text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/66

Hart officers. Hart laboriously compiled for his own information a large number of these services from military histories and other sources. Very meagre information was then afforded by the official army lists. Hart gradually added to his own interleaved copies until, while yet a subaltern, he had accumulated so large a mass of information as to suggest the publication of an army list of his own. Aided greatly by his wife in his literary labours, Hart, in February 1839, having obtained the approval of the military authorities, published the first edition of his ‘Quarterly Army List.’ It was at once favourably received by the queen and the Duke of Wellington, and other high authorities. Hart was allowed access to the official records of officers' services, and in 1840 published his first ‘Annual Army List,’ containing supplementary information of interest, in addition to the contents of the ‘Quarterly.’ He also projected a military biographical dictionary, specimen pages of which he issued, but never found time to carry out the work. From the first appearance of ‘Hart's Army List’ to the present day the annual and quarterly volumes have regularly appeared. The original form has never been altered, although the book has gone through two hundred editions.

Hart never allowed his literary avocations to interfere with his professional work, and was an admirable regimental officer. He rendered valuable services as a poor law inspector in Ireland during the famine of 1845–6. In 1856, when in temporary command of the depôt battalion at Templemore, by his masterly movements he suppressed a dangerous mutiny of the North Tipperary militia with very little bloodshed, and saved the town of Nenagh from pillage.

Hart married in 1833 Alicia, daughter of the Rev. Holt Okes, D.D., by whom he left a family, including three sons, who all served in the army: General A. Fitzroy Hart, C.B., 1st battalion East Surrey regiment (the present editor of ‘Hart's Army List’), Colonel Reginald Clare Hart, V.C., royal engineers, and Major Horatio Holt Hart, royal engineers. Hart died at Biarritz on 24 March 1878.

 HART, JAMES (fl. 1633), physician, was born probably between 1580 and 1590, and, though his pedigree cannot be traced, most likely in Northamptonshire. In 1607 and 1608, or perhaps longer, he studied in Paris, and travelled in other parts of France. He afterwards lived at Meissen in Saxony; in 1610 was travelling in Bohemia, and went probably later to Basle to complete his studies. Either at Basle or elsewhere on the continent he took the degree of M.D., and about 1612 settled as a physician probably from the first at Northampton, where he lived at least twenty or thirty years, and apparently succeeded in practice. He never belonged to the College of Physicians (though that body licensed his chief work in flattering terms) nor to the Company of Barber-Surgeons. He was a strong puritan, an appellation which he adopts more than once in his writings.

Hart's principal work, ‘Kλινική, or the Diet of the Diseased’ (London, 1633, folio), though little known, is of interest and value. This ‘fruit of twenty years' experience’ is an attempt, quite in harmony with the Hippocratic traditions, to prescribe the proper regimen and physical conditions in disease as well as in health, dealing with health, air, exercise, and the like, though not with drugs. It had scarcely any forerunner in medical literature since the classical times, and though the importance of such matters is now generally recognised, it has had till quite recently but few successors. Its general character is that of a learned compilation modified by common sense and experience. In copiousness of quotation it sometimes almost approaches Burton's ‘Anatomy of Melancholy;’ and the zeal displayed in refuting vulgar errors is worthy of Sir Thomas Browne himself. In rationality and freedom from the tyranny of therapeutic routine it is far in advance of most medical works of the time, and apart from its professional interest presents instructive pictures of the manners and customs of the seventeenth century. Hart's two other works (both dedicated to Charles I when Prince of Wales) are entitled: 1. ‘The Arraignment of Urines, by Peter Forrest, epitomised and translated by James Hart,’ London, 1623, 4to; and 2. ‘The Anatomie of Urines, or the second part of our Discourse on Urines,’ London, 1625, 4to. They expose the fallacies of diagnosis by means of an examination of urine at the hands of ignorant persons, and attack three kinds of trespassers on the medical domain, unlicensed quacks, meddlesome old women, and above all, prescribing divines. The British Museum copy of the first of these works has bound up with it a manuscript chapter, evidently in the handwriting of the author, which it is said ‘could by no means be got to be licensed;’ it also strongly denounces the ‘intrusion of parsons … upon the profession of phisicke.’


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/368

 While the severe climatic conditions that preceded the neolithic age restricted the presence of man to the more temperate parts of the globe, it may be assumed that in neolithic times there was nothing to prevent him from occupying the greater part of the earth’s surface, short of the neighbourhood of the two poles. Thus it may be expected that an age of stone will be found, if looked for, in every part of the globe. So far as our present knowledge goes, all is in favour of the use of stone before metals, in all countries. The one material requires no special treatment before being adapted to man’s use, while the other demands considerable knowledge, even if reasoning power have but little place in the process. Thus the probabilities are here borne out by the facts. In the extensive “kitchen-middens” of Japan are found great numbers of chert implements mixed with pottery of a primitive type, recalling that of European early Bronze Age barrows, while the succeeding periods of metal are equally clear. Even in the Far East, therefore, the same sequence is to be observed. In China, the conditions are more obscure. The superstitious regard for ancestors has prevented the exploration of ancient tombs in that country, and thus systematic search has been impossible, while the precise details of the discovery of such relics as have come to light are difficult to obtain. In spite of the assertion that China had no Stone Age, it is surely more probable, in the absence of exact knowledge, that she followed the normal course. Modern territorial divisions, more especially if they are independent of the natural physical conditions of the land, such as mountain ranges, great rivers and the like, have but little value in considering the race problems of remote ages. If, therefore, we find that, in the countries bordering on what is now the Chinese empire, the ancient inhabitants followed the same broad lines of culture that are evident elsewhere, it is easy to believe that China too was normal in this respect. The negroes and Bantu races of Africa also were thought to have passed direct to the use of iron, perhaps owing to the existence on the Nile of a civilization of great antiquity, which enabled them to pass over the intervening stages. Inherently improbable, this is now known not to have been the case. Stone implements, whether ground or merely chipped, have been discovered on the Congo, and more recently on the Zambezi. It is quite true that in both cases they are found in superficial deposits, and may be of any age. But here again the probabilities are greatly in favour of their having been in use before iron was known. While stone tools, such as knives or arrow-heads, may possess qualities that render them superior to bronze or copper, it is certain that once the working of iron was understood, its superiority to stone would at once be perceived, and the stone tools be discarded. There can be little doubt that investigations in Central Africa will demonstrate that the same course was followed there as elsewhere. In South Africa, in Egypt and in Somaliland large quantities of stone implements have been discovered, and of the great age of most of them there can be no doubt. Some from the banks of the Nile have even been claimed as “eolithic”; but here, as in Europe, We can only say that the case is not proven: General Pitt-Rivers did good service in Egypt by discovering among the stratified gravels near Thebes a number of rude flints bearing unmistakeable signs of human workmanship, but he described them merely as of “palaeolithic type,” and deplored the absence of mammalian remains in the gravels. At the same time he pointed out that the bulk of the implements claimed as palaeolithic (and, it may be, correctly) are found on the surface, and therefore cannot be dissociated from the surface types; hence form alone cannot be trusted to determine age. Further, we are by no means well informed as to the value of patination in flints found on the surface in Egypt. The depth and intensity of the patination would no doubt have a direct relation to the age of the implement, if only it could be proved that all of them had been equally subjected to the conditions that produced the discoloration. But this is clearly impossible. Some implements may conceivably have been continuously on the surface of the desert from the time they were made, and have been acted upon by the sun and air for many thousands of years, while others, though of equal age, may have been covered by sand or otherwise protected for a large part of the intervening centuries. Patination, therefore, like form, can only claim a conditional value. It is at the best an uncertain indication of age, as great age may be possible without it. Similarly, in Somaliland, the condition of the implements is very curious, and in some respects puzzling, while their forms resemble those from the Drift in Europe. But as to the climatic conditions we know nothing, and it is therefore useless to speculate on the condition of the stones; as to the geology we know next to nothing, and no mammalian remains give us a helping hand, while the form alone is a dangerous foundation for argument.

Investigations in the more remote parts of the world, though they may occasionally produce some startling novelty in the history of mankind, can scarcely be expected to furnish the same trustworthy continuous story as is to be found in the European area. Here history provides us with a fairly truthful account of what has happened for a period varying from two to three thousand years, or in some places even longer, and we are thus able to judge whether particular discoveries come into the historical stage or not. In more primitive lands where history (if there be any) partakes more of the character of mythical tradition, the task of defining the period to which particular discoveries belong is rendered much more difficult. In America, where history may be said to have begun five hundred years ago, such a feat is of course impossible, until a great deal of work on comparative lines has been accomplished. The accounts of the civilization of Mexico and Peru at the time of the Spanish conquest show a state of culture which in some respects must have put the Spaniards to shame, while in others it was primitive in the extreme. As regards internal communications, the working of gold and copper, and the manufacture and decoration of pottery, these American kingdoms were on a level with all but the most advanced nations; but of history in the true sense of the word they have none. In spite of this, it is by no means a hopeless task to disentangle the apparent confusion of their archaeology. It is now fairly well known what were the races or tribes that inhabited particular districts, and it is thus easy to make a corpus of the types adopted by the various peoples. This is the first certain step in the application of archaeological method. By degrees, as these types become familiar to the trained eye, it will not be difficult to arrange them in a progressive series, from the earliest in style to the latest. That this will be done by the archaeologists of the American continent, even with the present scanty materials, there can be little doubt. Numbers of young and enthusiastic workers have now had a good training in exploration in historical lands, and will usefully employ their experience on the antiquities of their own country. But if once a key be found to the ancient Mexican inscriptions, so plentifully scattered through the ancient monuments, it may be that enlightenment will come even more suddenly and more surely. The one problem that is of the greatest interest still awaits solution, viz. whether there is any relation, in culture or more remotely in race, between the inhabitants of ancient America and those of Europe or Asia. One thing is certain, that if there be any connexion, it is of

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/368


text:
Page:Baseball Guide and Record Book 1962.djvu/7

Organized 1876

WARREN C. GILES

President-Treasurer

PHILIP K. WRIGLEY

Vice-President

FRED G. FLEIG

Secretary

DAVE GROTE

Director of Public Relations

Headquarters—2601 Carew Tower, Cincinnati 2, O.

Telephone MAin 1-2988

Executive Committee, 1962—Vaughan (Bing) Devine, E. J. Bavasi, John Holland.

