of Arms precisely, clearly and briefly. The technical terms in a blazon are in Norman French, reflecting their origin. Although blazon may seem strange to the uninitiated, it performs the same function that musical notation does on a sheet of music enabling the musician to reproduce sounds the way the composer intended. Blazon allows the heraldic artist to reproduce accurately the design on the shield as the herald intended. The use of plain English, by way of contrast, would tend to be verbose and open to widely different interpretations thereby destroying the integrity of the original design.

Q.8 Do you have to pronounce heraldic terms (blazon) with a French accent?

A. No. Blazonry in English is pronounced phonetically. Gules (red) is pronounced with a hard 'G', Argent (silver) is ar-gent and so on.

Q.9 Why do heralds confuse people by calling the right side of the shield sinister, which means left, and the left side dexter which means right?

A. The sides of the shield (arms) are described from the point of the armiger standing behind his shield. Therefore the armiger's right is the viewer's left and his left is the viewer's right.

Q.10 Are the colours used in heraldry fixed in any way and do they have any particular significance?

A. No. There are no fixed shades in heraldry. The blazon (description) of a coat of Arms provides the colours (tinctures) as Gules (red), Azure (blue), Sable (black), Vert (green), Purpure (purple). There are two metals, namely Or (gold) and Argent (silver). Other colours are called stains and consist of Murrey (mulberry) , Tenne (orange), and Sanguine (blood red). Sometimes other stains are encountered such as Celestial azure (sky blue) and Carnation ('skin' tone). It is up to the heraldic artist to decide upon the shade he or she thinks is most appropriate for the whole design.

Q.11 Who can have a coat of Arms?

A. In Australia there is no heraldic authority to administer and regulate Arms so there is a legal vacuum as to which individuals or groups are eligible to apply for arms. In practice any adult, male or female, may have a coat of arms granted to them by an officially recognised overseas heraldic authority (which would be authentic), or may self-assume arms (which would not be authentic). (See also below).

Q.12 How and where do I apply for a coat of Arms?

Australians who can prove they are of English descent may apply, by way of a petition, to the English College of Arms in London; those of Scottish ancestry to the Court of the Lord Lyon King of Arms in Edinburgh; and those of Irish ancestry to the Chief Herald of Ireland in Dublin. Australians may also apply for registration of arms by the South African Bureau of Heraldry.

Q.13 Can a person who is not of English, Scottish or Irish ancestry apply for Arms?

A. Yes, if they are an Australian citizen. They can apply to the English College of Arms for a grant of Arms as that organisation asserts it has the right to grant Arms to any of Her Majesty's subjects where there is no indigenous heraldic body in the Commonwealth country in which they reside and where the Queen is still Head of State.

Q.14 Can anyone who is descended from someone who had a coat of Arms use it?

A. No. A coat of Arms belongs to, and is unique to, an individual at any one time. For a person to have the right to a coat of Arms they must either have it granted to them or be descended in a legitimate line of descent from a person to whom Arms were granted or confirmed in the past. As a general rule the Arms pass from the original grantee to his eldest son and continue on to the next eldest son in each succeeding generation. In Scotland a person, depending on their familial relationship and surname, may apply for a ?differenced? version of a particular coat of Arms. (See Q.3 above).

Q.15 I have located ?my? coat of Arms on the Internet. Can I use it?

A. No. Unfortunately many websites which purport to show Arms belonging to a particular name are misleading and completely unauthentic. Usually the Arms shown are those of prominent people or the Chief of a Clan. To use these Arms as though they are yours is akin to fraud. It is no different to stealing another person's passport or driver's licence and using or passing it off as your own.

Q.16 I have bought ?my? coat of Arms from a heraldic shop. Is it authentic and can I display and use it?

A. NO, in so far as using the Arms as though they are yours (See Q.15 above). However, tt is important to note the distinction between the display of Arms and the use of Arms. A person may purchase a copy of the Arms, for display purposes only, of his or her school, college, university, institution or organisation as a means of showing their association or allegiance. The display of Arms as distinct from using them is perfectly legitimate as it can be regarded as a souvenir.

Q.17 What is the relevance of heraldry in the 21st Century?

A. There are several possible reasons why this question is asked. Many people are completely unaware that heraldry is all around them and continues to be a part of their everyday life. The arms of the Nation, the State or Territory, the local municipal council, schools, universities, commercial concerns and other various organisations and associations are on buildings, on letterheads, legal documents and other artefacts, and help in their respective identification. This public display and use of arms is a manifestation of the various interests and loyalties that interact with one another and make up our pluralist society. The current use of logos by various organisations is an indication that a need for a visual symbol of identity is still important in the 21st Century. Heraldry can meet this need in a more timeless way that transcends quickly outdated fashions like logos, which tend to have short 'flavour of the month' lives.

Q.18 In modern society isn't the display and use of arms pretentious and rather snobbish?

