Can you quote yourself? Is it bad manners?Quote:
Originally Posted by dazza
Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
Printable View
Can you quote yourself? Is it bad manners?Quote:
Originally Posted by dazza
Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
Hi fortinian...not if what you're saying is right? Nothing wrong with a bit of self promotion. And thanks btw - I thought it might've been covered.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
That's a long time to wait just to hold a winning hand? :celb (6): This week's local myth busting prize goes to you.
Whatever will Tom Slemen say?
I don't know - I'll ask some of his friends...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ged
http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons...onster-002.gif http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons...onster-003.gif http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons...con-tv-019.gif http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons...con-tv-023.gif http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons...object-015.gif http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons...n-char-014.gif http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons...n-char-030.gif http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons...n-misc-005.gif http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons...nsport-004.gif
:)
Hello dazzaQuote:
Originally Posted by dazza
You make an excellent point. It would appear that the pyramid-style tomb was built when Edward Mackenzie, William's out-of-town brother, paid for the debt of the church in 1868. Thus, William's body must have been interred for 17 years in a run-of-the-mill grave before he was put under the new tomb. So it is highly unlikely that he could have been reburied sitting in a chair inside the tomb. So much for that story. . . .
C
Who said it wasn't true?
Only joking!!! :lol: [...had you all guessing for a split second though???]. Let me introduce Jeremy Benthan, (b.1748 - 1832), politician, philosopher, legal and social reformer preserved and displayed, as requested in his will, in a wooden cabinet called an "Auto-icon" at University College, London. At the 100th & 150th year anniversaries of the college it was wheeled in the meeting of the College Council, where it was listed as "present but not voting".
So William Mackenzie was in good company in the 19c. There were other eccentric last will and testament requests.
One of Frank Carlyle's youtube vid's said that William Mackenzie went as far as to make the request in his will, to be seated upright, with said winning hand. But with the 17 year old gap, between internment and the building of the monument, it seems less than likely that his wishes were carried out to the letter. More's the pity.
Best not open the monument, and keep the myth going for as long as we possibly can?
Apparently he only votes when the vote is tied and then he always votes in favour of the motion. True utilitarianism, even in death.Quote:
Originally Posted by dazza
I've tried to find a copy of his will but to no avail - Carlyle is a wonderful one for quoting his sources :disgust:.Quote:
Originally Posted by dazza
Keep the myth but make sure people like Mr Carlyle (who should know better) stop promoting it as historical fact.
It is interesting to note that I have never found any reference to this 'myth' until Slemen came on the scene.
John Reppion (a writer and poster on these forums) pointed out in his '800 Years of Haunted Liverpool' that there is a very famous story about a man buried in a pyramid called 'Mad Jack Fuller' but apparently that is untrue as well although the pyramid was built before he died and he was buried underneath it.
http://johnmadjackfuller.homestead.com/Pyramid.html
I was telling a freind about this myth of McKenzie and she quite rightly said it doesnt exist merely because skeletons dont exist, only in films and medical schools as once the connective tissue has disappeared so to does the skeleton so in reality all that would be left would be a pile of bones and a dissintegrated pack of cards and clothes....... er dust? not very spooky but true
True that Steve, most skeletons fall apart. I have seen some that stay together though, don't know the reason why. Never been one to mess with bones. Bad Joo Joo.Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveFaragher
Ha ha, only in Britain? IOW, he'd champion a cause, but would still remain in the closet. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
That's one for Frank then - otherwise it gets filed in the unsubstantiated fact bin.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/sick/sick0004.gif Amazing - he went into the afterlife armed with... a 'full dress and top hat seated at a table set with a roast chicken and a bottle of wine'. I'm not saying this is wrong - it obviously worked for him, as a royal flush did for Mackenzie.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
I've just read Dan Brown's The Lost Symbol, so forgive me for asking - but was William Mackenzie a mason?
Another nail in the coffin for this myth. It's not looking good for ole Mackenzie?Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveFaragher
Quote:
I've just read Dan Brown's The Lost Symbol, so forgive me for asking - but was William Mackenzie a mason?
I'm going to say probably. It is extremely likely he was a Mason as Masonic activity really took off during the Victorian era, most of the movers and shakers of the day where affiliated with a Lodge of somesort. Basically Freemasonay is and has always been a big old boys club, you scratch my back, wink wink, nudge nudge, know what I mean.