Director of Motion Picture Division for National and American leagues—Lew Fonseca, 200 S. Michigan avenue, Chicago 4, Ill. Telephone: WAbash 2-9655.

Umpires—Al Barlick, Lynton (Dusty) Boggess, Kenneth Burkhart, John (Jocko) Conlan, Henry (Shag) Crawford, August Donatelli, Thomas Gorman, William Jackowski, Stanley Landes, Chris Pelekoudas, Paul Pryor, Frank Secory, Vinnie Smith, Mel Steiner, Ed Sudol, Ed Vargo, Anthony Venzon, Frank Walsh, Lee Weyer, H. Douglas Harvey (purchased conditionally), William G. Williams (purchased conditionally).

Official Statistician—Elias Sports Bureau, Inc., 11 West 42nd street. New York 36, N. Y. Telephone—LOngacre 5-6362.

Players cannot be transferred from one major league club to another after June 15 to the close of the championship season except through regular waiver channels.

Waiver price, $20,000. Inter-league waivers, $20,000, except selected players.

CHICAGO CUBS

President—Philip K. Wrigley

Vice-President—John Holland

Vice-President—Charles J. Grimm

Honorary Vice-President—Clarence H. Rowland

Secretary-Treasurer—Bill Heymans

Assistant Secretary-Treasurer—E. R. Saltwell

Director of Player Procurement and Development—Gene Lawing

Public Relations Director-Traveling Secretary—Don Biebel

Home Secretary—Robert C. Lewis

Manager—Club's ten coaches will rotate as manager

Club Physician—Dr. Arthur Metz

Executive offices — Wrigley Field, Clark and Addison streets, Chicago 13, Ill.

Telephone—Buckingham 1-5050

Scouts—Byron Baker, Frank Calo, Billy Capps, Ralph DiLullo, Gene Handley, Roy Johnson, Thomas Kain, G. L. Mathis, Leonard Merullo, John — 5 —


text:
Page:Baseball Guide and Record Book 1962.djvu/8

 (Buck) O'Neil, Ray Perry, William Prince, John Streza, Harrison Wickel. H. D. (Rube) Wilson.

Park location—Wrigley Field, Addison street, Clark street, Waveland avenue and Sheffield avenue.

Seating capacity—36,755

Field dimensions—Home plate to left field at foul line. 355 feet; to center field, 400 feet; to right field at foul line, 353 feet.

CINCINNATI REDS

Chairman of the Board—Stanley E. Kess

President-General Manager—William O. DeWitt

Vice-President—Lewis M. Crosley

Secretary-Treasurer—Thomas M. Conroy

Assistant Secretary-Treasurer—Winfrey P. Bramham

Farm Director—Phillip Seghi

Traveling Secretary—Avery Robbins

Business Manager—John Murdough

Stadium Operations—Lewis L. Crosley

Publicity Director—Hank Zureick

Ticket Manager—Roger Noble

Manager—Frederick Hutchinson

Club Physicians—Dr. Herbert C. Boehner, Dr. George Ballou

Executive offices—415 Union Central Building, Cincinnati 2, O.

Telephone—DUnbar 1-0711

Scouts—Ray Baker, Ed (Buddy) Bloebaum, Ralph (Buzz) Boyle, Jimmy Bragan, Eck Branham, Paul Campbell, Mark Carrola, Jack Cassini, Loyd Christopher, Merrill Combs, Reno DeBenedetti, Joe Fero, Bert Fodor, Tom Giordano, Stan Hollmig, Robert Kelly, Angus King, Ed Kurlbaum, Ed Liberatore. Dale McReynolds, Jack O'Reilly, Cliff Polking, Mike Ryba, Jack Sanford, Ron Squire, Jack Vallely, Chuck Ward, James Yanni, Al Zarilla.

Park location—Crosley Field, Findlay street. Western avenue and York street (no street on side paralleling left field foul line).

Seating capacity—30,322

Field dimensions—Home plate to left field at foul line, 328 feet; to center field, 387 feet; to right field at foul line, 366 feet.

HOUSTON COLT .45s

Chairman of the Board—R. E. (Bob) Smith

Chairman of the Executive Committee—Judge Roy Hofheinz

President—Craig F. Cullinan, Jr.

General Manager—Paul Richards

Executive Vice-President-Assistant General Manager— George Kirkse

Assistant General Manager—Eddie Robinson

Secretary-General Counsel—W. E. James

Treasurer—A. J. Farfel

Business Manager—H. B. (Spec) Richardson

Sales Manager—Allen Russell

Assistant Business Manager—Tom Liegler

Director of Player Personnel—Grady Hatton

Farm Director—Tal Smith

Publicity Director-Traveling Secretary—Bill Giles

Ticket Manager—Dick McDowell

Advertising Manager—Earl Johnson

Comptroller—Helen Koopman

Manager—Harry Craft

Executive offices—Colt Stadium, Houston, Tex.

Telephone— JAckson 6-4500


text:
Page:Baseball Guide and Record Book 1962.djvu/9

 Scouts—Lee Ballanfant, Joe Bird, Brandy Davis, Claude (Dutch) Dietrich, Paul Florence, Joe Frazier, Frank Gabler, Jim Greengrass, John Harris, Earl Harrist, Homer (Dixie) Howell, Billy Jurges, Walter Laskowski, Vincent Maloney, Bobby Mattick, John (Red) Murff, Johnny O'Brien, Tony Pacheco, Earl Rapp, Larry Smith, John Sturm, Thurman Tucker, Bill Wight.

Park location—Colt Stadium, Old Spanish Trail and Main street, Houston. Tex.

Seating capacity—32,000

Field dimensions—Home plate to left field at foul line, 360 feet; to center field. 420 feet; to right field at foul line, 360 feet.

LOS ANGELES DODGERS

President—Walter F. O'Malley

Executive Vice-President-General Manager—E. J. Bavasi

Vice-President-Director of Minor League Operations—Fresco Thompson

Vice-President-Director of Stadium Operations—Richard B. Walsh

Assistant Treasurer-Comptroller—E. John Burns

Executive Secretary—Henry J. Walsh

Executive Assistant—Joe Ziegler

Director of Public Relations and Promotions—A. E. Patterson

Director of Ticket Sales—Harold Parrott

Director of Scouting—Al Campanis

Advertising Director—Danny Goodman

Assistant Director of Minor League Operations—William P. Schweppe

Traveling Secretary—Lee Scott

Director of Transportation—Robert J. Schenz

Statistician—Allan Roth

Assistant Director Public Relations—Tom Seeberg Group Ticket Sales and Knothole Club — George (Tuck) Stainback

Manager—Walter E. Alston

Executive office—Statler Hilton Hotel, Los Angeles 17, Calif.

Telephone—MAdison 3-1261

General office—714 South Hill street, Los Angeles 14, Calif.

Telephone—MAdison 5-2451

Scouts—Al Campanis, director; Dwight (Red) Adams, Cliff Alexander, Hugh Alexander, Romanus (Monty) Basgall, William Brenzel, John S. Carey. Leon Hamilton, Andy High. Tom Lasorda. Hank Majeski. Kenneth Myers. Edward Neville, Floyd (Pat) Patterson, Harold (Lefty) Phillips, Rudy Rufer. Jim Weaver, Guy Wellman, Bert Wells.

A. B. (Buck) Bailey, Manual Boody, Bob Carter, Ramon (Monchile) Concepcion, Scott Drysdale, Charles Robert Hodges, A. G. (Tony) John, Richard (Tex) Jones, Monroe Katz, John Keenan, Steve Lembo, Mike Maietta, Marion McDonald, Don Mohr, Mike Morrow, Richard Murray, Pat Murrow, Romeo Pilon, Jake Pitler, Phil Sahara, L. F. (Lefty) Scheibal, B. E. (Barney) Smith. Joe Thomas.

Park location—Dodger Stadium, 1000 Elysian Park avenue.

Park telephone—225-1411

Seating capacity—56,000

Field dimensions—Home plate to left field at foul line, 330 feet; to center field, 410 feet; to right field at foul line, 330 feet.

MILWAUKEE BRAVES

Chairman of the Board—Louis R. Perini

Vice-chairman of the Board—Joseph F. Cairnes

President—John J. McHale

First Vice-President-Treasurer—Joseph R. Perini

Secretary-Assistant Treasurer—Ralph Delforge

Director of Tickets and Customer Relations—Austin Brown

Director of Minor League Operations—John W. Mullen

Assistant Director of Minor League Operations—Richard Cecil

Director of Player Personnel—Raymond Hayworth


text:
Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/177

 LAKE BUCHANAN. by moonlight


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Maniapoto, Rewi


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Maning, Frederick Edward


text:
Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/191

 KADHI BIERI, OR MASSACRE LAKE.


text:
Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/200

   unaccustomed to such rapid motion, parted with his horse, which still continued the pursuit. In about a mile we two riders with our three horses pulled up the dark individual, and certainly a more expressive subject of mingled fear and rage could not be found. With hanging jaw to show his fear,

KERI KERI, A NATIVE OF KADHIBERRI, CENTRAL AUSTRALIA.

nostrils his surprise, and glaring eye his hate, there he stood, covered by my gun, convulsively twitching his waddy, as if meditating to hurl it at one or other. Bellenjani coming up, however, somewhat assuaged his fears, and ultimately


text:
Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/225

 LAKE KINLAY.


text:
Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/429

 A CAMP AT THE BURDEKIN.


text:
Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/441

 "The Alligators were close to us."


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Mann, Charles


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/440


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/439


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/430


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/428


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/427


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/192


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Mann, Hon. Charles


text:
Page:Baseball Guide and Record Book 1962.djvu/10

 Director of Team Travel and Press-Radio-TV Information—Donald L. Davidson

Assistant Director of Press-Radio-TV Information— Robert Allen

Business Manager—William Eberly

Manager—George (Birdie) Tebbetts

Club Physicians—Dr. Irwin Schulz, Dr. Bruce Brewer

Executive offices—Milwaukee County Stadium, Milwaukee 46, Wis.

Telephone—WEst 3-8650

Scouts—Mel Didier, Allan Elger, Gilbert English, Raymond Garland. Roland Gladu, Myron (Red) Hayworth, Harry Hickman, Lucius (Jeff) Jones, Jack Kearns, Alfred LaMacchia, Harry (Ted) McGrew, William Marshall, Harry Minor, John Moore, John O'Neil, Nap Reyes, John D. (Honey) Russell, Fred Schulte, Billy Smith, James (Zack) Taylor, Fred (Dixie) Walker.

