Mayflower Pub London, a dream relived

Piccadilly, which bounds the south side, was originally the medieval high road to Reading. By the 1500s, Piccadilly was a thriving fashion centre, taking its name from the ruff lace collars that were made in local workshops. Piccadilly’s north side was lined with the London homes of the country’s landed gentry; of which the most important were Burlington, Cambridge, Albany and Devonshire Houses

Established in 1550, and London's oldest pub to be built by the Thames, the Mayflower Pub overflowed with history. Set in the London homeport of Rotherhithe, the pub is located at the original mooring point of Pilgrim Fathers’ Mayflower ship which, under the command of Capt Christopher Jones, set sail on its epic journey to America in July 1620.

Front entrance and seating,

Rotherhithe St

View over the river, Tripadvisor

At low tide see original 1620 mooring point of Pilgrim Father’s Mayflower ship

In July 1620, the Mayflower ship took 65 passengers aboard, from its London homeport of Rotherhithe on the River Thames. It is believed that the Pilgrim Fathers had their last meal and gathered provisions in this very establishment. Rumour suggested that Capt Jones cunningly moored here to avoid paying taxes further down the river. The Mayflower journeyed onwards to Southampton for supplies and to rendezvous with the Speedwell ship. But after many delays, false starts and a dangerous leak, the Speedwell’s journey with The Mayflower was abandoned. In Sept 1620, Captain Jones set sail with 102 passengers and c30 crew members from Plymouth on a prosperous wind. 

After sighting land in Nov 1620, strong winter seas forced the Rotherhithe captain to anchor at Cape Cod, much further North than the original destination, Virginia. To establish legal order in their new homeland, the settlers agreed to write and sign The Mayflower Compact. In Nov the Mayflower anchored at Cape Cod where the settlers signed the Compact, which set out the first framework of a U.S government. The Mayflower pub apparently had some of the ship’s original timbers incorporated into its structure

Capt Jones later returned to London on the Mayflower, arriving at the home port of Rotherhithe in May 1621. He died less than a year later and was buried at St Mary's church in Rotherhithe. This was close to the mooring point of the Mayflower where she sank in the Thames, no longer useful as a ship. A commemorative plaque to Mayflower voyage now adorns the side of St Mary’s church; plus a memorial statue, dedicated to the memory of Captain Christopher Jones, sits in the churchyard.

dark and atmospheric with wooden furniture, cosy open fire 

Mayflower Pub ran from 1686-1764, before it was supressed by the area's new residents. Clearly they didn’t take to the annual visit of showmen, jugglers, prize-fighters, semolina eating contests, prostitutes and heaps of cheap ale on their doorstep. The pub was rebuilt in 1780 as the Spread Eagle and Crown, renamed The Mayflower later, and its history is tied to the ship which set sail from a nearby wharf.

Anyone visiting the Mayflower Pub, if they are direct descents from one of the Pilgrim fathers, is welcome to sign the Descendants Book. So strong is the Mayflower’s connections to the U.S that it is the only pub in the UK that is licensed to sell US postage stamps.

A visit offers amazing riverside views from its terrace whilst inside offers wooden pews, a cosy fire and a lively, authentic atmosphere. To deepen the historic experience, wander to St Mary’s Church across from The Mayflower and you can see the grave of Captain Christopher Jones himself.

Nestled on the Thames, The Mayflower Pub in Rotherhithe is a true London treasure, offering a fine blend of history, hospitality, and stunning riverside views. My last visit was a pleasure, and it's easy to see why this establishment holds a special place in the hearts of locals and visitors alike. The first thing that captivates you is the location. The pub's outdoor seating area provides an unparalleled panorama of the river, with views that stretch from the iconic Canary Wharf skyline to the bustling activity on the water. The views alone are worth the trip.

While the scenery is breathtaking, the staff makes The Mayflower special. When patrons walk in, they are met with genuine warmth and efficiency. They are happy to offer recommendations and share a bit of the pub's fascinating history, making for a truly welcoming experience. 

