George W.M. Reynolds And The Two Nations

Time Traveling 18: George W. M. Reynolds And The Two Nations by R.E. Prindle The Forties were a momentous period in nineteenth century England. It was one of their transition points from one societal organization to another. The people of England were stumbling out of the eighteenth century into the nineteenth with all its technological and scientific revelations. The Napoleonic wars had put a period to the eighteenth and the nineteenth blossomed. Perhaps unnoticed for what it was the emancipation of the Jews begun by Napoleon was about to transform the face of Europe and England. Nowhere was this more clearly evident than in the country of England. By the 1840s it was clear to the perceptive that there was a coming cultural clash between the Jews and English. As is usual with great changes, artists and writers were the first to grasp that there was a culture war in progress. Pre-eminent among the writers concerned with the two nations was the great novelist George W. M. Reynolds, the author of Mysteries of London. From the Jewish side the most overt writers were the future Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli and his father Isaac D’Israeli. Both writers blazed across the decade of the Forties. In this essay we will be concerned with Reynolds’ four series of Mysteries of London. I follow the Valancourt two series, two volumes edition. The first two series or volumes have current publication while the latter two series have been eclipsed by the passage of time. Reynolds himself had been eclipsed by the passage of time but English scholar Louis James’ effort seems headed for a revival of interest. Valancourt Press has released : The Mysteries of London Series I&II, Wagner the Wehrwolf and The Necromancer. In 1919 a San Bernardino firm with no name published a printing of III and IV, which I have, but the edition has sold through and is no longer available at this time. Several different volumes published by the British Library can still be had, they are discontinued, the Library seems to have lost interest in Reynolds and remaindered the lot. Some are still readily available at Ebay and possibly Amazon. A problem might be that the end of second series seems to indicate the end of the Mysteries but such is not the case for while Series Three doesn’t pick up where Series Two ended is nevertheless a long continuation along with Series Four bringing the total number of pages of the four series to nearly five thousand. The volumes of Benjamin Disraeli to figure prominently in this essay will be his trilogy Coningsby, Sybil and Tancred. Benjamin Disraeli was of course the most prominent politician of the English nineteenth century. Being in Parliament in the forties he published these three political novels then ended his writing career until 1870 when Lothair appeared followed in 1980 by his Endymion. Of stellar importance will be his father Isaac D’ Israeli’s, Genius of the Jews, whose teaching formed his son’s understanding of the Jewish Nation. The book was also meant a manual for non-Jews as to how they were to perceive the Jewish Nation. At this time in England little was known of the Jewish Nation. .2. From the year 1290 to 1660 Jews were banned from England. Allowed re-entry in 1660, immigration to England began slowly, by the end of the eighteenth century there was a small colony of perhaps several thousand who, staying within their colony in the East End were not disrupting English society. That situation had changed dramatically by the 1840s when the culture clash arrived with a bang. By the 1840s the Rothschild banking family of the Nation was the richest family in England eclipsing preeminent families of the English Nation by far. The modern palace of Mentmore Towers built in 1854 excelled all English manors in splendor. Built in the Vale of Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire, the Vale became the location of many Rothschild mansions. Isaac D’ Israeli establish himself at Bradenham in Bucks. while his son would establish himself at neighboring Hughenden. Thus the Vale became a Jewish principality. The Vale would figure prominently in the writings of Reynolds. The rise of the English Jewish Nation began in 1806 when the dynasties founder, Nathan Rothschild, made his first coup by smuggling English gold across France and Spain to General Wellington’s army on the Spanish Peninsula. Nathan’s next coup, that established the family fortune, came with the success of British arms against Napoleon at Waterloo. When Nathan died in 1836 he turned the dynasty over to his son Lionel who was a worthy successor. Lionel would rule the roost from 1836 to 1880 paralleling the career of Benjamin Disraeli in the heart of the nineteenth century. It was he who broke the British square. Shortly after Nathan’s death Disraeli was given a safe seat in Parliament in 1837, after having placed last in balloting four consecutive elections. The Rothchild/Disraeli link would last until Lionel died. Now linked with the Rothschilds and in Parliament Disraeli quickly wrote the trilogy that outlined the Jewish Nation’s position- Coningsby, Sybil and Tancred. These novels lauded his Nation while in Tancred he proposed a New Crusade leading from Palestine across Europe to England. Every member of Parliament had to take an oath as a Christian, while Disraeli, as a Jew, took Jesus’ view that