Park location—Milwaukee County Stadium, S. 44th street off Bluemound road.

Park telephone—WEst 3-8650

Seating capacity—43,826

Field dimensions—Home plate to left field at foul line, 320 feet; to center field, 402 feet; to right field at foul line, 315 feet.

NEW YORK METS

President—George M. Weiss

Chairman of the Board—M. Donald Grant

Executive Vice-President—G. Herbert Walker, Jr.

Vice-President—Joan W. Payson

Secretary-Treasurer—James M. Carlisle

Administrative Assistant—John J. Murphy

Administrative Assistant—Wid C. Matthews

Farm Director—Bill Bergesch

Business Manager—James K. Thomson

Controller—Joseph J. DeGregorio

Special Services—Matt Burns

Director of Public Relations—Tom Meany

Road Secretary-Publicity—Lou Niss

Promotion Director—Julius O. Adler, Jr.

Manager—Charles D. (Casey) Stengel

Club Physician—Dr. Peter LaMotte

Executive office—680 Fifth avenue. New York 19, N. Y.

Telephone—LT 1-2300

Scouts—Sam Allen, John Bulk, Eugene Corbett, Tom Fazio. Richard Foley, Joseph Gall, Lloyd Gearhart, Peter Gebrian, Morris (Buddy) Hancken, Phillip (Barney) Hearn, Clarence (Bubber) Jonnard, Richard Keely, Raymond Kennedy, Hillis Layne, Mel Logan, Hershel Martin. Walter Millies, Julian Morgan, Carlos Negron, Roy Partee, Charles (Red) Ruffing, John Scalzi, Herb Strunk, Elmer Valo, Ben Wade, Hal Weafer, Richard Wilson.

Park location—Polo Grounds, Eighth avenue and 155th street.

Park telephone—AUdubon 6-1010

Seating capacity—55,000

Field dimensions—Home plate to left field at foul line, 279 feet; to center field, 480 feet; to right field at foul line, 257 feet.

PHILADELPHIA PHILLIES

President—Robert R. M. Carpenter, Jr.

Vice-President-General Manager—John J. Quinn

Vice-President—L. Wister Randolph

Secretary—George A. Fletcher


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Mann, John


text:
Page:Baseball Guide and Record Book 1962.djvu/12

 ST. LOUIS CARDINALS

President—August A. Busch, Jr.

Executive Vice-President—Richard A. Meyer

Vice-President—Cyril J. Hauser

Vice-President—Eberhard Anheuser

Vice-President-General Manager — Vaughan P. (Bing) Devine

Secretary—K. Siebert

Treasurer—Reid McCrum

Comptroller—Marvin Waters

Business Manager—Arthur C. Routzong

Director of Player Procurement—Walter Shannon

Director of Player Development—George Silvey

Assistant, Player Personnel—Edward Stanky

Director of Public Relations—James L. Toomey

Traveling Secretary—Leo Ward

Director of Sales and Promotion—Joseph V. McShane

Manager—John J. Keane

Club Physician—Dr. I. C. Middleman

Executive offices—3623 Dodier street, St. Louis 7, Mo.

Telephone— JEfferson 5-7400

Scouts—James Belz. Sheldon (Chief) Bender, Bennie Borgmann, Nelson Burbrink, Tom Corbett, George Crowe, Charley Frey, George Hasser, Fred Hawn, Bob Keely, George Kissell, W. H. (Buddy) Lewis, Eddie Lyons, Fred McAlister, Joe Monahan, Mo Mozzali, Don Pries, Ollie Vanek.

Park location—Busch Stadium, Grand boulevard, Dodier street. Sullivan avenue and Spring avenue.

Seating capacity—30,500

Field dimensions—Home plate to left field at foul line, 351 feet; to center field, 426 feet; to right field at foul line, 310 feet.

SAN FRANCISCO GIANTS

President—Horace C. Stoneham

Vice-President—Charles S. Feeney

Vice-President—Charles H. (Pete) Stoneham

Treasurer—Edgar P. Feeley

Secretary—Edward T. Brannick

Business Manager—Jerry Donovan

Director of Farm System—Carl Hubbell

Secretary of Farm System and Scouting Staff—Jack Schwarz

Supervisor of Minor League Pitching Personnel—Frank Shellenback

Public Relations—Garry Schumacher

Ticket Manager—Peter M. Hoffmann

Speakers' Bureau—Walter Mails

Publicity—John Taddeucci

Manager—Alvin Dark

Executive offices—Candlestick Park, San Francisco, Calif.

Telephone—JUniper 6-8000

Scouts—A. J. Ablett, Dale Alexander, John DeForest (Dutch) Anderson, Dennis Boyle, Frank Burke, C. Rex Carr, Clarence Chun Hoon, Walker Cress, Enid Drake, Allen Fey, Charles Fox, Dave Garcia, Frank (Chick) Genovese, Herman Hannah, John Hudson, Thomas Hull, Forrest Hunt, Carl Kentling, John (Buddy) Kerr, Nick Klisky, David Kosher, Melvin Krause, H. Max Lanier, John (Hans) Lobert, Ray Lucas, Sal Margaglione, Dickey Martin, Horacio Martinez, Joe Mathes, J. R. (Bully) McLean, Jack Meeks, Edward Montague, Tim Murchison, Bill Phillips, Hugh Poland, Alex Pompez, Joe Przada, Tony Ravish, Russell Rolandson, Walter (Dutch) Ruether, Hank Sauer, Frank Seyboth, Thomas Sheehan, Nicholas Shinkoff, Les Slattery, Jesse Thomas, Gene Thompson, Bill Webb, Pedro Zorrilla.

Park location—Candlestick Park, Bayshore boulevard

Seating capacity—42,500

Field dimensions—Home plate to left field at foul line, 335 feet; to center field, 410 feet; right field, at foul line, 335 feet.


text:
Page:Baseball Guide and Record Book 1962.djvu/11

 Treasurer—George F. H. Harrison

Farm Director—Eugene J. Martin

Public Relations and Publicity Director—Bob Chandler

Promotion Director—Frank Powell

Traveling Secretary—Charles R. Meister

Connie Mack Stadium Manager—Andrew J. Clarke

Manager—Gene W. Mauch

Club Physician—Dr. George Laquer

Executive offices—Connie Mack Stadium, Philadelphia 32, Pa.

Telephone—BAldwin 9-9200

Scouts—J. Edward Bookman, John P. (Jocko) Collins, Bruce Connatser, Edward Dancisak, Thomas Demark, Paul Duval, H. Glen Elliott, Dewey Griggs, Dale Jones, David Kelley, Joseph Labate, Wes Livengood, Tony Lucadello, Hap Morse, Ted Norbert, John Ogden, Paul Owens, Roy Smith, A. C. Swails, Gilberto Torres, Walter Widmayer.

Park location—Connie Mack Stadium, Lehigh avenue, Somerset street. North 20th street and North 21st street.

Seating capacity—33,608

Field dimensions—Home plate to left field at foul line, 334 feet; to center field, 447 feet; to right field at foul line, 329 feet.

PITTSBURGH PIRATES

President—John W. Galbreath

Vice-President-Secretary—Thomas P. Johnson

Vice-President—Harry L. (Bing) Crosby

Director—Frank R. Denton

Director—Daniel M. Galbreath

Director—Leslie B. Worthington

General Manager—Joe L. Brown

Director of Minor League Clubs—Robert C. Clements

Assistant to General Manager—Joseph M. O'Toole

Treasurer—James A. Herron

Public Relations Director—Jack H. Berger

Traveling Secretary—Robert T. Rice

Manager—Daniel E. Murtaugh

Special Assistant to Manager—George H. Sisler

Club Physician—Dr. Joseph Finegold

Executive offices—Forbes Field, Pittsburgh 13, Pa.

Telephone—MUseum 2-5300

Managerial Consultant—Donald E. Osborn

Scouts—J. Rex Bowen, director of scouting; Frank Akers, William (Scrappy) Allen, Edward Barberis, Herb Benninghoven, Kenneth Blackburn, E. Joseph Bowen, William Bryan, James Burns, C. L. (Buster) Chatham, Francisco Coimbre, Joe Consoli, James Davies, George Detore, Elmer Dobberstein, Robert Fontaine, James Foster, Jerry Gardner, Joseph Grace, Howard Haak, Jack Heimbuecher, Napoleon Heredia, Merrill Hess, William Hinchman, Earl Hite, Robert Hughes, Jack Kyle, James Maxwell, Edward McCarrick, E. R. (Tuck) McConnell, E. T. (Hap) Minor, Charles Muse, Clark Porter, George Pratt, Milton Rosner, George Schmidt, Clyde Sukeforth, Syd Thrift, Harold (Pie) Traynor, Paul Tretiak, James Vennari, William Weaver, Robert Whalen, Lindsay Wolfe, Louis Zaklin, Robert Zuk, George Zuraw.

Park location—Forbes Field, comer of Bouquet and Sennott streets, and bordered on other two sides by Schenley Park.

Seating capacity—35,000

Field dimensions—Home plate to left field at foul line, 365 feet; to center field, 457 feet; to right field at foul line, 300 feet.


text: Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia/Chapter 3


text: Page:Baseball Guide and Record Book 1962.djvu/14


text:
Page:Baseball Guide and Record Book 1962.djvu/15

, just when they had many observers believing they would pull away from the field, Alston's athletes encountered their worst nosedive of the year—ten losses in a row. The disastrous slide began August 14, when Ernie Broglio hurled St. Louis to a five-hit, 5 to conquest at Memorial Coliseum.

August 11, 1961, marked a red-letter day in career of Warren Spahn, 40-year-old Milwaukee southpaw, who entered exclusive group by notching victory No. 300 of his major league career with 2 to 1 conquest of Cubs.

Cincinnati invaded the Coliseum the next night. The Dodgers tagged Joey Jay for two runs in the first inning, but he blanked them the remainder of the way to win on six hits, 5 to 2. A twi-night double-header concluded the series, August 16. First place was at stake, and a crowd of 72,140—biggest for a twin-bill in N. L. history—turned out. But they saw the Dodgers shut out twice, 6 to and 8 to 0, as Purkey tossed a four-hitter and O'Toole followed with a two-hit masterpiece to extend the L. A. scoreless string to 26 innings. With the sweep, the Reds returned to the lead. They never again were ousted from the driver's seat, although they had several close calls.

