Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Mitta Xinindlu

Quote by Mitta Xinindlu

“Dear Fellowship of Astrology, According to my astrology faith, Venus is the goddess of fertility, feminine energy, creation, and renewal. It is the divine power that blesses wombs with fruitful outcomes. Those who carry a womb are not marked for chaos, nor are they marked for death. They are the bearers of life itself. Yet, I believe that because of their sacred gift and their fertile carriage of creation, they naturally attract those who wish them harm; those who seek to defile their bodies and all that sets them apart. For when the original House of fertility and creation is destroyed, the very foundation of life itself begins to fall. To my fellow worshippers of astrology: let us remember the divine message of Venus which is to honour the womb, to protect creation, and to rise in the radiant strength of the feminine force. This has been the message of the Month of October, but please carry it onwards.”

Quote by Mitta Xinindlu

Author

Mitta Xinindlu

Browse famous quotes and profile details for Mitta Xinindlu. more

You May Also Like

“She'd become accustomed to letting the garden grow uncontrolled since her father left. And that had suited both Harriet and the garden. They'd both been free to move about as they liked, to behave how it felt natural to behave. Harriet's decision not to prune was why the vines climbed so high along the house this summer, why the roses covered the garden walls and the blackberry brambles spread out as they did, decorating the bricks between the house and the railroad tracks with as many brilliant green leaves as menacing thorns. It was why the plum tree's fruit lay about the place all summer and its flowers bloomed brilliantly in the spring. It was why the bluebells stood in their own self-proliferating patches beneath the trees and rosebushes and wherever they pleased. Why her evergreen hedges were not neatly trimmed and why the hawthorn tree at the front towered over the gate. Her garden was filled with so much fierce beauty, she knew it would not take kindly to being clipped to the quick.”

“Purpose and Perspective: This work, which the author acknowledges is essentially a synthesis drawing upon the results of many other detailed studies, offers a new approach to both the burgeoning study of regions in English history and on the established discussion of the nature of Yorkist and early Tudor government (Foreword by Professor A. J. Pollard, p. iv). The study aims to explore whether a regional approach to late medieval English politics and governance is feasible, with specific reference to south-west England during the later fifteenth century. The relative importance of regions, in comparison to counties, will be explored by examination of the elites, politics, and government of Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, and Dorset from 1450 to 1500. But such an undertaking raises the fundamental question of whether a regional approach to the study of the south-western shires (or indeed any grouping of neighbouring counties anywhere in England) is valid–was there anything more to a ‘south-west region’ than simply a set of separate shires? That problem has made it necessary to study the south-west in a longer and broader context, in political terms, across the whole of the later fifteenth century (p.1). Certain aspects of the political history of south-west England have received attention from historians, mostly in the form of family or county studies… (p.19). Despite these admirable and informative studies, therefore, there are still significant lacunae in our understanding of particular aspects of the region’s governance during the later fifteenth century. Consequently, a regional investigation of the south-west political elites spanning the later fifteenth century might draw on earlier research and offer a broader perspective of court–country relations. A regional perspective of the interaction of local and national government would make possible a greater evaluation of the role of the duchy of Cornwall and the impact of the Wars of the Roses in the region (p. 21).”

“Edward IV’s ‘regional’ policy: The stimulus for this investigation was D.A.L. Morgan’s analysis of Edward IV’s second reign… Morgan proceeded to explain that this ‘territorial re-ordering’ was designed to cure disorder and lawlessness in the localities. Thus, Morgan suggested, Edward intended ‘the creation of an apanage’ for his second son, Richard, Duke of York, and that ‘by 1475 the plan was to endow him with a collection of lands in the East Midlands’. Also, the king ‘bent his efforts to making his elder son’s household at Ludlow the governing power in Wales and the West Midlands...and similarly to establishing his brother [Richard, Duke of] Gloucester as heir to the Neville lands and ruler of the North’. Furthermore ‘1474 saw the scheme pushed forward...and the beginning of an apanage endowment for the king’s stepson Thomas Grey [Marquess of Dorset] in the South-West’. Moreover, Edward’s ‘two leading household men were fitted in as the heads of further regional blocs’: his steward, Thomas, Lord Stanley, was ‘made undoubted ruler of Lancashire’, while ‘in Cheshire and north-east Wales also Stanley power was extended’ through Stanley’s brother, William; and the king’s chamberlain, William, Lord Hastings, ‘similarly emerged in 1474 as ruler of the North Midlands from Rockingham to the Peak’ (pp. 1–2). …the concept of Edward IV’s provincial policy raises much broader questions… whether this regional policy was planned or unintentional, and also as to whether its consequences were constructive or destructive. Furthermore, in a broader context, Edward’s scheme also suggests the importance of issues concerning the concept of regions, with potential implications for our study of politics and government in the localities, as well as questions regarding royal authority, governance, and the constitution, in general, in the later fifteenth century (p. 5). …This topic [Arbitration] is inseparable from the wider consideration of justice, and law and order, and these aspects could be the subject of substantial research in themselves; hence the remit of this study is specifically limited to questions of politics and governance. Arbitration of disputes may indicate a magnate’s influence and local standing, but this is, of course, not the only way in which to ascertain a magnate’s power in the localities: consideration of his estates, offices, and clientele reveals the extent to which his lordship pervaded local society (p. 8).”