he came to fulfil the law of the Old Testament. Thus, while accepting Jesus as a Jewish savior becoming a nominal Christian he could take the oath in good conscience while maintaining a dual religiosity. There were already Jewish members of Parliament but they had falsely taken the oath. Lionel ran for Parliament, was elected to one of the six City seats, but refused the oath desiring to be admitted as member of the Jewish Nation only. He was refused but repeatedly ran and was reelected as one of the six City members. Finally in the mid fifties he was able to corrupt the procedures of the English Nation seating himself as a member of the Jewish Nation, but not the English Nation. The Jews at this point had parity as the Jewish Nation functioning within the English Nation. The two nations had come into existence. .3. George W.M. Reynolds was also a revolutionary but an English national. Born in 1814 to an English Navy Captain, he spent the years between two and eight on the island of Guernsey where his father was stationed. The family returned to England in 1822 in which year his father died. The next five years he was under the guardianship of his father’s best friend, Duncan McArthur, who was a Naval physician stationed at Walmer, Kent. At the end of the period McArthur placed the thirteen year old boy as a cadet at the Sandhurst Military Academy. George had apparently been at odds with his father, but hated Duncan McArthur, who, as his father and mother’s executor, probably defrauded him of a large part of his inheritance. No longer able to stand military discipline, after his mother died in March of 1830, Reynolds removed himself from Sandhurst. He exiled himself to France at the end of 1830. Eighteen-thirty was the year of the second French revolution, called the July Revolution, with its three glorious days. In France, Reynolds became a thorough revolutionary favoring violent revolution. In 1836 he was asked to leave France under a criminal cloud. Returning to England he began his literary career as the editor of the Monthly Magazine. In 1832 the first Reform Act was made law in England. As a consequence of the Reform Act a worker’s party called the Chartists emerged in which Reynolds served a prominent role. Having written several creditable novels between 1835 and 1842 but which failed to establish him as a successful author he was invited by the publisher George Stiff to serialize a novel for his magazine the London Journal. The novel was to be patterned on The Mysteries of Paris by the French author Eugene Sue. Reynolds accepted the offer and began the serialized Mysteries of London. The series lasted for four years, 1844-48. Probably to the wonderment of Reynolds, and maybe all, his writing was a runaway success. Mysteries of London sold as many as forty thousand copies per weekly installment. Made his eyes sparkle. He now had a platform to promulgate his social ideas and political platform. By 1844, when the series began, the Jews were pushing off English social mores seeking to create a counter Jewish Nation within the English Nation. The significance of the Jewish Nation within England was recognized in 1809 by the reformer William Wilberforce. While Wilberforce was battling to end slavery he also helped found the London Society for Promoting Christianity among the Jews. Thus the presence of the Jews has become conspicuous. By the 1840s their presence had been duly noted. While the Jews received scant notice in the first two series of Mysteries of London, in the third and fourth the Jewish issue quite emphatically took Reynolds attention. Disraeli’s trilogy was published in 1844, ’45 and ’47 so that Reynolds obviously read them but doesn’t reference Disraeli by name although he does reference Lionel Rothschild. .4. The years 1830 through 1848 were years of revolution and revolutionary schemes in Europe and England. In Europe the revolutions were violent indeed with perhaps a hundred thousand or more meeting their deaths until the revolutionary period from1789 through 1848 was vanquished, until 1903 and the first Russian Revolution. In England the violence was minimized while the revolution was compelled to accept limited success. Both the crown and the aristocracy were stripped of most of their privileges while the Commons became the most important of the three estates. Reynolds remained a dedicated violent revolutionary believing that only a revolution such as France’s 1793 episode in which the past was swept away in one fell swoop. Reynolds admired and approved of this most violent revolution as it swept away the past allowing for an attempt to build back better. Thus when the Chartist movement after 1839 was formed Reynolds was a charter member of the extremist sort. While every effort has been employed to reduce his importance in the movement the rumbles are that he was positively disliked for his extremism, while the main body favored fabian tactics. Disraeli, now a member of Parliament was content to bore from within. I quote from Monypenny and Buckle’s The Life of Disreali, six volumes in two p.141: Quote: The quintessential issue was between an aristocratic government in its proper sense of the term—that is a government of the best men in all classes—and a democracy. The English were a peculiar people. Disraeli wrote: ‘You have an ancient, powerful, richly endowed Church and perfect religious liberty. You have