Still reeling from this debacle, the beleaguered Dodgers went to San Francisco, where they dropped three in a row. One of the setbacks was their fourth whitewashing in six starts.

The Dodgers next journeyed to St. Louis and the Giants to Cincinnati. While L. A. was losing three more to the Cardinals, Dark's sluggers won a double-header from the Reds, 12 to 2 and 5 to 3, August 22, and slaughtered them the next evening, 14 to 0, with a six-homer assault. The trio of triumphs capped a surge that found the third-place Giants winning 13 of 15 games to pull within four lengths of the top and revive flag hopes in San Francisco.

Hutchinson read the riot act to the Reds following the humiliating August 23 lambasting, and they responded by whipping the Giants in the series finale. This started Dark's club on a crushing five-game skid.

But more trouble loomed for Cincinnati. The Dodgers, in the throes of


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/442


text:
Page:Baseball Guide and Record Book 1962.djvu/13

OOLING the experts, the Cincinnati Reds captured the 1961 National League pennant. By doing so, Fred Hutchinson's crew pulled one of the majors' biggest surprises in years. The Rhinelanders generally were figured to do little better than their sixth-place showing of '60. Instead, they set the pace most of the way to bring Cincinnati its first flag in 21 years

Because of the club's conglomeration of castoffs, the Reds were known throughout the league as "ragamuffins." But they surprised everyone. Showing a 26-game improvement over 1960, they registered 93 victories against 61 defeats in finishing four lengths ahead of runner-up Los Angeles. The Reds occupied first place or were tied for the lead on 113 of the 174 days in the season. San Francisco enjoyed 37 days on top and Los Angeles 26.

Ironically, the season began on a sad note for Cincinnati. Powel Crosley, Jr., owner of the Reds since 1934, died during spring training. However, under the astute leadership of Hutchinson and Bill DeWitt, who had been named general manager the previous winter, the club ended a pennant drouth that had extended back to 1940. when Bill McKechnie piloted the Reds to a second successive N. L. championship.

With the triumph, Cincinnati became the fourth different club to win the N. L. gonfalon in as many years, providing further evidence of the even balance of the senior circuit.

To show how lightly the Reds were regarded, they failed to draw a single first-place vote from among the 232 members of the Baseball Writers' Association who participated in The Sporting New^s' pre-season poll. The Dodgers rated the favorite's role with 99 flag votes. Defending champion Pittsburgh received 58, while Milwaukee drew 38, San Francisco 22, and St. Louis 15. Cincinnati ranked sixth in the balloting, Chicago seventh and Philadelphia last.

The Reds started the season auspiciously. On opening day, April 11, Jim O'Toole tamed the Cubs on four hits, 7 to 1, and Cincinnati went on to win five of its first seven games. Then followed a string of eight successive defeats that dumped Hutchinson's outfit into the cellar. But the Rhinelanders turned right around to reel off nine victories in a row and climb back into the thick of things.

When the early shakedown was completed, the Giants under rookie Manager Al Dark roared into the spotlight. Fourteen victories in an 18-game stretch, most of them on the road, stamped the Giants as an apparently solid team. Except for one day, San Francisco led throughout the month of May.

Walt Alston's Dodgers gave the Giants their first real jolt. May 19-21, by sweeping a three-game series at Candlestick Park. The Reds duplicated the trick on a May 29-30 visit to the city by the Golden Gate and in the process climbed into a tie for first place. Although the Giants were bounced from the top rung on June 1, they remained right on the heels of the leaders until just before the first All-Star interlude, when they reeled under six straight losses and eight in nine games.

June 15 found the league still enjoying a torrid four-club scramble. Fourth-place Pittsburgh was only three and one-half lengths back. Launching a six-game victory skein that night, the Reds regained the lead the following evening and held it continuously through the succeeding six weeks.

From June 15 up to the Dream Game layoff, July 10-12, Cincinnati won 21 out of 28 to forge a five-game advantage. The club owned a 54-30 record and was beginning to convince the skeptics that it was a real pennant threat. Los Angeles held second place, Pittsburgh third and San Francisco fourth place, nine and one-half games behind. Milwaukee, St. Louis, Chicago and Philadelphia, in that order, comprised the second division.

Resumption of the schedule saw the Rhinelanders go into a brief tailspin. Six successive losses at Crosley Field melted the club's lead from six games to one in a week's time.

Meantime, the Dodgers had gotten hot. Winning 12 of their final 13 games during July, capped by an eight-victory spurt, they snatched first place from the Reds, July 29. Cincinnati regained the top spot four nights later, only to have Los Angeles grab it again, August 6, during a six-game winning streak.

The splurge gave the Dodgers 19 victories in their last 22 games.


text:
Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/464

 first-rate there, no two ways about it. We stopped here a fortnight, and enjoyed ourselves much.

Here we are now on board the "Havilah" steamer, bound for Adelaide. Four days of it, the sea as smooth as glass, lots of passengers. We arrived all safe and sound at Port Adelaide very early in the morning. No one to be seen hardly, but we have to wait till eight for the train to take us to town. We go and have a nobb or two with friends, who are glad to see us all. Here we are back again.

My chapter concluded, good reader, farewell.

THE END.


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/175


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/176


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/178


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/226


text:
Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/411

 SKETCH ON THE GILBERT


text: Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/412


text:
Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 1.djvu/32

18 name being derived from the Gaelic word pict-ich, which signifies "plunderers."

The Scots had a widely different origin: they originally came over from Ireland, where they inhabited the eastern coasts, settled in the neighbourhood of Loch Lomond, and made an alliance with the nearest tribes, for the purpose of ravaging the possessions of the Britons.

They were severely chastised by Theodosius, who visited Britain in 343. He succeeded in expelling them from the Roman provinces and driving them back to their wild retreats.

Maximus, who afterwards assumed the title of Augustus, while in Britain, carried on the war against the Picts and Scots with unrelenting severity; his ambition, however, led him to attempt the conquest of the whole western empire, in which he failed, and was beheaded at Aquileia. His army, composed in a great majority of Britons, never returned to their native country, which consequently was left in a great measure defenceless. So favourable an occasion did not escape the vigilance of the Picts and Scots, who made successive inroads in the island, and returned to their mountain fastnesses laden with plunder.

The power of Rome was now shaken by the irruption of barbarians of various denominations, who, issuing from the east and north, depopulated her fairest provinces. Assailed at so many points at once, it seemed as if the nations of the earth had been let loose to uproot her supremacy, and break the shackles which for so many ages had fettered the greater part of the world. The Goths, Vandals, and Alans, led by Alaric, crossing the Julian Alps, swept like a torrent over the fertile plains of Italy. The German tribes devastated Gaul, and the Roman legions in Britain, deprived of all communication with the Emperor Honorius, determined on electing an emperor for themselves.

The first whom they selected for the purple was Marcus, whom his soldiers, very soon after elevating him to the imperial dignity, put to death: after him an adventurer named Constantine, who paid for his short-lived dignity with his life.

The island had for some time been in this distracted state, when the Britons, who had not ceased to regret the loss of their freedom, deeming the occasion favourable, rose in arms, deposed the Roman magistrates, and proclaimed their independence; and afterwards succeeded in driving the Picts and Scots back to their own country.

When the Emperor Honorius heard of this revolution, he wrote to the states of Britain, to say that they must provide for their safety, and govern themselves; by which concession the rule of Rome in the island was looked on as at an end.

The Britons, at various periods afterwards, demanded the assistance of the empire against their terrible enemies, the Picts, who still continued to harass them; but no aid of any consequence was accorded.

How frequently do we read, in the history of the world, of a nation urged by an irresistible, though unknown principle, to pursue the path of conquest, not for their own advantage, but for the ultimate benefit of the people whom they subject. Such was the result of the Roman invasion of Britain, which proved neither profitable nor advantageous to the conquerors.

Appianus of Alexandria, who flourished A.D. 123, wrote a history of all the nations which Rome had subdued, in twenty-four books; he says: "The Romans have penetrated into Britain, and taken possession of the greater and better part of the island; but they do not desire the rest, because that which they already possess is not of the slightest benefit to them."

The historian was right, for, despite the taxes, the produce of the mines, and the exportation of corn, the island could never have been a source of great profit to the victors; notwithstanding which we trace them, urged by a resistless combination of events, progressing step by step, till the greater part of the country was subdued. Fortunately, they sowed the seeds of a civilisation more endurable than their dominion.

For nearly a century, the portion of Britain which had submitted to their yoke formed but a single province; it was first separated into two during the reign of the Emperor Severus. This division was afterwards extended to five:—

1st. Flavia Cæsariensis, which consisted of the western portion of the island.

2nd. Britannia Prima, the country between the Thames and the Humber.

3rd. Britannia Secunda, lying between the Severn and the sea, now known by the name of Wales.

4th. Maxima Cæsariensis, lying to the north of the two preceding ones, extending to the Wall of Severus, between the Tyne and the Solway.

5th. Valentia, comprising the lands from the Wall of Severus to the Forth and Clyde.

The conquests of Agricola, which extended to the Grampians, although dignified by the rank of a province under the name of Vespasiana, remained but a short time in the possession of the Romans.

The limits of the Roman provinces in the island have given rise to many discussions amongst the learned. We have taken them as laid down by Richard of Cirencester, De Situ Britain. Each of these provinces had a separate ruler, subject to the governor-general of Britain, who was named by the emperor under the title of prefect. He exercised all but sovereign authority, and united in his hands both the military and judicial power. Under him was a procurator, or questor, who levied the taxes, and administered the revenues of the island.

The principal sources of revenue were a poll tax, a tax on funerals and inheritances, on slaves, on all public sales, and an impost upon cattle and agricultural produce.

The tax upon cattle, which was called scriptura, from the collectors visiting the pastures and writing down lists of the number and kind which each estate nourished, was particularly oppressive to the Britons, and one of the most frequent causes of revolt.

In addition to these burdens, the Romans levied imposts upon merchandise, either imported or exported, which formed a considerable item in their revenue, the commerce between the empire and Britain having been greatly extended. Agriculture also made immense progress in the island, in which cities of considerable importance were built.

Of these the most important, in a commercial point of view, were Clausentum and London.

In the second century, Britain contained upwards of a


text:
User talk:Lgfcd

Welcome
Welcome

Hello, Lgfcd, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * Help pages
 * Style guide
 * Inclusion policy
 * For Wikipedians

You may be interested in participating in Add the code active projects, PotM or CotW to your page for current wikisource projects.
 * Proofread of the Month
 * Community collaboration
 * Requested texts

You can put a brief description of your interests on your user page and contributions to another Wikimedia project, such as Wikipedia and Commons.