There was the case of Miss Hickman, an early woman surgeon, whose body was found in Richmond Park, London, in 1903 after she had been missing for several months. It appears to have been a case of suicide, although a poster on JtR Forums argued that because her head was detached from her body, a serial killer must have done that. More likely her body just fell apart as it became skeletonized. There also appeared to be evidence that dogs or some other animals had disturbed the corpse.Quote:
Originally Posted by pablo42
Here's a pdf download about the case:
Susan Collinson, "The Case of the Missing Doctor," Sketches from the history of psychiatry (Women, suicide and insanity at the turn of the century), Psychiatric Bulletin 1990;14:83-86.
The article chronicles the case of Miss Sophia Frances Hickman, MD Bruxelles, LRCP, LRCS Edinburgh, a locum tenens at the Royal Free Hospital, Gray's Inn Road, reported missing in August 1903. As noted above, it looks as if it was a case of suicide, a hypodermic syringe being found near her body, and evidence introduced at the inquest that before her disappearance she had purchased 15 grains of sulphate of morphine. Her body was found to be "in repose" and there was no sign of sexual interference.
Chris
Pablo. Bad news for you. That skeleton in Alan's room in Rising Damp is plastic ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by pablo42
This one is still intact, and doesn't suffer from rising damp.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ged
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1388610/4786730
As you're probably aware this is not him. His head fell off and was eventually taken away. His body rotted from the inside, so it's largely his clothes and a dummy head that remains.Quote:
Originally Posted by dazza
So there's still a chance that Mackenzie's clothes are still playing cards in his tomb (after a 17 years wait...)
lol, I was about to post angrily saying 'no chance, he wasn't in the bloody pyramid in the first place'.... then I realised you were joking.Quote:
Originally Posted by petromax
I'll get my coat.
:rolleyes:
One has to wonder whether the story does have some sort of truth in it. It is not possible that the body was stored away, fully clothed until the money was found to have this pyramid built on top so his last dying wish could be fulfilled? It's doubtful but there has to be a reason in the 17 year wait.
Whatever the truth, it's one of the most striking grave stones I've ever seen in Liverpool, and it beats the Walker grave at Childwall.
Attachment 11667
Only one way to find out...:034:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadfael
It is very unlikely Cad for a number of reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadfael
1) Mackenzie's first wife Mary Dalziel was already buried on the grave plot so the vault was there and ready to recieve coffins easily.
2) How would you go about storing a body for 17 years? Especially a fully clothed one? They did not have refrigeration in those days and preserving techniques (formaldehyde etc...) tend to make flesh and muscle incredibly stiff. Although I do like the idea of a bloke sitting in a huge tank of formaldeyde but humerous as it is its very unlikely.
3) As for the money... William Mackenzie was incredibly wealthy and his brother even more so. In the years before his death Mackenzie had purchased a number of country estates including Newbie and other
estates in the county of Dumfries and Auchenskeoch in the Stewartry
of Kirkcudbright. His will was valued at ?341,848 at the time of his death. Because he had no children it all went to his brother Edward.
Edward Mackenzie (who erected the pyramid) owned the lovely Fawley Court http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fa...circa_1826.jpg.
Money was clearly not an issue.
The reason the pyramid was built 17 years after he died is quite simple. In 1839 William Mackenzie married for the second time to Sarah Dewhurst.
After his death Sarah remained living in Grove Street before dying herself on 9th December 1867. The pyramid was erected in 1868 simply because they where waiting for Sarah to die so she could be laid to rest with her husband.
Pretty hard to do that if there is a stonking pyramid on top of the vault is it not?
A side note: Mackenzie was much admired accross Europe, more so than in Britain. The Empeor of France Louis Napoleon was full of praise for William:
Quote:
Napoleon, grasping him
by the hand, thus addressed him - "I am happy to see you again
so well. I am still happier to have the opportunity of thanking
you, as President, for the great and useful works you have executed
in France. I shall be glad to confer on you the decoration of the
Legion of Honour, and I trust your Government will permit you to
wear a distinction so well-merited.
A cracking reply and fully knowledgeable on the subject.
I think sLemon has led many people up the garden path on this one - but I would still be first in the Q when they opened up the tomb just to have a nose.