unbroken order and complete freedom. You have landed estates as large as the Romans, combined with commercial enterprise such as Carthage and Venice united never equalled. And you must remember that this peculiar country, with these strong contrasts, is not governed by force; it is not governed by standing armies; it is governed by a most singular series of traditionary influences, which generation after generation cherishes because it knows they embalm custom, represent law. And with these, what have you else? You have created the greatest empire of modern time. You have amassed a capital of fabulous amount. You have devised and sustained a system of credit still more marvelous. And abroad, you have established and maintained a scheme so vast and complicated of labor and industry that the history of the world affords no parallel to it. And all these mighty creations are out of all proportion to the essential and indigenous elements and resources of the country. If you destroy that state of society, remember this—England cannot begin again. Unquote, unquote. Disraeli might as well have been describing the United State of the twentieth century. Disraeli would then set about to dismantle what he had just described as his fellow Jews have done to the United States. It must be remembered that the Old Testament of the Bible predicts that the Jews will inhabit houses that they didn’t build. That means that they will move country to country (The House of Egypt, The House of England, France, Germany, the US etc.) and trash each moving on to the next. Next in line is China. Reynolds, on the other hand, favored a utopian fantasy of Chartist democracy. A vision as absurd an any democratic fantasy as all democracies must ultimately fail as they dumb down the population to the lowest level. Thus, the Jews while demanding an aristocracy of Judaism promotes democracy for everyone else. The elite of a Nation and the Jewish Nation within the Nation ultimately work toward the same end with different results. As of 2020 both England and the US have been trashed, Reynolds then, ignorant of the inevitable results of democracy, and the tendencies of Judaism, wrestles with the problems in Series III and IV of the Mysteries of London. .5. Perhaps the trigger that led to the content of Series III & IV was the publication of Coningsby in 1844 at the same time that Reynolds was beginning Mysteries of London. Coningsby was subtitled the New Generation, probably meaning the arrival of the Jews, while the meaning of Coningsby is that of the king’s manor or village, two significant names. Compare the terms with Nathan Rothschilds, New Court. Coningsby, the hero, then means a natural king. The story line of the two volumes must have begun germinating after that book’s, publication. The second of Disraeli’s trilogy, Sybil was published in 1845 adding its impetus. Thus Reynolds; mind masticated the stories when he began the third series in 1846. Coningsby must have been a startling book for England as Disraeli raved about the natural superiority of the Jews. His portrait of Sidonia was based on Lionel Rothschild. Sidonia was so outrageous as to be unbelievable. Sidonia was characterized as a real superman; while Disraeli’s description of Jewish infiltration of all European governments must have been as shocking as Reynolds’ reaction indicates. Indeed, those Jews were so many spies collecting information to be sent to the Rothschilds as the new messiahs of Europe. The Rothschild story is so fabulous that they might well be considered the Jewish redeemers. With those means of collecting information it is no wonder that the Jews were informed of political developments almost before they were put into execution. Inside information was a major source of their financial wizardry. This Jewish seeming prescience was considered wonderful and baffling to Europeans. The reasons are quite obvious today. Only in the matters of the Dreyfus case in France was anyone caught. The French correspondingly accused Dreyfus of passing info to the Germans which he certainly was not doing; he was passing info to the synagogue which used it for their own ends. The cultural conflict in England more or less began when Charles Dickens published his novel Oliver Twist which featured the Jewish criminal character, Fagin. It was not the portrayal of a Jew as a thief that directly set the Jews off as we all believe. No, it was the fact that Fagin suffered the shame of being executed on the scaffold. This was taken as an insult for all Jewry. As Disraeli expressed it, all nations had criminals, Jews were to be seen everywhere with the exception of never, never being seen on the scaffold. This was a crucial matter. In twentieth century US when New York DA Thomas Dewey finally managed to arrest the originator of Murder Inc., the master criminal Lepke Buchalter, his fellow Jews worked like demons to prevent his conviction. Once convicted on Federal offense and sentenced to be electrocuted, in a frenzy Jewish operative worked to their utmost to prevent the execution. One can only imagine the machinations behind the scenes to send Buchalter to the chair. Resistance failed and Buchalter was burned. The indignity of a public execution as a common criminal was too much for them to endure. That very likely explains what was the supreme insult when the aristocratic Jewish criminal Joseph ‘Jud Suss’ Oppenheimer not