The walls are covered with many historical portraits, paintings and maps

The beers are kept in great condition, and beer drinkers say it was a pleasure to sample a few of the options on tap. There’s something for every taste and the quality is above average pub fare. [Since I don't drink beer, good wine and friendly staff are more important to me]. A must-visit for anyone looking for an essentially British pub experience with a touch of romance.

It is situated directly opposite Sands Films and Picture Research Library, adjacent to The Brunel Museum.

Freddie Mercury: The Final Tribute

Born to Western Indian parents who had immigrated to Zanzibar, Farrokh Bulsara (1946-91) showed an early inclination for the arts. His family moved to England when he was 17, which soon led to the teenager playing in bands around London, later meeting guitarist Brian Mays and drummer Roger Taylor. The trio founded Queen in 1970 and brought on bassist John Deacon a year later. Bulsara also changed his name then to Freddie Mercury

Rock band Queen, 1973.

L->R drummer Roger Taylor, singer Freddie Mercury, guitarist Brian May, bassist John Deacon,  Getty

Mercury lived at his Kensington home, Garden Lodge. He bought the property in 1980 and lived there permanently. Mercury kept private his personal life yet it was known that despite romances with men, he lived most of his later life with his best friend and common-law wife Mary Austin.

Freddie Mercury, Wembley Stadium, 1985, Facebook

The crowd was huge, 1985

Over the 1980s decade, with their blend of glam and heavy metal rock, Queen rocketed to international superstardom, releasing MY favourite hits Rhapsody and We Are The Champions, anthems boosted by the group’s superb guitar work and dramatic vocals. By then Queen had become a global phenomenon and Mercury had become one of the world’s most popular rock stars. 

Queen played their famous Live Aid set at Wembley in 1985. Mercury sang on stage, and the band delivered a flawless bracket of music that captivated the audience and history books. Few concerts carried the emotional power and legendary status of the Live Aid performance; this wasn’t just a rock concert, it was a once-off music moment.

Freddie kept his struggle with AIDS a secret, denying his status to the press and not telling the truth even to his band. He was first reported to have sought medical help for the virus in 1982, but wasn’t officially diagnosed until 1987, while his meteoric music career was apparently still in full swing. He died from AIDS-related bronchial pneumonia, just after the public announcement.

The most significant concert after Mercury's death was The Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert for AIDS Awareness, to be held April 1992 at Wembley Stadium. Harvey Goldsmith promoted the concert. Rehearsals were held at Nomis Studios London and at Wembley Stadium in early April 1992.

The tribute featured the surviving Queen members (Brian May, Roger Taylor, John Deacon) with many other major artists. Queen assigned their songs to the list of great artists, having decided beforehand which singers would sound best on each track. The artists included Metallica and Guns N' Roses, George Michael, Elton John, Liza Minnelli, David Bowie and others.

Though 75,000 people filled Wembley Stadium, 1+ billion people watched globally. In July 1992, this concert has been voted the greatest live concert, back then. 75+ of the biggest acts in rock & roll performed that night, the concert lasting 4.5 hours! To read the list of performers and songs, and the photos, look up Smooth Radio.

Freddie and Queen totally stole the show! They celebrated Mercury's life and raised £20 million for AIDS research. It was broadcast live worldwide, and watched by c1 billion people. The proceeds from the concert were used to launch the Mercury Phoenix Trust, minus the monies used for travel accommodations for stars.

72,000 tickets were sold for that night. A live tv broadcast was produced by Jim Beach, directed by David Mallet and broadcast to 70 nations. One billion people were estimated to have watched the concert live on television.

`

George Michael with Queen

The 1992 crowd at Wembley

 

When I replayed the concert programme many years later, the crowd reception was an unforgettable mix of profound sadness and triumphant celebration. I have been to many public concerts in my life, but never was a concert so characterised by endless energy and an outpouring of love for Mercury and his music. The audience was deeply moved, singing along with an almost explosive sound during Freddie's songs, treating it as a celebration of his life and a call to action to prevent AIDS.

The atmosphere was electric, making it an unforgettable event for those present and those viewers overseas. The general consensus was that George Michael’s version of Somebody to Love was the most brilliant. For me the performance of Bohemian Rhapsody by Queen, Elton John and Axl Rose, was the most moving.

