Oedipus's Riddle: Elizabethan transformation of the family portrait of Thomas More, an Appendix to “Non sum Oedipus sed Morus”

Moreana ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 56 (Number 212) (2) ◽  
pp. 133-159
Author(s):  
Frank Mitjans
Keyword(s):  
Family Group ◽  
The Other ◽  
Thomas More ◽  
The Family ◽  
Sir Thomas More ◽  
History Of ◽  
Victoria And Albert Museum

Holbein produced a drawing of Sir Thomas More and his Family which was a preparatory sketch for a larger painting. The painting was acquired by Karl von Liechtenstein-Kastelkron (1623–95), Archbishop of Olomouc, Moravia, and was last recorded in 1691 as being kept in the episcopal residence in Olomouc; it is generally assumed that the painting was lost in the 1752 fire at the Archbishop's château in Kroměřiž. There are, however, five extant versions of the Family Group. The three main versions are the full-sized oil on canvas, The Family of Sir Thomas More (1592), now at Nostell Priory, and two paintings of Sir Thomas More, his Household, and Descendants: one kept at the National Portrait Gallery, the other at the Victoria and Albert Museum, London. There has been much discussion about the transformation from a family at prayer—as portrayed in the original drawing—to a conversation on Seneca. Based on editions of Oedipus prior to the Nostell painting, the history of More's descendants, and a cameo that belonged to More's family, this paper argues that the Elizabethan transformation is a story of conformity and non-conformity.

What Holbein & Lockey Captured in The Family of Sir Thomas More: A Family “furnished for the whole scope of human life”

Moreana ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 45 (Number 173) (1) ◽  
pp. 103-116
Author(s):  
Gerard Wegemer
Keyword(s):  
Human Life ◽  
Thomas More ◽  
Oil Painting ◽  
Works Of Art ◽  
The Family ◽  
Sir Thomas More ◽  
History Of

This article explores the striking differences between the predominantly religious scene in Holbein’s 1526/27 Basel drawing of the More family and the predominantly secular scene found in the Holbein/Lockey 1530/1593 oil portrait of the More family found at Nostell Priory. This paper suggests a reading of both works of art, including an interpretation for the choice of the specific books by Seneca and Boethius in the Nostell Priory portrait. It also reviews the history of the portrait, indicating that Holbein probably began this oil painting, or at least prepared the canvas, and that Lockey completed it as a faithful imitation of the original.

The Wilkins Lecture 2000: Medical futures

2001 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 309-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. S. Porter
Keyword(s):  
Early History ◽  
Perfect Health ◽  
Social Investigation ◽  
Thomas More ◽  
Complete Health ◽  
Sir Thomas More ◽  
Future Society ◽  
History Of ◽  
Nature Of Medicine

This paper examines forecasts made by writers, medical and non-medical alike, as to the nature of medicine in a future society. In particular, starting from Plato and Sir Thomas More, it explores what place (if any) has been envisaged for medicine in a future Utopian society. By way of an explanatory device, predictions concerning medicine are compared and contrasted to expectations as to the role of the sciences, natural and social. Investigation of the corpus of social prognostications in fact reveals a dearth of glorious expectations as to the future of medicine as such, although certain writings have held out great hopes for biologistic disciplines, such as eugenics. It is often in ‘golden age’ fantasies about the early history of mankind that the most glowing descriptions of complete health are painted. Similarly, perfect health is something often viewed not in social but in individualistic terms. Explanations are offered of these perhaps slightly surprising facts.

Schleicher, Čelakovský, and the Family-Tree Diagram

1975 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. M. S. Priestly
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Family Tree ◽  
Slavic Languages ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Family ◽  
Tree Diagram ◽  
History Of Linguistics ◽  
History Of ◽  
Common Interests ◽  
And Linguistics

Summary The first family-tree diagram in August Schleicher’s (1821–68) published work appeared in 1853, seven years after his first printed discussion of the family-tree concept. In 1853 there also appeared Čteni o srovnavaci mluvnici slovanské by the Czech scholar František Ladislav Čelakovský (1799–1852); this book also contained a family-tree diagram. Since Čelakovský and Schleicher were contemporaries in Prague for over two years, their interrelationship is of interest: was this rivalry of collaboration? At first sight, a coincidence seems improbable. In the available work on and by Schleicher, Čelakovský is never mentioned; in the writings on and by Čelakovský, Schleicher’s name is never linked to his. However, the two had very many common interests. Apart from being colleagues at Charles University, they shared the same friends and enemies, were both interested in music and botany, and so on. Moreover, both were working on Slavic Historical Linguistics during the period in question. On the other hand, their personalities were such that the possibility of a mutual antipathy must not be excluded. Given the background to Čelakovský’s life and work, including the legends of the common origin of the Slavs and the obviously close interrelationships of the Slavic languages; the burgeoning of interest in Slavic history and linguistics, and in Panslavicism; the popularity of genealogy; and the developments in classificatory techniques along natural scientific lines, it is argued that Čela-kovský’s depiction of a family-tree for the Slavic languages could be quite naturally expected from him at this point in time, without any influence from Schleicher. On the other hand, Schleicher’s first family-tree diagrams were the next logical step in his own development. Moreover, the actual form of the diagrams in question suggests that they may indeed have been developed independently. This puzzle in the history of linguistics remains unsolved: collaboration, rivalry, and coincidence are all possible.