A. No. It is most unfortunate that there is sometimes a suspicion that heraldry is somehow associated with snobbery. This attitude could also be a reason why many armigers (people entitled to bear Arms) are reluctant to openly display their armorial bearings in the belief that to do so would be seen as pretentious. Coats of Arms are visual symbols of identity; the use of Arms can only be considered pretentious if they were used without authority and deliberately used and displayed as if they were legitimate. It is interesting to note that the association of heraldry with snobbery coincided with the rise of the industrialist, merchant and middle classes during the latter part of the 18th Century and in the 19th Century which, in the main, assumed arms in an attempt to raise their social standing.

Q.19 I have a coat of Arms granted by an overseas heraldic authority. Is this protected in Australia?

A. No. At present the only way to obtain legal protection is to register an illustration of the Arms with IP Australia at the federal level and with the relevant state or territory organisation dealing with title deeds etc. This can be an expensive exercise if you want Australia-wide coverage. Creation of an Australian Heraldic Authority would rectify this situation.

Q.20 Is there an official body that administers and regulates heraldry in Australia?

A. No. At present there is no official heraldic organisation in Australia so there is a legal vacuum as to the usage and protection of Arms in Australia. HAGSOC supports the creation of an Australian Heraldic Authority.

Q.21 Why does Australia need its own heraldic authority when coats of Arms can be registered with IP Australia?

A. The staff of IP Australia probably will not have any expertise with the rules of heraldry because they are not responsible for the administration of heraldry in Australia. Consequently when a coat of Arms is submitted to them for registration they will most likely not be concerned whether the Arms are authentic or not. Nor will they check with overseas heraldic authorities as to whether the arms have already been granted to somebody else who is an Australian citizen. Their main concern will be to check that the design of the Arms is not the same as any design (as a logo or a trademark) already entered in their Register. Should the design of the arms prove to be original, in so far as they are concerned, it will most likely be registered as submitted. IP Australia only registers a design for 10 years, after which time the protection must be renewed. Only an Australian Heraldic Authority will be able to protect and maintain the integrity of arms granted to Australian citizens, in perpetuity.

Q.22 Will members of the HAGSOC heraldry interest group design arms for me?

A. Some individuals within the group may be prepared to undertake this as a private commission. The group is happy to comment on and make recommendations on the design of any arms.

Q.23 Does the HAGSOC heraldry interest group undertake research?

A. The group undertakes heraldic research at the current HAGSOC scale of research fees.


1 comment(s), latest 2 months, 4 weeks ago

Convict Assignments. Our first Public Servants

Convict Assignment was like a great big rehabilitation program. It was a sort of nineteenth century 'Outward Bound'. With abrupt change, new surroundings and personal challenge, but without the floggings

John Dunmore LANG told us in 1837,that:- "when a convict-ship arrives it is the practice of the colonial government to reserve as many of the convicts, whether labourers or mechanics, as are required for the public service; the rest are assigned to persons who have previously transmitted duly attested applications for convict-servants, agreeably to a code of regulations recently established by the present Governor, and denominated the Assignment Regulation. One pound sterling is paid to Government for each convict so assigned, as the price of his bedding and slop-clothing, which he carries along with him to his future master's. If the master resides in Sydney, he is employed in the various menial capacities in which house-servants are employed in Europe; if he resides in the country, as is much more frequently the case, he is employed in tending sheep or cattle, or as a farm-servant.

The convict-servants on the different farms of the colony are usually lodged in huts formed of a split-timber, and thatched with long grass or straw, at a little distance from the proprietor's house. Two of these huts, with a partition between them, form one erection; and each of them is inhabited by four men. A large fireplace is constructed at one end of the hut, where the men cook their provisions, and around which they assemble in the winter evenings, with a much greater appearance of comfort than the sentimentalist would imagine. Rations, consisting of ten and a half pounds of flour, seven pounds of beef or four and a half pounds of pork, with a certain proportion of tea, sugar, and tobacco, are distributed to each of them weekly; and they receive shoes and slop-clothing either twice a year, or whenever they require them. Pumpkins, potatoes, and other vegetables, they are allowed to cultivate for themselves.

On my brother's farm at Hunter's River - and I believe a similar system is pursued on most of the large agricultural farms thoughout the colony - the overseer rises at day-break, and rings a bell, which is affixed to a tree, as a signal for the men to proceed to their labour. The greater number follow the overseer to the particular agricultural operation which the season requires; the rest separate to their several employments, one to the plough, another to the garden, and a third to the dairy, while a fourth conducts the cattle to their pasture. The bell is again rung at eight o'clock, when the men assemble for breakfast, for which they are allowed one hour; they again return too their labour till one o'clock, when they have an hour for dinner, and they afterwards labour from two till sunset".


* Lang makes it sound so 'Cosy' and it was for some who were fortunate to have honest and fair masters. But for a great many others it was no more than slavery where they were bullied, flogged and had their rations taken away by their cruel masters. For the ones who ran away, the outcome was often 30 to 50 lashes, 12 months in irons or the rope.

Rev. John Dunmore Lang described the conditions convicts worked under on his brother Andrew Lang's farm.
Source jenwillets.com Free Settler or Felon