only was hanged but the authorities used a thirty foot high scaffold and an iron cage that could be seen for miles and remained up for years that was a constant shaming not to be endured without revenge. Dicken’s was compelled, that is ordered, to remove the passage describing Fagin’s exposure from all future editions. Undoubtedly word was put out to the literary community to not offend again. The culture war was on. The Jewish right to censorship was quietly established. While Dickens either buckled, or his publishers did, Reynolds was made of sterner stuff. The only question was what course to take. In Series III then, He tried to show the Jews how to integrate into English society. This they couldn’t take as they saw themselves as superior to the English. Both father and son published books demanding English submission. At the same time Isaac D’Israeli explained that they wished to remain exclusive in his book, The Genius of Judaism. While the Frankfort ghetto, from when the Rothschild came, was certainly exclusive it was also demeaning. Now, in England, with their already enormous wealth the Rothchilds began creating dozens of palaces that outrivaled the English estates putting them far above the English aristocrats to maintain obvious exclusivity. Reynolds then laid out an example of how to integrate with the English. As his Mysteries was selling tens of thousands of copies weekly his message was noticed by the Jewish community. He was well read there and noted in the Jewish newspapers. From their side, it is suspect that they resented this attempted indoctrination as much as they did the hanging of Fagin. After all Reynolds was essentially telling them to integrate, that is, to abandon Jewish mores for English. This was probably too close to the Catholic Church’s age old attempt to convert them. Whether pressure was put on Reynolds I can’t say, nevertheless as the novel approached its end in a petulant outbreak Reynolds drew an extremely deprecating portrait of the meanest Jewish usurer that he could imagine. Quite shocking really. Devastating. .6. In the first and second series Reynolds was heavily under the influence of De Sade’s Justine and Juliette. Virtue and vice. Richard Markham then, was the male counterpart of Justine, or virtue, while Eugene Markham represented vice, or Juliette. As the second series closes Eugene in assassinated as the result of his vice while Richard is exalted by his virtuous activities in Italian Castelcicala. Thus Reynolds reversed De Sade’ notion of the superiority of vice. For the story to be plausible it must be remembered that Italy was not yet united into a single State. The ending of Series two implies the end of the story so that there is no reason to expect more hence a complete surprise when a reader discovers two more series or volumes. Volumes that history had more or less swept under the rug. In Reynolds’ terms he is redeeming himself for his youthful criminality as recorded in The Youthful Impostor, or a Youths Career In Crime. In 1847 he rewrote that book, first written when he was eighteen, as The Parricide, a much darker version. Richard Markham’s redemption at the end of Series Two was imperfect and not completely satisfying to him so that Series Three begins with a complete mystery and surprise. The new series built around the continuation of Richard Markham in Castelcicala and Reynolds’ fantasy of a complete and perfect triumph of democracy. The main character amid a host of very strong characters Serie three is a criminal by the name of Thomas Rainford, the last of the highwaymen. As the story opens Thomas Rainford, known as Tom Rain, stops a coach that contains Lady Georgiana Hatfield and her friend. Rain gallantly relieves Lady Hatfield of her cash but allows her to keep her jewellery. As he disguises his voice while robbing the women we are left with the impression that he knows Lady Hatfield, she too thinks there is something familiar about the man. Thus the story begins with a mystery that will take some time to resolve. There may be some dark humor here that one will only get if one can connect the resolution of the mystery with this beginning. Remember that Rain left the Lady with her jewels. As we will learn Rain had robbed the Lady Georgiana once before. At that time her beauty was so great that he lost control of himself and forced himself on her, raped her, that left her pregnant. She bore the child but gave it way to conceal the fact that the greatest treasure of a women, her must valuable jewel, is her virginity, her purity. Rain smirkingly telling her that he will leave her her jewels is a naughty reference to the fact that he had taken her most valuable jewel from her earlier. While the joke is definitely in the text, if Reynolds planned that, he was a first rate genius. Rain proceeds to London where he links up with the international criminal, Old Death—hideous looking fellow. Old Death, perhaps the least impressive of Reynolds, great criminals—Tony Tidkins, the Resurrection Man, Old Death, Chiffen the Cannibal of the Lady Saxondale volume, and the Burker of the Fortunes of the Ashtons. The Burker is closest in evil to the best, The Resurrection Man. These criminals will leave you gasping for breath. Through Old Death we learn that Rain has a mistress, the beauteous Jewess, Tamar. A little alarm goes off when we learn she is a Jewess, that this isgoing to be a Jewish