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikisource, the library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please "sign" your comments using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click  [ edit] ) and place  before your question.

Again, welcome! Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:44, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:Lgfcd


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/194

HE three centuries which have passed over the world since the Reformation have soothed the theological animosities which they have failed wholly to obliterate. An enlarged experience of one another has taught believers of all sects that their differences need not be pressed into mortal hatred; and we have been led forward unconsciously into a recognition of a broader Christianity than as yet we are able to profess, in the respectful acknowledgment of excellence wherever excellence is found. Where we see piety, continence, courage, self-forgetfulness, there, or not far off, we know is the spirit of the Almighty; and, as we look around us among our living contemporaries, or look back with open eyes into the history of the past, we see—we dare not in voluntary blindness say that we do not see—that God is no respecter of 'denominations,' any more than he is a respecter of persons. His highest gifts are shed abroad with an even hand among the sects of Christendom, and petty distinctions of opinion


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/195

1539.] melt away and become invisible in the fulness of a larger truth.

Thus, even among the straitest sects whose theories least allow room for latitude, liberty of conscience has found recognition, and has become the law of modern thought. It is as if the ancient Catholic unity, which was divided in the sixteenth century into separate streams of doctrine, as light is divided by the prism, was again imperceptibly returning; as if the coloured rays were once more blending themselves together in a purer and more rich transparency.

In this happy change of disposition, we have a difficulty in comprehending the intensity with which the different religious parties in England, as well as on the Continent, once detested each other. The fact is manifest; but the understanding refuses to realize its causes. We can perceive, indeed, that there may have been a fiery antagonism between Catholics and Reformers; but the animosities which divided Protestant from Protestant, the feeling which led Barnes to prosecute Lambert, or the Landgrave of Hesse to urge Henry VIII. to burn the Anabaptists, is obscure and unintelligible. Nevertheless, the more difficult it may be to imagine the nature of such a feeling, the more essential is it to bear in mind the reality of its existence; and a consequent and corollary upon it of no small importance must also be carefully remembered, that in the descending scale of the movement no sect or party recognized any shadow of division among those who were more advanced than themselves. To the Romanist, schism


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/196

176 and heresy were an equal crime. All who had separated from the Papal communion were alike outcasts, cut off from grace, children of perdition. The Anglican could extend the terms of salvation only to those who submitted to ordinances, to the apostolical succession, and the system of the sacraments; the Lutherans anathematized those who denied the real presence; the followers of Zuinglius and Calvin, judging others as they were themselves judged, disclaimed and murdered such as had difficulties on the nature of the Trinity; the Unitarians gave the same measure to those who rejected the inspiration of Scripture; and with the word 'heretic' went along the full passion of abhorrence which had descended the historical stream of Christianity in connection with the name.

Desiring the reader, then, to keep these points prominently before him, I must now describe briefly the position of the religious parties in England at the existing crisis.

First, there was the party of insurrection, the avowed or secret Romanists, those who denied the royal supremacy, who regarded the Pope as their spiritual sovereign, and retained or abjured their allegiance to their temporal prince as the Pope permitted or ordered. These were traitors in England, the hope of the Catholic powers abroad. When detected and obstinate they were liable to execution; but they were cowed by defeat and by the death of their leaders, and for the present were subsiding towards insignificance.

Secondly, there were the Anglicans, strictly


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/197

1539.] in the speculative system of the faith, content to separate from Rome, but only that they might bear Italian fruit more profusely and luxuriantly when rooted in their own soil. Of these the avowed leaders were the majority of the bishops and the peers of the old creation, agreeing for the present to make the experiment of independence, but with a secret dislike to change, and a readiness, should occasion require, to return to the central communion. Weak in their reasoning, and selfish in their objects, the Anglicans were of importance only from the support of the conservative English instinct, which then as ever preferred the authority of precedent to any other guide, and defended established opinions and established institutions because they had received them from their fathers, and because their understandings were slow in entertaining new convictions.

To the third or Lutheran party belonged Cramner, Latimer, Barnes, Shaxton, Crome, Hilsey, Jerome, Barlow, all the Government Reformers of position and authority, adhering to the real presence, and, in a general sense, to the sacraments, but melting them away in the interpretation. The true creed of these men was spiritual, not mechanical. They abhorred idolatry, images, pilgrimages, ceremonies, with a Puritan fervour. They followed Luther in the belief in justification by faith, they rejected masses, they did not receive the sacerdotal system, they doubted purgatory, they desired that the clergy should be allowed to marry, they differed from the Protestants in the single but vital doctrine of transubstantiation. This party after a few


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/198

178 years ceased to exist, developing gradually from the type of Wittenberg to that of Geneva.

Lastly, and still confounded in a common mass of abomination, lay Zuinglians, Anabaptists, sacramentarians, outcasts disowned and cursed by all the rest as a stigma and reproach; those whose hearts were in the matter, who supplied the heat which had melted the crust of habit, and had made the Reformation possible.

For the present the struggle in the State lay between the Anglicans and the Lutherans—the King and Cromwell lying again between them. Cromwell, on the whole orthodox in matters of speculation, cared, nevertheless, little for such matters; his true creed was a hatred of charlatans, and of the system which nursed and gave them power; and his sympathy was gradually bursting the bounds of a tradition which continued to hamper him. The King was constant to his place of mediator; he insisted on the sacraments, yet he abhorred the magical aspect of them. He differed from the Anglicans in his zeal for the dissemination of the Bible, in his detestation of the frauds, impostures, profligacies, idlenesses, ignorances, which had disgraced equally the secular and regular clergy, and in his fixed English resolution never more to tolerate the authority of the Pope. He differed from the Lutherans, and thus more and more from Cromwell, in his dislike of theoretic novelties, in an inability to clear himself from attaching a special character to the priesthood, in an adherence generally to the historical faith, and an anxiety to save himself and the country from the reproach of apostasy. A sharp


text: Template:^

title: Template:^


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/199

1539.] line divided the privy council. Cranmer headed the Reformers, supported by the late-created peers, Cromwell, Lord Russell, and for a time Lord Southampton and the chancellor; opposed to these were the Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk, Sir Anthony Brown, Gardiner, Bonner who was now Bishop of London, the Bishops of Durham, Chichester, and Lincoln; and the two parties regarded each other across the board with ever-deepening hatred, with eyes watching for any slip which might betray their antagonists to the powers of the law, and were only prevented by the King's will from flying into open opposition.

In the country, the sympathy of the middle classes was, for the most part, with Henry in preference to either Cranmer or Gardiner, Norfolk or Cromwell. Even in the Pilgrimage of Grace the King had been distinguished from his advisers. A general approbation of the revolt from a foreign usurpation led the body of the nation to support him cordially against the Pope; and therefore, as long as there was danger from Paul or Paul's friends, in England or out of it, Cromwell remained in power as the chief instrument by which the Papal domination had been overthrown. But there was an understanding felt, if not avowed, both by sovereign and subjects, that even loyalty had its limits. If it were true—as the King had ever assured them that it was not true—that Cromwell was not only maintaining English independence and reforming practical abuses, but encouraging the dreaded and hated 'heresy,' then indeed their duties and their conduct might assume another aspect.


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/200

180 And seeing that this 'heresy,' that faith in God and the Bible, as distinguished from faith in Catholicism, was the root and the life of the whole change, that the political and practical revolution was but an alteration of season, necessary for the nurture of the divine seed which an invisible hand had sown—seeing that Cromwell himself was opening his eyes to know this important fact, and would follow fearlessly wherever his convictions might lead him, appearances boded ill for the terms on which he might soon be standing with the King, ill for the 'unity and concord' which the King imagined to be possible.

Twice already we have seen Henry pouring oil over the water. The 'Articles of Religion' and the 'Institution of a Christian Man' had contained, perhaps, the highest wisdom on the debated subjects which as yet admitted of being expressed in words. But they had fallen powerless. The decree had gone out, but the war of words had not ceased. The Gospel had brought with it its old credentials. It had divided nation against nation, house against house, child against father. It had brought, 'not peace, but a sword:' the event long before foretold and long before experienced. But Henry could not understand the signs of the times; and once again he appealed to his subjects in language of pathetic reproach.

'The King's Highness to all and singular his loving subjects sends his greeting. His Majesty, desiring nothing more than to plant Christ and his doctrine in all his people's hearts, hath thought good to declare


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/201

1539.] how much he is offended with all them that wring and wrest his words, driving them to the maintenance of their fantasies, abuses, and naughty opinions; not regarding how his Highness, as a judge indifferent between two parties, whereof the one is too rash and the other too dull, laboureth for agreement. Seeing the breach of small matters to be cause of great dissension, his Highness had charged his subjects to observe such ceremonies and rites as have been heretofore used in his Church, giving therewith commandment to the bishops and curates to instruct the people what ceremonies are, what good they do when not misused, what hurt when taken to be of more efficacy and strength than they are. His Highness, being careful over all his people, is as loath that the dull party should fancy their ceremonies to be the chief points of Christian religion, as he is miscontent with the rash party which hunt down what they list without the consent of his Grace's authority. His Highness wills that the disobedience of them that seek their lusts and liberties shall be repressed, and they to bear the infirmity and weakness of their neighbours until such time as they, enstrengthened, may be able to go in like pace with them, able to draw in one yoke: for St Paul would a decent order in the Church; and, because God is a God of peace and not of dissension, it were meet that all they that would be his should agree on all points, and especially in matters of religion.