If the Eygptians could perserve bodies, then, why not a man with tons of Loot having his wishes granted..
They could of put him (fully clothed), like a mummy in an Eyptain casket.. and sat it up in a catacomb under the earth.. It is very cold there, and would perserve it somewhat.. I think it is possible.. Lime which may accumulate inside a skeleton.. will preserve the outer service.. Like a fossiled skull..
Those were the days of experiment and yes ,The society of Free masons..which is still alive to this day... I agree with how this could of been a hushup circumstance..but, believe preservation of bones to some extent sitting up would be fesible....
Woo! Finally, I found a copy of his Will online:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2730/...0f59f4cd_o.jpg
It's written in pretty dense Chancery Script and it may be a while before I have to time to sit down and transcribe it but in my quick overview I haven't found any mention of a pyramid, gambling or indeed any above ground internment at all.
The first paragraph seems to be all about looking after his wife:
You can see why the 3/4 pages of it are going to be a bugger to transcribe, but I will endevour.Quote:
. I give to my Wife an annuity of three thousand pounds payable during her life and to be enjoyed as her separate property free from the control of any husband whom she may marry whilst said annuity shall ouccure from my estate and shall be paid quarterly without dedution and I request for her to reside with my brother Edward Mackenzie in the house No 74 Grave Street Liverpool or any other house she may wish in where apartments of her own hire and for living shall be allowed to her should she so live to accept this at my decease or at any future time I own that she be allowed any out of my houses within the parliamentary constituencies of Liverpool (excepting that one at No 74 Grove Street) for a residence free of rent and all other charges for the natural term of her life or so long as she may reside in it.
:handclap:Fortinian.. Aww, the man loved unconditionally.. How beautiful is that? :hug:
Nice you are desecting it for us.. very interesting stuff indeed.. and something for all the tour directors to digest when they pass the tomb..
Sounds unlikely, mate. This makes a lovely story for the Shiverpool and Slemen tours. But. . .Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadfael
The fact is that the pyramid monument was put up by Mackenzie's brother as a final resting place for Mr Mackenzie and his wife and others, which in itself makes it unlikely that 17 years after his demise Mackenzie was given the honor of sitting in a chair holding a winning hand. Did anything appear in the press at the time of him being put in the pyramid tomb that his corpse was arranged such a position? I assume not. Correct me if I am wrong. So, this is just a legend, and probably not true at all. Right?
But as we say, the story sounds good.
Chris
Excellent detective work fortinian - there's some really good stuff here. It seems like Mackenzie was a very considerate and respectful man, as far as his family was concerned. The fact that the pyramid is not explicitly mentioned in the will, casts even more doubt on on the validity on card playing, royal flush story.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
The instruction for the monument came from his brother Edward, some 17 years later, following the death of James MacKenzie's wife. Edward seems to have followed his brother's wishes for a monument to be placed on the family tomb. But the pyramid could well be proved to be his choice of memorial, rather than his brother's instruction? It could be that such an unsual monument was singled out for mockery and insult, by people who were jealous of his successes, and perhaps scornful of his unorthodoxies?
We may be doing James MacKenzie a service, in quoshing the original rumour as false?
One point dazza, it was William Mackenzie - not James. The James idea is a Slemenism... Tom Slemen claims he did it so he could identify people who where stealing his stories... much like Leonardo Da Vinci included deliberate mistakes in many of his plans to foil thieves.
It doesn't help that Tom Slemen has never formally corrected the Haunted Liverpool book that it appears in or that for some time he was to be heard on the radio calling him 'William James Mackenzie'.
I think you are right that the pyramid was his brothers design, Mackenzie probably did want a memorial but I think it was more down to his brother than him. I'm trying to find out some sort of context for Pyramid memorials... I know there was an increased interest in Egypt during the Romantic Period... but Mackenzie's death was too late for that... similarly there was an interest in Egypt from the fin de siecle up until the 1930s but he would be too early for that. Maybe his brother just liked pyramids?
We may be doing James MacKenzie a service, in quoshing the original rumour as false?
As for doing him a service, I think we are in correcting the slights on his name.
But I am more concerned about the service to history itself. It is a brilliant story but it has remained unchalledged for far too long - even guidebooks are quoting it.
He was clearly a man who loved Liverpool, it's clear to see that from his Will and the fact that he was known in business as Mackenzie of Paris and Liverpool.