story in the heart of the forties and in the middle of Disraeli’s trilogy. Subsequently we are introduced to her sister Ester de Medina and her fine old Jewish parents Mr. and Mrs. de Medina. Tamar and Ester are not twins but as the two were born nine months apart, perhaps they were almost twins because they were so close to each other in birth that they didn’t completely differentiate as Reynolds amusingly speculates. So Ester and Tamar only appear to be twins to the careless eye. So, now that we can connect the rest of the family to Tamar it looks like a full fledged Jewish story, and they do occupy three or four hundred pages of the mammoth novel. So, Reynolds engages the Jews. I speculate that Reynolds had read Isaac D’Israeli’s ‘The Genius Of Judaism’, and his son’s Coningsby and possibly Sybil, Tancred not have been issued at the time of writing, and that he is in reaction to those writings. Jews will occupy his attentions in III and IV as well as in The Wehrwolf also of 1847 and The Necromancer of 1851. While he characterizes different types of Jews in his volumes, at this point, perhaps in reaction to The Genius of Judaism he appears to be showing the Jews how to integrate into English society rather than maintaining the complete separation described by Isaac in The Genius of Judaism. His son’s version of Jews and English is a reflection of Isaac’s vision. According to Isaac in his The Genius of Judaism a whole set of procedures were put in place to guarantee separation of Jews and Gentiles. Actually, since Jews inhabit Houses they don’t build, that is other nations, a rigid set of regulations is necessary. Yet, every year a large percentage falls away else the Jewish population would be much larger. Only the dedicated remain; those who recognize the fatuousness of the belief system move on. The Rothschilds themselves were considered messiahs, with some justification, by the faithful. Thus, Reynolds attempting to show his set of Jews how to assimilate perfectly is committing the Catholic crime of proselytizing. His attitude seems somewhat ambiguous. The greatest challenge to Mr. de Menil, who by the way, appears to be Sephardic not Ashkenazi. The difference is important since non—Jews considered the Sephardics much more respectable than the Ashkenazi, as did Jews themselves. The de Menils may have lived in England for four hundred years, living in disguise. The D’Israelis themselves according to Benjamin must have been Sephardics because their ancestors were expelled from Spain in 1492, exiled to Venice, while arriving in England about 1740 where the picking were better, I mean, for a better life. The Rothschilds were Ashkenazi so that Isaac’s ancestry was superior to the Rothschild’s riches. Reynolds was a Liberal and he exhibited all the faults that Liberals do today. For instance he had some very strange notions of criminal reformation. In a critical situation he had imprisoned his adversary, Old Death in one of Old Death’s subterranean cells completely denied light. Apparently Reynolds’ sincere belief was that that if a criminal was imprisoned in darkness for a period he would ponder the error of his ways and hence reform when the blessed light was restored. Then he could be guided to complete restoration of honesty if treated decently. Old Death had been imprisoned with a few of his gang. According to Reynolds, his scheme of reformation worked perfectly, except for Old Death. The rest were completely reformed and released into society ever thankful to Rain. So, Rains scheme worked well for those former criminals. Old Death however was an inveterate, hardened criminal. He knew well how to dissimulate and fool Rain. The next part is so nutty that one would have to question Reynolds’ intelligence. Believing that the tender attention of the female sex might jolly Old Death along he employed the beautiful and sympathetic Ester de Menil to lead Old Death on. Ester speaks to Old Death through a grate in the door. Old Death is laughing up his sleeve as he deludes Ester and Rain that the plan to convert him is succeeding. The great prize of having the door opened is obtained by Old Death. However before this circumstances call Rain and Ester away so that he substitutes his wife Tamara for Ester Remember she looks like a twin. Tamara without instructions is naïve. Old Death persuades her to open the door and actually come inside. He then pounces on her and beats her to death, smashing her beautiful face in on vengeance to Rain. Because the two women look so alike he believes he is killing Ester not Tamar. What is going on in Reynolds’ mind here? In a few months Rain and Georgiana Hatfield will become reconciled and marry. It is necessary then for Tamara to be put aside some how and murdering her was the solution. Old Death’s hatred of Rain would explain the brutal murder of Tamar and her defacement as Old Death believed Esther was Rain’s wife but still the murder is so repulsive that one is led to believe that Reynolds had an ulterior motive. The irony of Old Death thinking that Ester was Rain’s wife and then killing his actual wife by mistake is one of those little twists that Reynolds employs continually that keeps the reader on his toes. .7. After having turned the grateful De Menils into English people Reynolds goes on into a longish diatribe on Judaism. While Reynolds is supposed to have been read mainly by the working class