Was the Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert world's greatest rock concert ever? No, Queen's iconic performance at Live Aid in July 1985 has been named the world's greatest, in an industry poll. But of course the personal participation of Mercury made the 1985 concert very special, and the clear model for the Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert in 1992.

World's most liveable city. Hello Vienna!

The Global Liveability Survey is a measure of urban quality of life, published annually by the Economist Intelligence Unit/EIU. The EIU is a multi-nat­ional media company based in London, best known as publish­er of The Economist 

baroque Plaque Column, Vienna

1679. Bing

Vienna kohlmarkt

The survey assesses 140 of the world’s major cities in fixed cat­egories, stab­ility, education, universal health care, public trans­port, culture and envir­on­ment. Cities were scored out of 100, with the avail­ability of goods and services pushing scores up and pers­onal risk (guns, terrorism) pushing down.

In 2010 & 2011, Vancouver remained in top position. Even in 2014, 2015 and 2016, the top cities have remained amazingly constant, scoring VERY closely:

1 Melbourne; 
2 Vienna;
3 Vancouver;
4 Toronto;
5 Calgary;
6 Sydney;
7 Helsinki;
8 Perth; 
9 Adelaide;
10: Auckland.

Australian and Canadian cities did best, capturing 7 of the top 10 spots. So why did the world’s most powerful cities not score well? Global business centres (cities with 8+ mill­ion) eg New York, London, Paris and Tokyo were victims of their own size, with strained public transport, higher crime rates and crowd­ing. London ranked 53rd! In addition, The Economist Intelligence Unit show­ed Europe scores had been pushed down a bit by the euro-zone crisis.

The report concluded the best scoring cities were mid-sized cities (2-4 mill) in weal­thier countries with a relatively low population density. Cities with a significant proportion of their area allocated to green parkland did well, as did cities with Olympic Games-standard sporting facilities.

But some disagree that the successful cities were equally live­able for all residents eg The Victorian Council of Social Ser­­vice said Melbourne's top ranking failed to recognise the growing disparity between those who can afford to live where the services and jobs are, and those who have to live in areas of high unemployment, expensive housing and very long public transport commutes. [NB aggr­eg­ated stats lose individual differences in overall results].

The same Global Liveability Survey listed Damascus Syria as the least liveable cities in the Aug 2015 index, although Harare Zimbabwe, Dhaka Bangladesh, Tripoli Libya, Lagos Nigeria and Port Moresby PNG were close. But that too can change. Ongoing conflicts in Syria, Ukraine and Libya might have been predicted, but totally unexpected tragedies in France, Belgium, Tunisia, Ukraine and Gaza were not predict­ab­le. In Athens, governmental austerity reduced employment and reduced the provision of public services.

European cities dominated the top 10 positions in the Quality of Living Rankings, with Vienna remaining in the No.1 spot and Zurich, Geneva, Munich, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt and Copenhagen coming in the top 10. How could the Mercer results be so different from the Glob­al Liveability Survey results, in the same year? Because this American global human resource and fin­an­c­ial firm, is more infl­uenced by business concerns eg currency exch­ange regulations, banking services, housing costs and consumer goods.

The Economist Intelligence Unit is a British business providing fore­casting and advisory services through research and analysis, includ­ing country, industry and management analyses world-wide. It has pub­lished an annual Global Liveability Ranking which began in 2004. The Unit ranks cities for their urb­an quality of life, based on assess­ments across five categories: stability, infrastructure, healthcare and culture, education and environment.

With Melbourne winning the world title for the many previous years, it may come as a surprise to Australians that in 2018 Vienna for the first time topped the EIU’s Global Liveability Index. The diff­eren­ces between the top 30 cities in this index were small. Vienna and Melbourne were VERY close in the index of 140 urban cen­tres for years, and are still separated by less than a point.

In 2018, Vienna was the World's Most Liveable City, the results being: 1. Vienna Austria; 2. Melbourne Australia; 3. Osaka Japan; 4. Calgary Canada; 5. Sydney Aus; 6. Vancouver Canada; 7. Toronto Canada, Tokyo Japan; 9. Copen­hagen Denmark and 10. Adelaide Aus. Vienna and Melbourne saw an improve­ment in their score this year, scoring maximum points in health-care, educ­ation and infra­structure. But while Melbourne extended its lead in the cult­ure and environment component, that was out­weighed by Vienna’s improved stability ranking. Os­aka's impro­ved in public traffic, as well as a consistent dec­line in crime rates, contributed to Osaka’s im­p­roved ratings in infra­structure and stability categories.