Well done fortinian. :handclap:
Apologies, I meant 'William', not James, thanks for correcting.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
William Mackenzie's younger brother, partner and heir, Edward Mackenzie, died 27th Sept 1880, at Henley-on-Thames. His mausoleum at St Mary's Church, Fawly, certainly has hints of Egyptian Revival about it [picture attached]. Normally 'the winged sun' [a symbol for Horus, the sky god] was placed above temple doors to symbolise man's eternal nature. The pediment sculpture has wings, but I can't be certain whether it's a representation of Horus, without a more detailed photo? The pyramid on top is helpful however.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
Actually the interest started much earlier than that, in part, owing to Nelson's victory at the battle of the Nile [1798] which loosened Napoleon's grip on Egypt. That and also his eventual defeat in 1815 [although British occupation of Egypt wasn't until 1882-1922].Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
John Taylor published The Great Pyramid: Why Was It Built? & Who Built It? in 1859 [pub. same year as Darwin's Origin of Species] Wiki entry here. Charles Piazzi Smyth, in his book Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid [pub. in 1864] 'claimed, and presumably believed, that the pyramid inch was a God-given measure handed down through the centuries from the time of Israel, and that the architects of the pyramid could only have been directed by the hand of God' - Wiki quote, see 'Piazzi Smyth, Charles'.
And as Christian apologists today still try and fact fit dinosaurs into the Noah's ark myth, so did the Victorians in attempting to prove that the measurements of pyramids, were related to the biblical 'cubit' [about 457.2mm] and the King Jame's bible version of events. I think it was an honest enquiry, but doomed to fail, as most trying to fit-the-facts to suit a cherished belief, or myth normally do.
I feel certain that Edward would have known, or even possible read some of this material. And for a contractor working on the continent, he would have encountered the metric system, and the ongoing problem of a standardisation. [It would be interesting to know the exact dimensions of the Rodney Street pyramid - as he may of played around with this?] But in a wider context, absorbing a classic pagan symbol, such as a 'pyramid' into the church, albeit a presbyterian church, such as St Andrew's, may have offered an alternative interpretation [outside of Rome] as to what constituted god's works?
Interestly enough, just looking around the sites this afternoon, it seems that prothestant Victorians, including Presbyterians, had 'Pagan' funerary memorials, rather than 'Christian'. ie: Greek vases, Greek Temples, broken columns, inverted torch's, egyptian obelisks, egyptian mausoleums. Maybe they occur in Catholic cemeteries, though I'd expect to see more angels and crosses there instead?
Brilliant once again dazza, top info. I particuarly like the idea that Mackenzie was playing around with the dimensions of the pyramid... now all I need is a tape measure and a way into the church!
Edward's mausoleum is strikingly similar in concept... one wonders if the pyramid was cleaned up would it be of the same material?
As for your ideas of pagan imagery in christian sites. Classical architecture has long had a central place in Christianity. The early Xtian basillicas where converted roman temples (Think of the Pantheon, now a church) so in a way ecclesiastical architecture was taken to be greco-roman, especially in the rennaisance when the classical world was held to be the highest form of civilisation (look at Christopher Wrens churches). Gothic architecture was considered to be suspiciously Catholic so the protestants liked the greco-roman stuff.
The image of the urn is a reminder of the Roman cremation customs.
The broken column means life cut short or indeed the last member of a family who dies without heirs.
The upside down torch is particuarly christian however... if you turned a normal torch upside down it would extinguish... but these torches are still lit representing eternal life.
I was going to write more but then I found this apt description:
Curiously, many of the monuments in Victorian cemeteries are not actually Christian, but rather pagan ? classical (Roman) or Egyptian. Christianity in 19th-century Britain was predominantly Church of England (Protestant), but with worrying challenges from various Protestant sects (Methodists, Presbyterians) as well as a movement towards "High" Anglicanism ? incorporating elements of Catholicism into the Church of England.
What Victorians put on their graves sometimes reflected their religious positions ? though in counter-intuitive ways. For instance, some Church of Englanders felt that a cross was too Catholic a symbol, and reacted by deliberately using non-Christian symbols such as columns or urns on their graves. Gothic architecture was also considered by some to be linked to the Catholic Church. However, Egyptian architecture was not linked with any Christian movements, and so was popular with everyone.