'God's will, love, and goodness ought, with all reverence, to be kept in memory; and therefore the old forefathers thought it well done that certain occasions


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/202

182 might be devised to keep them in remembrance, and so invented signs and tokens which, being seen of the eye, might put the heart in mind of his will and promises. For, as the word is a token that warneth us by the ear, so the sacraments ordained by Christ, and ceremonies invented by men, are sensible tokens to warn us by the eye of that self-same will and pleasure that the word doth; and, as the word is but an idle voice without it be understood, so are all ceremonies but beggarly things, dumb and dead, if the meaning of them be not known. They are but means and paths to religion, made to show where Christian people must seek their comfort and where they must establish their belief, and not to be taken as savers or workers of any part of salvation. But his Grace seeth priests much readier to deal holy bread, to sprinkle holy water, than to teach the people what dealing or sprinkling showeth. If the priests would exhort their parishioners, and put them in remembrance of the things that indeed work all our salvation, neither the ceremonies should be dumb nor the people would take that that is the way of their journey, to be the end of their journey. Neither bread nor water nor any indifferent thing can be holy, but it be because it bringeth men to holy thoughts, to godly contemplations, and telleth them where they may and must seek holiness. Ceremonies cannot yet be put down, because the people are evil taught, and would be much offended with the sudden overthrow of them; but, if they be used, their meaning and signification not declared, they are nought else but shadows without a body—shells where there is no


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/203

1539.] of decision without any writing—witnesses without any covenant, text, or promise. And for this cause the King's Highness commanded that ceremonies should be used, and used without superstition; and now, of late, some have blurted in the people's ears that their ceremonies be come home again, taking them as things in themselves necessary—slandering all such as, in their preaching, have reproved the misuse of them.

'The King's Highness being grounded upon a surer foundation than to waver or revoke any his former injunctions, might worthily punish such wresters of his words and changers of his will and pleasure; but for as much as his Grace is persuaded that clemency oftentimes worketh more than pain can, and seeing many of his loving subjects punished since his last proclamation, not only for evil opinions, but also for words spoken of long time past, his Grace, tendering nothing more than the wealth and comfort of his subjects, doth think it meet rather to heal all diseased, fearful, and hollow hearts, than by dread and fear to keep them still faint friends—faint to God, faint to the truth, faint to his Highness. And, in this consideration, his Highness granteth a general pardon and discharge to all and singular his loving subjects for all and singular causes, matters, suits, preachings, writings, and other things by them or any of them done, had, made, defended, or spoken, touching matters of Christian religion, whereby they might have been brought in danger of the law for siispicion of heresy. And his Highness trusteth that this his gracious pity shall more effectually work the


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/204

184 abolishing of detestable heresies and fond opinions than shall the extreme punishment of the law. For, where fear of hurt should be a cause that they should less love his Highness than their duty bound them to do, now shall this be an occasion, his Grace thinketh, not only to make them tender his Highness's will and pleasure, but also to cause them, of honest love, quite to cast away all foolish, fond, evil, and condemned opinions, and joyfully to return to the elect number of Christ's Church.

'All that is past, as touching this matter, his Highness pardoneth and frankly forgetteth it wholly. But, as his Grace desireth the confusion of error, this way so failing of his purpose and expectation, his Highness will use, albeit much against his will, another way—that, when gentleness cannot work, then to provide what the laws and execution of them can do.'

What persuasion could effect this address would have effected; but kindness and menace were alike unavailing. A seed was growing and to grow, which the King knew not of; and it was to grow, as it were, in the disguise of error, with that abrupt violence which so often, among human beings, makes truth a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence. The young were generally on one side, the old on the other—an inversion of the order of nature when the old are wrong and the young are right. The learned, again, were on the wrong side,


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/205

1539.] the ignorant were on the right—a false relation, also, fertile in evil. Peasant theologians in the public-houses disputed over their ale on the mysteries of justification, and from words passed soon to blows. The Bibles, which lay open in every parish church, became the text-books of self-instructed fanatics. The voluble orator of the village was chosen by his companions, or, by imagined superior intelligence, appointed himself, to read and expound; and, ever in such cases, the most forward was the most passionate and the least wise. Often, for the special annoyance of old-fashioned church-goers, the time of divine service was chosen for a lecture; and opinions were shouted out in 'loud high voices,' which, in the ears of half the congregation, were damnable heresy. The King's proclamations were but as the words of a man speaking in a tempest—blown to atoms as they are uttered. The bishops were bearded in their own palaces with insolent defiance; Protestant mobs


text:
Page:O. F. Owen's Organon of Aristotle Vol. 1 (1853).djvu/280

 (to demonstrate) a geometrical (problem) by arithmetic, for there are three things in demonstrations, one the demonstrated conclusion, and this is that which is per se inherent in a certain genus. Another are axioms, but axioms are they from which (demonstration is made), the third is the subject genus, whose properties and essential accidents demonstration makes manifest. Now it is possible that the things from which demonstration consists may be the same, but with those whose genus is different, as arithmetic and geometry, we cannot adapt an arithmetical demonstration to the accidents of magnitudes, except magnitudes are numbers, and how this is possible to some shall be told hereafter. But arithmetical demonstration always has the genus about which the demonstration (is conversant), and others in like manner, so that it is either simply necessary that there should be the same genus, or in a certain respect, if demonstration is about to be transferred; but that it is otherwise impossible is evident, for the extremes and the middles must necessarily be of the same genus, since if they are not per se, they will be accidents. On this account we cannot by geometry demonstrate that there is one science of contraries, nor that two cubes make one cube, neither can any science (demonstrate) what belongs to any science, but such as are so related to each other as to be the one under the other, for instance, optics to geometry, and harmonics to arithmetic. Nor if any thing is inherent in lines not so far as they are lines, nor as they are from proper principles, as if a straight line is the most beautiful of lines, or if it is contrary to circumference, for these things are inherent not by reason of their proper genus, but in so far as they have something common.


text:
Organon (Owen)/The Posterior Analytics

Book 1 Book 2

Concise Table of Contents
Book 1

Chap. 1. Upon the Nature of Demonstration. Chap. 2. Of Knowledge, and Demonstration, and its Elements. Chap. 3. Refutation of certain opinions as to Science and Demonstration. Chap. 4. Upon the terms "every," "per se," and "universal." Chap. 5. Of Errors about the primary Universal. Chap. 6. Demonstration consists of Principles per se; and of a necessary Medium. Chap. 7. That we may not demonstrate by passing from one Genus to another. Chap. 8. Things which are subject to Change are incapable of Demonstration per se. Chap. 9. That the Demonstration of a thing ought to proceed from its own appropriate Principles: these last indemonstrable. Chap. 10. Of the Definition and Division of Principles. Chap. 11. Of certain Common Principles of all Sciences. Chap. 12. Of Syllogistic Interrogation. Chap. 13. The difference between Science, "that" a thing is, and "why" it is. Chap. 14. The first Figure most suitable to Science. Chap. 15. Of immediate negative Propositions. Chap. 16. Of Ignorance, according to corrupt position of the Terms, where there are no Media. Chap. 17. Continuation of the same with Media. Chap. 18. Of the Dependence of Universals upon Induction, and of the latter upon Sense. Chap. 19. Of the Principles of Demonstration, whether they are Finite or Infinite. Chap. 20. Of Finite Media. Chap. 21. It is shown that there are no Infinite Media in Negative Demonstration. Chap. 22. That there are no Infinite Media in Affirmative Demonstration. Chap. 23. Certain Corollaries Chap. 24. The superiority of Universal to Particular Demonstration proved. Chap. 25. The Superiority of Affirmative to Negative Demonstration proved. Chap. 26. The Superiority of the same to Demonstration ad impossible proved. Chap. 27. Upon the Nature of more Accurate Science. Chap. 28. What constitutes one, and what different Sciences. Chap. 29. That there may be several Demonstrations of the same thing. Chap. 30. That there is no Science of the Fortuitous. Chap. 31. That we do not possess Scientific Knowledge through Sensation. Chap. 32. On the Difference of Priniciples according to the Diversity of Syllogisms. Chap. 33. Upon the Difference between Science and Opinion. Chap. 34. Of Sagacity.

Book 2

Chap. 1. That the subjects of Scientific Investigation are four. Chap. 2. That all Investigation has reference to the Discovery of the Middle Term. Chap. 3. Upon the Difference between Demonstration and Definition. Chap. 4. That the Definition of a thing cannot be demonstrated. Chap. 5. That there is no Conclusion by Divisions proved. Chap. 6. Case of one Proposition defining the Definition itself. Chap. 7. That what a thing is can neither be known by Demonstration nor by Definition. Chap. 8. Of the logical Syllogism of what a thing is. Chap. 9. Of certain Natures or Principles incapable of Demonstration. Chap. 10. Upon Definition and its kinds. Chap. 11. Of Causes and their Demonstration. Chap. 12. Upon the causes of the Present, Past, and Future. Chap. 13. Upon the Method of investigating Definition. Chap. 14. Rules for Problems. Chap. 15. Of Identical Problems. Chap. 16. Of Causes and Effects. Chap. 17. Extension of the same subject. Chap. 18. Observation upon Cause to Singulars. Chap. 19. Upon the Method and Habit necessary to the ascertainment of Principles.

title: Organon (Owen)/The Posterior Analytics


text:
Organon (Owen)/The Posterior Analytics/Book 1

Chap. 1. Upon the Nature of Demonstration.
 * 1.1. All dianœtic discipline is produced from previous knowledge, possessed in a two-fold respect. (Cf. Mag. Moral. lib. i. 18, and Eth. Eud. lib. v. c. 1, 2, 3)
 * 1.2. What we know universally and generally we may not know singly, although not in the same manner.

Chap. 2. Of Knowledge, and Demonstration, and its Elements.
 * 2.1. Scientific knowledge is possessed, when we know the necessary connexion between a thing and its cause. Definition of Demonstration. (Vide Ethics, vi. 3, 4.)
 * 2.2. Specified elements of true demonstrative science.
 * 2.2.1. True.
 * 2.2.2. First and indemonstrable.
 * 2.2.3. Causes of the conclusion.
 * 2.2.4. Prior and more known, in a two-fold respect.
 * 2.2.5. Immediate.
 * 2.3. Distinction of proposition.
 * 2.4. Definition of thesis, considered by Pacius and Waits as synonymous with.
 * 2.5. Of axiom.
 * 2.6. Of hypothesis.
 * 2.7. The necessity of knowing principles and their opposites, in order to possess science by demonstration.

Chap. 3. Refutation of certain opinions as to Science and Demonstration.
 * 3.1. Refutation of those who deny the existence of science.
 * 3.2. Also of those who declare all things capable of demonstration.
 * 3.3. We cannot demonstrate in a circle things which do not reciprocate.
 * 3.4. Example.

Chap. 4. Upon the terms "every," "per se," and "universal."
 * 4.1. Definition of demonstration.
 * 4.2. Of predication "de omni.".
 * 4.3. Of "’," "per se."
 * 4.4. Of accidents. . (Cf. Phys. lib. ii, et Metap. lib. v.)
 * 4.5. "Per se," recapitulation.
 * 4.6. What is a contrary.
 * 4.7., "quatenus ipsum," and , explained.