Osaka, Calgary and Sydney filled the top 5 positions. The EIU be­lieved the survey usually favoured medium-sized cities in wealthy countries, of­ten with relatively low population densities. Larger, more crowd­ed cities tended to have higher crime rates and more strained infrast­ruc­ture.

Australia and Can­ada achieved great liveability results, as expect­ed. Melbourne (98.4%), Sydney (97.4%) and Adelaide were joined by Calgary (97.5%), Vancouver (97.3%) and Toronto (97.2%) in the Top Ten. But apart from Vien­na, only one other European city achieved a great rating. This was Copen­hagen, 9th place at 96.8%. Helsinki and Ham­burg, who held Top Ten places last year, dropped out.

Green spaces are important. 50% of Vienna comprises green areas, parklands and gardens that can be reached on foot or by tram. Mel­bourne has huge public parks and wide, tree-lined boul­evards. Vancouver has its harbour setting, with beaut­iful parks and gardens. Copenhagen has fine Botanical and Tivoli facilities.

Now examine January Magazine's published results of The 2020 Best Countries Report which was part of US News’ Government Rank­ings init­iative, measuring government performance at the state and inter­national levels.

Overall Best Countries results 2020
1. Switzerland
2. Canada
3. Japan
4. Germany
5. Australia
6. United Kingdom
7. United States
8. Sweden
9. Netherlands
10. Norway and New Zealand

Regarding Switzerland, the report emphasised that “Switzerland has low unemp­loyment, a skilled labour force and one of the highest gross domestic products per capita in the world, according to the CIA World Factbook. The country’s strong economy was powered by low corporate tax rates, a highly-developed service sector led by financial services and a high-tech manufacturing industry.”

Citizens painted a bleak picture when asked about nations’ trust­­worth­in­ess. While the US was seen as the most powerful country in the wor­ld, it was not seen as trustworthy. Can­ada was seen as the most trustworthy country, and has been since the first Best Count­ries re­port in 2016. During the same time, perceptions of the US as being trust­worthy steadily drop­­ped to a record low of 16.3 on a 100-point scale. As did UK also fall in this attribute

There was global consensus about climate change’s effects, 87% agr­eeing it was serious. Of the 36 countries surveyed, people in Rus­sia agreed about climate change the least (71%), and Indonesia ag­reed the most (97%) with Nigeria, Kenya and South Africa. Only 60% agreed their country addressed climate change.

For Quality of Life in 2022
1. Canada
2. Denmark
3. Sweden
4. Norway
5. Australia
6. Netherlands
7. Switzerland
8. New Zealand
9. Finland
10. Germany

Since 2012 the World Happiness Report has published World's Most Liveable Cities in an annual survey ran by the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Solutions Network. The survey ranks global happiness in countries globally and the World Happin­ess Report’s most imp­ortant source has always been the Gallup World Poll, unique in the range and com­parability of its global series of annual surveys. The Gal­lup World Poll prov­ide the basis for the an­nual happiness rankings have always drawn in readers who want to know how their nation is faring but soon become curious about the secrets of life in the happ­iest countries. Right from the outset, we received very favour­able terms from Gallup and the very best of treatment. Gallup resear­ch­ers have also contrib­uted to the content of several World Happin­ess Reports. The value of this part­ner­ship was recognised by two Better­ment of the Human Conditions Awards from the Society for Quality of Life Studies. Although the statisticians typically base the ranking on data from the Gallup World Poll, this year was a bit differ­ent. Since the researchers were unable to do face-to-face in­terviews in a number of countries, they focused on the relation­ship between well-being and Covid-19 in order to rank the countries.

“Surprisingly there was not, on average, a decline in well-being when measured by people’s own evaluation of their lives. A possible explan­ation is that people see Covid-19 as a common, outside threat affecting everybody and this has generated a greater sense of solidarity and fellow-feeling.”