Thanks mate - likewise. You've been supplying some top-notch and solid research, all very interesting stuff. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
The 'Pyramid Inch' [ref. here] is one twenty-fifth of a sacred 'cubit' = 1.00106 British inches. The difference is marginally small as you can see. Lets say, for argument's sake, that MacKenzie's Pyramid in Rodney Steet is 15 feet high. The difference between the British Inch measurement and the Pyramid Inch measurement would only lead to the Pyramid being a 1/5th of an inch taller, over it's entire height. About 5mm, in today's money.
The original drawing would be more useful, though I doubt it exists anymore? The problem with a tape measurement is that the contractor, may have built it over tolerance, and so the 5mm would be lost before you even got your tape measure out. Pity.
The Mackenzie family mausoleum [at Fawly] was built in 1862, and is constructed Aberdeen Granite.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
It was easier for the church to absorb symbols, than to distroy them. As the Christians did of the Roman's, and the Roman's did of the Greeks.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
You'd think that polytheism was alive and well in Victorian society, but I guess is was just recycling existing Egyptian, Greek and Roman myths, art, literature and styles of architecture, rather than personally upholding a belief in the gods they once represented.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
Article from the latest Fortean Times on the tomb and MacKenzie.
http://www.forteantimes.com/features...the_devil.html
The film is online here too!
Nice to see kids interested in him but shame the info that Fortinian posted here they didn't look up!
http://www.firstlightonline.co.uk/mo...d-above-ground
Hi Fortinian and DazzaQuote:
Originally Posted by dazza
I think it was less that the Victorians and the Georgians before them believed in pagan ideas and more that those styles of design and architecture were popular. Egyptian influences of course came in after Napoleon's adventures in Egypt.
Major General Robert Ross's 100-foot granite obelisk in Rostrevor, County Down is obviously based on classical designs of similar monuments in Rome but it has a winged eye device on it that comes from Egyptian motifs, as does Baltimore's triumphant Battle Monument to the dead of the Battle of Baltimore of September 1814 and in celebration of the defeat of the British during which Ross was killed in a skirmish before the Battle of North Point.
Ross's monument in St. Paul's Cathedral, London, shown at bottom, is obviously also of classical design with the weeping figure of Britannia and another figure holding a laurel wreath over the general's head. But no one would say Ross was not a Christian. In fact his elder brother Thomas Ross was a minister of the episcopal Church of Ireland.
Chris
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2382/...415a000e_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2552/...e6f910157e.jpg
Thanks Chris, you're right. I was perhaps mischievously sticking my tongue-in-cheek at the ghoulish appearance of polytheism in Victorian society, but that aside, I totally agree with you that it was more a recycling or 'resurrection' if you'll permit me of pagan styles gone before.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisGeorge
Thanks Chris, as Dazza said, you're right. You must remember that the 'gothick' kick off of Pugin et al was as a statemant against the percieved paganism of the neoclassical. Pugin himself didn't use the term gothic, he prefered to call it 'pointed' or 'christian'.
In a roundabout way, St Andrews church itself is a fantastic example of greek-revival favoured by Foster. Greek-revival was the later stage of neoclassical architecture and shows an increased influence of the greek ruins that where being explored for the first time by the west in the late 1700s.
The differences are subtle, but many. Compare St Andrews (greek-revival) to St Brides which is more standard neoclassical.
Thanks, Fortinian. Good point about Pugin and the Gothic Revival being a reaction to the perceived paganism of neoclassicism. There's a nice example of Pugin's work at Scarisbrick Hall outside of Southport. I have not been there but the photographs of the hall make it look very dramatic and worth seeing.Quote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
Chris
Thanks, CG. Very nice. I didn't even know that existed.
Hawksmoor's church - St. Anne, Limehouse, London built 1714-30 also has a pyramid in the graveyard. I'll have to get the inscription next visit?
Attachment 16517
Odd Church that one Daz. From what I can gather on the internet it's not a gravemarker, it's suggested that it was intended for the tower of the church but was never added.
Of couse the Dan Brown/Masonic/Illuminati contingent are all over it but it really seems a bit of a mystery to be honest.
Of course there is also this: http://johnmadjackfuller.homestead.com/Pyramid.html
I was first made aware of this by Researchwriter (who posts on here) who's written some good stuff on Mackenzie's tomb.