or read to illiterates by professional readers that may been exaggerated. Consider this passage: Quote: We have been much gratified in observing that our attempts to vindicate the Jews against most of the unjust charges that it seems to be a traditionary fashion to level against them, haven’t passed unnoticed. All the Jewish papers have quoted the passage at page 172 of the series of “The Mysteries of London”. Many provincial journals have transferred it to their columns; and in No. 173 pf Chambers Edinburgh Journal (New Series) it was printed with the following record of approval on the part of the editors of that well considered periodical: We cordially agree in the openly defense of a cruelly misrepresented people. Unquote. Obviously his readers included a fair number of Jews including Jewish newspaper editors which may indicate that he was being monitored to detect anti-Jewish tendencies. In the Shires he also must have had a readership among those following literature. If editors of the Two Nations snipped excerpts out of the installments he was taken quite seriously. Indeed, in these two series he frequently appears to preach and in quite elevated language and concepts. It is difficult to believe that installments that professional readers read to illiterate listeners could be understood by them. Or perhaps they ended up like Richard Markham’s butler who admired and humourously mispronounced big words but little understood them. I, myself, have dealt with illiterates who quite cleverly listened closely to what I was saying and then cleverly paraphrased my words and contents back seeming to further the conversation. Remarkable to myself, while if they heard me and repeated me I was quite impressed with my own original delivery. Having then done the honors to the Jews, he later in the volume presents the Jews that were not righteous and apparently not misrepresented. He turns to a usurer, which type he seems to be very familiar with, who grinds his debtors into the dust with great pleasure and no remorse. A quite savage attack compared to his adulation of the de Menils. One wonders how Jewish editors reacted to this version of the Jew. The Jewish usurer is represented many times in the corpus, each of a different type. But English society was evolving. Coningsby was published in 1844 while his Tancred was published in 1847 that cast the Jewish situation in an updated light just before the revolution of 1848. One must believe that Disraeli was aware of the machinations set to occur in 1848. The coming of that revolution seems to have been an open secret. In ‘Tancred or the New Crusade’ the new crusade was to originate in the Middle East and roll over Europe reversing the old crusade. While, to my knowledge the 1848 revolution didn’t originate in the Middle East it was certainly difficult to suppress. Disraeli says the ’48 was originated and executed wholly by the Jews, for what that’s worth. Floods of defeated revolutionaries fled for the safety of the United States. That was the first really large number of Jews to emigrate to the US. As fortune would have it the US was in the midst of an unparalleled industrial, technological and territorial expansion that provided unheard of opportunities. The ’48 Jews prospered accordingly so that when the Eastern Jews of the Pale began to be transferred from Europe to America in the 70s and 80s they were rapidly absorbed in what become Jewish industries, among them the needle trades and movies. With the failure of ’48 hope seemed to vanish from Reynold’s breast. Terminating his Mysteries of London in 1848 he began his next great work, moving back from a disappointing present to the days of George III and the Regency of George IV. His fantastic vision of Richard Markham’s successes in Castelcicala and utopian views of the perfect democracy freed from hereditary aristocracy and monarchy by Richard take up a fair portion of Series III and IV. While his mind was occupied by those visions, the Jewish situation was reaching crisis proportions. His novel was apparently read, discussed and pondered by the Jewish population but they disregarded his assimilationist advice. He became disillusioned and an alarmist when he realized that the Jewish desire was, for the nonce anyway, a dual monarchy. Remember that Nathan Rothschild’s establishment was titled The New Court. Lionel bullied his way into Parliament as a Jew on his own terms in the mid-fifties. The probability was noted as early as 1851 when George published his novel The Necromancer. Using an allegorical approach, placing the novel in the time of Henry VIII he warned of the arrival of the dual kingship. Perhaps warned away, one can’t confirm it as yet, George turned more to historical romances and his ‘biographical’ novels. By 1860 England had entered into a more mature or post phase of the Industrial Revolution moving into the Scientific Revolution heralded by Darwin’s Origin of Species published in 1859. Reynolds was no futurist, he left that to men like Jules Vern, his specialty was the past. George ended his career as a novelist to concentrate on his famous newspaper that survived until 19, that’s nineteen, 67. Disraeli prospered through the period realizing his life’s dream to become Prime Minister. Reynolds died in 1879 having realized his dream of becoming a Man of the World. Disraeli died in 1881, Lionel Rothschild in 1880, closing the era.