We need urgently to learn from Covid-19. The pandemic reminds us of our global environmental threats, the urgent need to cooperate, and the difficulties of achieving cooperation in each country and glob­al­ly. The World Happiness Report 2021 reminds us that we must aim for wellbeing rather than mere wealth, which will be fleeting indeed if we don’t do a much better job of addressing the challenges of sustainable development.”

Adelaide

Melbourne

Osaka

Vancouver

It's official! In 2021 Finland is the Happiest Country in the world for the 4th year running. So where did other countries fall on the list this year? Norway slipped a bit this year, coming in at #8. Last year, Norway was at #5, and in 2019, Norway was in the top three overall. United Kingdom slipped 4 spots from 2020, coming in at #18, while Germany is at 7—up 10 spots. Another big leap was Croatia, which rose to 23 this year, up from #79 in 2020.

One of the countries that had a challenging time this past year—China—made the top 20 in 2021, coming in at number 19. It was a dramatic leap from last year, when China was at 94. But the researchers, who took a deep dive into the lessons learned in Asia, weren’t surprised. “The East Asian experience shows that stringent government policies not only control Covid-19 effectively, but also buffer the negative impact of daily infections on people’s happiness,” said the Korea Development Institute.

There were similar success rates in Australia, which ranked #12 and New Zealand at #9 “The evidence shows that people’s morale improves when the government acts,” says the editors. Besides the happiest countries in the world, the Happiness Report also looked at the places where people are the most miserable. This year, countries like Afghanistan, Zimbabwe, Tanzania and Jordan were ranked as some of the unhappiest countries in the world.

Vienna was named the world's most liveable city in 2024 for the 3rd year running, according to the EIU's latest results. Two Can­adian cit­ies (Calgary, Vancouver) and 4 in Asia-Pacific (Melbourne, Sydney, Osaka,Auckland) completed the top 10. 

The 2020 Best Countries methodology used data gathered from a sur­vey of 20,000 business leaders; college educated individuals; and general citizens who were repres­ent­ative of their count­ry. The goal of the Best Countries report was to understand how global perceptions are related to investment, foreign trade and tourism of a nation. But Best Count­ries should also measure peace for the re­sidents, democracy, universal health care, adequate social housing, unemployment rates, free schooling for all children.

Beyond the essential ideas of broad access to food and housing, to quality education and health care and employment, the Quality of Life measure may also include intangibles such as job security, political stability, individual freedom and environmental quality.

And I have another question. Does cultural diversity add to a city’s overall liveability? If GIU could measure cultural div­ersity (eg the proportion of a city’s population born overseas), Toronto might maximise its score. But then if climate was one of the included catagories, Toronto might go down the list a tad and Barcelona might go up the little.

Maria Anna & Wolfgang Mozart: 2 geniuses?

Until she was 16, Maria Anna Mozart (1751-1829) shared equal billing with her brother Wolfgang Mozart (1756-91), 5 years younger. Musical partners and collaborators, Wolfgang and Maria Anna played music together before royalty, and were the talk of Europe. So what happened to her?

Wolfgang (L) and sister Maria Anna (R) were devoted to each other and ?co-writers of Wolfgang’s earliest work. 
FrontRowCentre

Maria Anna was the first child of Leopold Mozart, a musician and composer who had his daughter musically educated from a young age. Maria showed great talent, a child prodigy in both composing and playing. When Wolfgang was young, he was quickly engrossed in playing music with his sister. The film featured emotional images of this childhood bond, emphasising the siblings’ cooperation with music. Leopold recognised his children’s unusual talents; he soon had them travelling and playing concerts to the European aristocracy.

According to a new film Mozart’s Sister (2012), imagined the Mozart family's tiring life on the road from 1763 on, travelling by coach from one royal court to another. Together the wonder-children toured most of Europe. Contemporary reviews praised Maria, and she was even billed first on promotional posters. As a child, there was no issue with performing for an audience. But skilled singer, harpsichord player and violinist nicknamed Nannerl, was first seen as the family's infant prodigy. In the film, she was still performing, though increasingly side-lined by Wolfgang's growing fame. Her father bowed to social strictures for women, refusing to let her continue with violin or composing, while privately conceding Nannerl's talent to his wife. The teen fretted about her career prospects, but was forced to retire at age 17, was left at home, and was never to play in public again.