Severe prekallikrein deficiency due to a compound heterozygosis in the KLKB1-gene

2009 ◽  
Vol 29 (02) ◽  
pp. 187-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Kochhan ◽  
P. Heuchel ◽  
J. Jenderny ◽  
B. Maak
Keyword(s):  
Family History ◽  
Reference Range ◽  
The Other ◽  
Paternal Allele ◽  
Thrombin Time ◽  
Base Exchange ◽  
Coagulation Study ◽  
The Family ◽  
Prolonged Aptt ◽  
History Of

SummaryA 14 year old boy was referred to us for a detailed coagulation study because a previously performed aPTT has been found prolonged. The boy had no history of bleeding symptoms and also the family history was negative for bleeding or thrombotic events. The aPTT in the patient was 96 s (reference range: 24–36 s), prothrombin time and thrombin time were both normal.As the cause for the prolonged aPTT we identified a severe prekallikrein deficiency (prekallikrein activity < 1%). The prekallikrein deficiency results from two mutations in the KLKB 1-gene: first, an insertion of 1 bp in codon 149 in exon 5 and, second, a base exchange Cys 548 (TGC) > Tyr (TAC) in exon 14. The boy inherited the first mutation from his father and the second from his mother. The mutation in the paternal allele was not described before the completion of our study. There are two brothers of the propositus, one with normal prekallikrein activity and no mutations in the KLKB1-gene, the other showed the same constellation as the propositus.

The history of Richard III., attributed to Sir Thomas more

1856 ◽  
Vol s2-I (6) ◽  
pp. 105-107
Author(s):  
James Gairdner
Keyword(s):  
Thomas More ◽  
Richard Iii ◽  
Sir Thomas More ◽  
History Of

569 Surrogate Decision Making: Who Has the Ultimate Say in Patient Care?

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S134-S135
Author(s):  
Todd F Huzar ◽  
Monica L Gerrek ◽  
Daniel J Freet
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
The Other ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Surrogate Decision Making ◽  
Next Of Kin ◽  
Fourth Degree ◽  
Her Family ◽  
The Family ◽  
History Of ◽  
Surrogate Decision

Abstract Introduction Burn patients may present with an inability to communicate. In these cases, we need to rely on surrogates such as the Medical Power of Attorney (MPoA) or next of kin. A MPoA gives the agent the authority to participate in medical decision and in accordance with their wishes. The agent may consent to, refuse, withdraw, or withhold treatment, including life-sustaining interventions. At times, they may feel unable to participate in decision making without assistance (i.e. family members). The process can become more complicated and decision making can become “muddied” due to others influencing decisions. In our state, the MPoA is the proxy if the patient is unable to participate in decision making; however, there are cases when the patient doesn’t have an MPoA and the next of kin is the surrogate. In these cases, the next of kin would be consulted in the following order: spouse, adult children, parents, and nearest relatives. Some next of kin may not know the patient’s wishes complicating their care. Methods Two cases involving surrogates: #1: 60-year-old man with a history of HIV involved in a MVC and sustained 30% TBSA third and fourth degree burns to the face, torso, and extremities. The severity of his injuries and outcomes were discussed with his wife. She was not certain what her would want and she consulted her family because she did not know what to do; however, she knew that he would not want to live like this. After talking to the family, the kids “over-ruled” her. They wanted aggressive care despite the risks of complications and inability to perform ADLs because of his severe facial and hand burns. Case#2: 40 something year-old man with a history of schizophrenia that sustained 65% TBSA third and fourth degree burns to his face, neck, torso, and extremities due to self-immolation. The patient’s mother was identified, and it was explained to the patient’s mother that if he did survive his injury, he will not be able to perform any of his ADLs due his hand and facial burns. The patient’s mother wanted everything done for her son. Results Both patients were unable to perform ADLs due to their injuries. One patient was discharged for further inpatient care and the other was discharged home because his mother refused further care. The first patient was unable to communicate about his thoughts on his outcome. The other patient was discharged home. He was upset about what he looked like. He also told the staff that he will do his best to finish what he started. Conclusions Complex issues can arise when the patient cannot communicate their wishes and the next of kin plays the role of surrogate. The family may disagree and alter the decision-making process. After seeing this scenario play out and patients not being happy about their outcomes, the policies regarding surrogate decision making should be re-evaluated.

scholarly journals IV.—The Lineage of Sir Thomas More. By Edward Foss, F.S.A.

Archaeologia ◽  
1853 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-33
Author(s):  
Edward Foss
Keyword(s):  
Thomas More ◽  
The Family ◽  
Sir Thomas More ◽  
Legal Position

It cannot have escaped the observation of every person interested in the life of Sir Thomas More, that his biographers, though one of them married his daughter, and another was his great-grandson, are almost entirely silent as to the family from which he sprung. In their statements upon this subject, they ascend no higher than Sir Thomas's father, Sir John More; he being no less a person than one of the superior judges; holding that dignity, too, for a space of at least twelve years, and not dying till after his son had been elevated to the highest legal position in the kingdom.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document