Chap. 5. Of Errors about the primary Universal.
 * 5.1. Sources of error in effecting universal demonstration. Example.

Chap. 6. Demonstration consists of Principles per se; and of a necessary Medium.
 * 6.1. Recapitulation; true demonstration only from necessary propositions.
 * 6.2. Proof of this.
 * 6.2.1. Reply to objection.
 * 6.3. If the conclusion be necessary, the premises need not be so, but when the latter are so the conclusion must be necessary.
 * 6.4. The non-necessary, not to be neglected in disputation.
 * 6.5. Necessity of the minor and major propositions being "per se."

Chap. 7. That we may not demonstrate by passing from one Genus to another.
 * 7.1. Three things in demonstration, viz. a demonstrated conclusion, axioms, and the subject genus.
 * 7.2. That the extremes and media must be of the same genus.

Chap. 8. Things which are subject to Change are incapable of Demonstration per se.
 * 8.1. That there is no demonstration nor definition "per se" of mutable natures, because of the universal being non-existent.

Chap. 9. That the Demonstration of a thing ought to proceed from its own appropriate Principles: these last indemonstrable.
 * 9.1. That true demonstration only results from principles appropriate to the subject of demonstration: the terms must either be homogeneous, or from two genera, of which one is contained in the other.
 * 9.2. That the appropriate principles of each thing are themselves incapable of demonstration. What is the especial science.
 * 9.3. Difficulty of deciding whether a thing is really known.

Chap. 10. Of the Definition and Division of Principles.
 * 10.1. Definition of principles, their existence to be assumed.  Example.
 * 10.2. What are peculiar to each science, and what common.
 * 10.3. All demonstration conversant with three things, of which we sometimes may neglect two.
 * 10.4. Of the difference between, , and.
 * 10.5. That definition is not hypothesis.

Chap. 11. Of certain Common Principles of all Sciences.
 * 11.1. Demonstration may exist without, but not without an universal conception.
 * 11.2. Of the use of what is called the principle of contradiction in demonstration.
 * 11.3. Of the common principles of the several sciences.

Chap. 12. Of Syllogistic Interrogation.
 * 12.1. Method of deciding what proposition belongs to each science.
 * 12.2. Of discovering the science to which each false syllogism appertains.
 * 12.3. When an objection is not to be made.
 * 12.4. Instance of a syllogistic argument, by employing a syllogism with both prop. affirm. in the 2nd figure.
 * 12.5. Mathematical demonstrations rarely prove the same, by many media.

Chap. 13. The difference between Science, "that" a thing is, and "why" it is.
 * 13.1. A two-fold difference if the syllogism be not through things immediate: next, if it be, but not through cause, in the same science.
 * 13.2. Where the media do not reciprocate the is demonstrated, also where the middle is externally placed.
 * 13.3. Another difference between a syllogism of the and the, in respect of each belonging to a different science.
 * 13.4. The knowledge of the belongs to the perceptive, of the  to the mathematical arguer.

Chap. 14. The first Figure most suitable to Science.
 * 14.1. Mathematical demonstrations effected through this figure.
 * 14.2. Also the syllogism of the . Cf book 2nd.
 * 14.3. Also the science of.
 * 14.4. The other figures condensed by this one.

Chap. 15. Of immediate negative Propositions.
 * 15.1. That one thing may possibly not be individually present with another. Examples.

Chap. 16. Of Ignorance, according to corrupt position of the Terms, where there are no Media.
 * 16.1. Definition of, and its kinds.
 * 16.2. Examples of affirmative deception.
 * 16.3. Negative deception instanced in the first and middle figures.
 * [16.3.1. First fig.]
 * 16.3.2. Middle fig.

Chap. 17. Continuation of the same with Media.
 * 17.1. Syllogism of the false produced in mediates, when the major is false.
 * 17.2. Case of both propositions being false.
 * 17.3. Both prop. cannot be wholly false in the middle figure, when deception is produced.
 * 17.4. Affirmative deception.

Chap. 18. Of the Dependence of Universals upon Induction, and of the latter upon Sense.
 * 18.1. Universals from which demonstration proceeds, depend upon induction, the latter upon sense. (Cf. Eth, b. vi. ch. 3; Rhet. b. i. ch. 2, and b. ii. ch. 23.

Chap. 19. Of the Principles of Demonstration, whether they are Finite or Infinite.
 * 19.1. By those who syllogize it is to be considered whether the syllogisms arise from propositions especially probable.
 * 19.2. An inquiry whether a stated series of terms proceeds to infinity.
 * 19.3. The same as to negatives.
 * 19.4. The doubt does not exist in the case of reciprocals.

Chap. 20. Of Finite Media.
 * 20.1. Media not infinite where the predications stop—Explanation and example.

Chap. 21. It is shown that there are no Infinite Media in Negative Demonstration.
 * 21.1. That there is not an infinity of media in negative demonstration, proved in the several figures.

Chap. 22. That there are no Infinite Media in Affirmative Demonstration.
 * 22.1. Of predications, as to what a thing is, there cannot be infinity—a difference of predication pointed out.
 * 22.2. True predications either define what the subject is, or are accidents.
 * 22.3. In either case there cannot be an infinite series shown from the nature of category.
 * 22.4. Hypothesis that a mediate proposition may be proved.
 * 22.5.1. If there is an infinity of predication, demonstration cannot exist.
 * 22.5.2. The same proved analytically from the nature of those things which are predicated ’.
 * 22.6. That there is not infinity of media.

Chap. 23. Certain Corollaries
 * 23.1. Case where no common ground of inherency subsists.
 * 23.2. Cases of propositional demonstration, when a certain medium is granted.
 * 23.3. What position the connecting term should occupy in an affirmative and negative proposition.

Chap. 24. The superiority of Universal to Particular Demonstration proved.
 * 24.1. The question stated.
 * 24.2. Reasons why particular demonstration may appear eligible.
 * 24.3. Reply to the above.
 * 23.4.3. Universal alone is cognizant of cause.
 * 24.4. It is true "non per aliud," but "per se."
 * 24.5. Universals tend to the simple and finite hence are more scientific.
 * 24.6. They come closer in demonstration to the principle.
 * 24.7. The universal is above all superior, in that it comprehends the particular, and is more intellectual.

Chap. 25. The Superiority of Affirmative to Negative Demonstration proved.
 * 25.1. That the demonstration which is through fewer postulates, etc., is, "cæteris paribus," the better—proved by example, and applied to affirmatives.
 * 25.2. The negative requires the affirmative, but the latter does not need the former.
 * 25.3. Affirmative comes nearer than negative to the nature of a principle.

Chap. 26. The Superiority of the same to Demonstration ad impossible proved.
 * 26.1. The difference proved by example, between direct demonstration and that which leads "ad absurdum."
 * 26.2. Scale of demonstrative superiority.

Chap. 27. Upon the Nature of more Accurate Science.
 * 27.1. That one science is more subtle and accurate than another.

Chap. 28. What constitutes one, and what different Sciences.
 * 28.1. Whatever things are demonstrated from principles of a common genus, these constitute one science. Nature of diverse sciences.

Chap. 29. That there may be several Demonstrations of the same thing.
 * 29.1. The same thing demonstrable in many modes, both when the middles are taken from the same, or from a different genus.

Chap. 30. That there is no Science of the Fortuitous.
 * 30.1. This class does not come under the proper subjects of demonstration.

Chap. 31. That we do not possess Scientific Knowledge through Sensation.
 * 31.1. The perception of the senses is not science.
 * 31.2. Though there are certain things unknown, from the deficiency of sensible perception.

Chap. 32. On the Difference of Priniciples according to the Diversity of Syllogisms.
 * 32.1. The impossibility of principles of all syllogisms being identical, proved.
 * 32.2. Reply to objection founded upon mistaken identity.
 * 32.3. Principles two-fold,  and.

Chap. 33. Upon the Difference between Science and Opinion.
 * 33.1. Science is universal, and subsists through things necessary: intellect the principle of science.
 * 33.2. Opinion conversant with the non-necessary.
 * 33.3. Solution of an inquiry why in certain cases opinion may not be science.
 * 33.4. We cannot, at one and the same time, know, and opine.

Chap. 34. Of Sagacity.
 * 34.1. Definition of sagacity, : instances.


text:
Page:O. F. Owen's Organon of Aristotle Vol. 1 (1853).djvu/332

 through the immediate, he will only opine that they are. Still opinion and science are not altogether conversant with the same thing, but as both the true and the false opinion are in a manner about the same thing, thus also science and opinion are conversant with the same. For as some say that true and false opinion are of the same; absurd consequences follow both in other respects, and also that he who opines falsely does not opine. Now since the same thing is stated in several ways, in one way there may be, and in another there cannot be (a true and false opinion of the same). For to opine truly that the diameter of a square is commensurate with its side, is absurd, but because the diameter about which there are (contrary) opinions is the same thing, thus also they are of the same thing, but the essence of each according to the definition is not the same. In like manner also knowledge and opinion are conversant with the same thing, for the former is so conversant with animal as that it is impossible animal should not exist, but the latter so as that it may possibly not exist, as if the one should be conversant with that which is man essentially, but the other with man indeed, yet not with what is man essentially; for it is the same thing, that is, man, but not the same as to the manner.

From these then it is clearly impossible to opine and know the same thing at the same time, for otherwise at one and the same time a man might have a notion that the same thing could and could not subsist otherwise, which is impossible. In different (men) indeed each (of these) may be possible about the same thing,


text:
Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 1.djvu/33

TO A.D. 420]  hundred cities; the principal were London, Colchester, Bath, Gloucester, Caerleon, Chester, Lincoln, and Chesterfield; most of them built upon lands which the emperors had bestowed upon the veterans of those legions whose descendants formed the greater part of the population. The larger cities, about ten in number, enjoyed the jus Latii, which conferred, amongst other privileges, the right of electing their magistrates. The inferior ones, called stipendiaries, paid tribute to the emperor, and were governed by officers under the authority of the prefect.