Having been forced to withdraw from public life because she was now a woman, the film explored how she was retired by dad Leopold and what happened to her music. She had been a musical prodigy just like her younger brother Wolfgang, so naturally she retained her love of music.

The two Mozart siblings, 

The Conversation

An amazing new discovery of her creative work is being uncovered through historians, musicologists, letters between siblings and other evidence. If confirmed, this new evidence suggests she may have contributed to her brother’s earliest works; a global search for her own works continues. The musical-mystery story unfolded around the world with historians following why her lost talent may have been hidden all this time.

This film came at a time, 2012, when many people were reassessing the nature of female authorship in the arts. The Mozart case was not an oddity. There were many other examples of women whose talent was obscured OR completely lost. Many people analysed the less well-known female creators of today, composers, musicians and conductors, as well as the very low rates of female participation in classical music today. In 2020-21 season a survey of the top 100 global orchestras found 5% of works were composed by women!

Writer René Féret's film was partly a feminist reclaiming of one of history's lost women, plus a revisionist version of Mozart's early life. The issues commanded attention, including a clear sense of the hardship and bitterness Mozart Sr put his family through. Marc Barbé and Delphine Chuillot were Léopold and Anna-Maria Mozart, the parents who put their children through a gruelling continental tour. Their 10-year-old Wolfgang/David Moreau was remarkable.

The person who felt all this most keenly was Mozart's elder sister, Nannerl, played by the writer’s daughter Marie Féret. She was reduced to the status of Wolfgang's accompanist, despite being a talented musician and having, she claimed, contributed to her brother's compositions. Then a quirk of fate led to her friendship with the King's younger daughter Louise, played by another Féret daughter, Lisa Féret. The exchanges between Louise and Nannerl were sometimes tough. But the two sisters’ performances had a kind of rugged authenticity that attracted.

Maria Anna and Wolfgang at piano, and parents Leopold and Anna Maria;

by Austrian artist Johann Nepomuk della Croce,
c1780; Mozart House, Salzburg. Wiki 

Maria Anna and Wolfgang were inseparable and often composed together. But this ended when Maria Anna turned 17. For women musicians in C18th, it was thought unseemly for a girl to perform in public, likening this public performance to that of a prostitute. Regardless of their skill, these women wouldn’t have any career prospects. They were even banned from playing musical instruments deemed unseemly eg violin and cello. Even though this was during the Enlightenment, any enlightenment was reserved for white men only. Definitely not to women! Yet Wolfgang continued pursuing music at will. Maria Anna’s musical talents weren’t even encouraged at home. Her life was only illustrated through her diary entries, which ware mainly filled with ordinary family events.

Maria Anna married Johann Baptist von Berchtold zu Sonnenburg in 1783 and had 3 children . They moved to St Gilgen in Austria near the Mozart family home in Salzburg, and continued to practise music daily. On her husband’s death in 1801, and now with an income and a title (baroness) in her 50s, she returned to solo concerts.

Mozart’s Sister was a documentary that functioned on several levels. A] It was a biopic that portrayed Maria Anna’s story by recreating her childhood. The narration and interviews highlighted her relationship with her brother. It was filmed in Austria and framed by present-day museum curators and experts. B] The film was a broader statement on the non-appearance of female composers.

Director Madeleine Hetherton-Miau’s created a hard-hitting documentary. The film offered a well-researched investigation into Maria Anna’s life, showing how the draconian attitudes that prevailed in her time condemned her to a lesser life than Wolfgang, even though she was equally talented. It also reminded of the importance of championing women musicians today, to avoid discrimination being repeated. The director was excellent in portraying this duality via the contrast of Maria Anna’s path with the brilliant young British composer Alma Deustger (b2005). Deustger has great skills in composing and conducting, but she was able to pursue her passion and make it her career. The film used a recent literary trend i.e discussions of how talented women in history were overshadowed by their more famous male equals, then overlooked totally.