Thus we perceive that Britain owed to Rome, not only her first steps in the path of civilisation, but her municipal government, a code of written laws, judges to interpret them, and civil instead of priestly tribunals; whilst, at the same time, her arts and refinements gradually wrought a change in the savage but warlike character of its inhabitants, who, previous to their invasion, lived in a state of barbarism, inhabiting wretched huts, built in the rudest form. Their progress in architecture must have been rapid.

remains of Roman architecture in Britain, though numerous, do not exhibit any perfect buildings, and the workmanship in general is not equal to that of the continental remains. The buildings seem to have been inferior and of smaller dimensions, and there is very little of ornamental detail to be found, except the tesselated pavements, of which many fine examples yet remain in the Roman villas which have been discovered from time to time in various parts of the kingdom. The principal places where Roman remains are now to be found are Lincoln, Dover Castle, St. Albans, Richborough Castle, Porchester, York, Cirencester, Leicester, Colchester, &c. But in all these there is little ornamentation or detail left, the remains consisting chiefly of plain walls, the masonry of which has peculiarities of character which mark its date. Of the masonry there are two principal varieties; the first, and that which is most readily


text:
Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 1.djvu/34

20 , consists of alternate layers or bands of pebbles, or small stones imbedded in mortar, and tiles or flat stones. "These bands consisted of three or four courses of tiles or stones laid through the wall, and were placed at two or three feet from each other, the intermediate spaces being raised with a sort of cement composed of mortar and pebbles or sometimes rag-stones, or such materials as the country affords." In this manner are built the Mint wall at Lincoln, the Jewry wall at Leicester, and the walls at Verulam (St. Albans), Porchester, Richborough, York, Pevensey, Chesterford, Colchester, Wroxeter, Silchester, &c.

The other variety consists of walls formed of square stones or ashlar, as the Roman wall in Northumberland. These are sometimes very large, as at the north gate (or Newport gate), Lincoln. Smaller kinds of ashlar, of almost cubical blocks, occur at the multangular tower and other buildings at York. The mortar used in all these walls is in general mixed with pounded brick.

It will not be necessary here to go into a description of all these buildings, but a few of the most remarkable may be mentioned; one of the most curious and interesting of these is the, though it has undergone much alteration, particularly in the fifteenth century. "Wherever the outer casing is worn away, or has been removed by violence, the walls exhibit the usual mode of Roman building with the material of the districts; in this case with tufa or stalactite, brought perhaps from the opposite coast of France, and flint, with layers of large flat Roman bricks, some of them two feet long, each layer two courses deep, placed regularly and horizontally in the walls at equal intervals, or nearly so. No less than eight of these layers of brickwork are visible on the south-east side; other layers are apparently concealed by the external and subsequent casing of flint and stone, and where the casing of flint is perfect, quoins of stone appear at the angles. This tower is externally octagonal in form; internally the space enclosed forms a square. The doorway, recently blocked up, is on the south side, and the arch, turned and faced with a single row of large Roman bricks, springs from a kind of rude impost moulding, somewhat resembling that of the Roman gateway at Lincoln; but this is not now visible. In the interior, the constructive features of the original Roman work were, before the entrance was closed up, far more visible and perfect than on the exterior, and the facing of the bricks was quite smooth; yet the effect of the alterations is here also plainly apparent, and the original windows, the arches of which are turned with Roman brick, have been filled up with flint masonry. Both the external as well as the internal facings of the entrance doorway on the south side were, a few years back, when the interior could be readily examined, far from perfect. Over this doorway were two windows, one above the other, each arched with brickwork. On the east side of the tower is a rather lofty arch faced with stone, the soffit of which, however, appears to have been turned with brick; this probably communicated with some building adjoining. Over this arch is a window now blocked up."

, in Kent, is one of the most important of the Roman remains in England. It is a large parallelogram, including within it an area of five acres. The walls to the height of six feet are more than eleven feet thick, and above that ten feet eight inches; and the masonry is thus described by the Rev. C. H. Hartshorne:—"At Richborough, commencing at the ground, there are on the north side, where the masonry is displayed in its most perfect state, first of all, four courses of flint in their natural

form, then three courses dressed; to these succeed two courses of bonding tile, and then they rise above each other in the following order: seven courses of ashlar and two of tile; seven courses of ashlar and two of tile; seven courses of ashlar and two of tile; again, seven courses of ashlar and two of tile; eight courses of ashlar and two of tile; nine courses of ashlar. The extreme height of this wall is twenty-three feet two inches, and its thickness ten feet eight inches."

One of the most perfect and interesting of Roman remains is the archway at Lincoln, known as "" and styled by Dr. Stukely "the noblest remnant of this sort in Britain." It was the north gate of the Roman city of Lindum, and from it a military way, called the Ermine Street, leading to Winteringham on the Humber, may now be traced, and it still forms the principal entrance into the city from the north. It is supposed to have had a large central arch, and two smaller ones at the sides, that on the west having been destroyed, the larger being about fifteen feet, and the lesser ones seven feet in width. It is built of squared stone, out as far as the top of the arch, of remarkably large size. It is without ornament of any kind, but is said by Rickman to have had architrave and impost mouldings. That of the architrave, if it ever existed, has entirely disappeared; but there is, or was lately, a small portion of the impost moulding remaining, on the west side of the large arch. The masonry, which exhibits none of the usual bands of tiles so frequent in other buildings, will be best understood by the engraving on page 22, which gives every stone in its proper place.

There is another piece of Roman work in the neighbourhood of Newport Gate, which is a piece of wall built with ashlar and bonding courses of tile. It is known as the Mint Wall.

But perhaps the most interesting of all the Roman remains in Britain is the, which reaches across the narrow part of the island in Northumberland and


text:
Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 1.djvu/35

to A.D. 420.] Cumberland, commencing at Wallsend, on the Tyne, running through Newcastle and Carlisle, and terminating at Bowness, in Cumberland. A most interesting and fully illustrated account of this wall has been given to the world by the Rev. J. Collingwood Bruce, from which work we have (by the kind permission of the author) copied the preceding illustrations.

The conquests of the Romans in Britain had been carried by Agricola as far as the Friths of Forth and Clyde; but after his recall, the natives had recovered possession of their own soil, and matters fell again into confusion. "In the year 120—thirty-five years after the recall of Agricola—affairs in Britain had fallen into such confusion as to require the presence of the Emperor Hadrian, who had assumed the imperial purple three years before. He did not attempt to regain the conquests which Agricola had made in Scotland, but prudently sought to make the line of forts which that general had constructed in his second campaign the limit of his empire. With this object in view, he drew a wall across the island— The testimony of Spartian, the historian of his reign, though brief, is decisive. "Hadrian," says he, "visited Britain, when he corrected many things, and first drew a wall (murus), eighty miles in length, to divide the barbarians from the Romans.

"The arrival in Britain of Hadrian, one of Rome's greatest generals, was thought an event of sufficient importance to be commemorated in the currency of the empire. A large brass coin was struck by decree of the Senate in the year 121.

"The plans and prowess of the emperor were thought to have effectually secured that portion of the island which it was prudent to retain in the grasp of Rome. This circumstance was announced to the world in another coin, bearing, on the reverse, a name destined to sound through regions Hadrian never knew—; and representing a female figure seated on a rock, having a spear in her left hand, and a shield by her side." It is curious to observe how closely this figure resembles that on the modern coins, the chief alterations being that the spear is changed into a trident, and the right hand extended, offering the olive-branch of peace to all the world.

Arguments have been brought forward by some antiquaries to show that the wall and the vallum by which it is accompanied belong to two different periods; but Mr. Bruce contends that they are both to be considered as forming part of the great engineering work of Hadrian. It consists of a stone wall, or murus, and a wall of earth, or vallum. These two run always near together, but not always parallel. The vallum is likewise rather the shortest, terminating at Newcastle on the east, and at Drumburgh, about three miles from Bowness, the western extremity of the wall.

"The most striking feature in the plan, both of the murus and the vallum, is the determinate manner in which they pursue their straightforward course. The vallum makes fewer deviations from a right line than the stone wall; but as the wall traverses higher ground, this remarkable tendency is more easily detected in it than in the other. Shooting over the country, in its onward course, it only swerves from a straight line to take in its route the boldest elevations. So far from declining a hill, it uniformly selects one.

"For nineteen miles out of Newcastle the road to Carlisle runs upon the foundations of the wall, and during the summer months its dusty surface contrasts well with


text:
Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 1.djvu/36

22 the surrounding verdure. Often will the traveller, after attaining some of the steep acclivities of his path, observe the road stretching for miles in an undeviating course to the east and the west of him, resembling, as Hutton expresses it, a white ribbon on a green ground. But if it never moves from a right line, except to occupy the highest points, it never fails to seize them as they occur, no matter how often it is compelled, with this view, to change its direction. It never bends in a curve, but always at an angle. Hence, along the craggy precipices between Sewing-shields and Thirlwall, it is obliged to pursue a remarkably zigzag course; for it takes in its range, with the utmost pertinacity, every projecting rock."

Though no part of the wall now retains its full height, it has been calculated that when entire it was about eighteen or nineteen feet, including the parapet. Its general thickness is about eight feet, though it varies in different parts from six feet to ten and a half feet. It is "throughout the whole of its length accompanied on its northern margin by a broad and deep fosse, which, by increasing the comparative height of the wall, added greatly to its strength. This portion of the barrier may yet be traced, with trifling interruptions, from sea to sea."

The masonry of the wall is somewhat peculiar; it has none of the binding courses of tile which are, in many parts of England, and on the continent, so characteristic of Roman work. No tiles are used in the construction. The outer face of the wall on both sides is formed of squared blocks of stone, usually called ashlar, and the interior of rubble, imbedded in mortar. These blocks are about eight or nine inches thick, and ten or eleven wide; their length is considerably more, sometimes as much as twenty-two inches, and tapering to the opposite end, which was firmly bedded into the rubble. The whole rested on a course of large foundation stones.

On or near the wall were placed, at tolerably regular intervals, stationary camps, or "stations," about seventeen or eighteen in number; and at still shorter intervals, that is, about a Roman mile from each other, were placed smaller towers, called, from this circumstance, "mile castles." These are in general placed against the south side of the wall, and had mostly only one entrance, which was from the south; but in the most perfect of those at Gawfields there are two entrances, one on the south, and another through the main wall on the north.

More of ornamental detail seems to have been bestowed on the architecture of these stations and mile castles than on the wall, which was intended merely for defence. The walls have moulded basements and cornices, of which the woodcuts on page 19 are specimens; the one from Vendalana (Chesterholm) exhibits also the peculiar ornamentation of the surface of the stone work, which is produced by cutting lines in various directions, either lozenge-wise or parallel, horizontal, upright, oblique, or zigzag-wise, thus producing considerable variety. In the extremely interesting Saxon crypt at Hexham, which was built out of the ruins of the