text:
Index talk:The Pathway of Roses, Larson, 1913

1910 edition
Link to 1910 edition for copy/paste of text.

alternate text

1910 (& subsequent editions excepting the London, 1913 ed.) decorative border

 * The following text is copied from User talk:MODCHK. No further edits should be made to this section.

Overfloat image help request
MODCHK, Would you consider showing me how to place the text of this page within the corresponding available at Commons? Does the border image need to be in a format other than .jpg or does it not matter? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I am hardly the best person to answer this, as I usually end up opening up the overfloat image template and fairly blindly following the recipe in the documentation.

However, to answer your second question first: as the internal image specification is the same as that to simply display said image directly, I do no believe there is any bar to using a particular format. As (I hope) you can see, .jpg works fine.

The order in which I approached this was to first lay out the image to give yourself as much "space" in which to fit the text. I normally make sure it is centred, frameless and at least 400px wide (i.e. File: or Image: both work, your free choice. This then becomes the 'image=' value in:

Step two is to add chunks of text (in this case just the one) using the 'item1=', 'item2=' etc. parameter values. I do not believe more than one
 is allowed per "item", so grouping using block left or etc. is almost obligatory; except in the simplest possible cases. Because this results in loss of justification, I also added justify at this point.

There is another reason for using the various "block" forms, as the added text needs to be constrained to fit inside the border. I simply fooled around with "|width=300px" until it fitted. (Caveat: "|width=" simply does not do anything if you forget to add "px" or "em"―this can drive you quietly insane.)

To "move" the text block into the right position, use "|x1=" and "|y1=" and experiment. Increasing "x" pushes right; "y" pushes down. (Another caveat not applicable in this instance: if you need to use "hpos" or "vpos" the "x" and "y" effects reverse.)

Finally, to make the text fit in the frame vertically, I used fine block, mainly for the side effect of it reducing line height. This in turn required re-tweaking "y1" to vertically re-centre the text.

I hope the result is something like that you were looking for?

Oh, and the scan read "all that we may desire in the without shall be added." instead of "all that we may desire in the without may be added."
 * Must have been a brain slip on my part. Image-to-brain-to-output somehow translated "shall" to "may".  Thanks for catching that.  Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:22, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

MODCHK (talk) 23:43, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Oops. Glad you picked up that quote I accidentally swallowed. MODCHK (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

 * How 'bout suggestions for this one? Am I being too lazy by asking, or should I keep trying myself?  I think a hanging indent of sorts should be used (but normal hi use causes extra line breaks}}, as well as "white space" at top/bottom to keep the look the same—somewhat like what you did with the "Kernel" page.  I tried the white example you used, but only applied it once resulting in error.  If you think I should give it a further shot, then ignore this post for a while.  But for now I gotta run.  Thanks for above, Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, this is my suggestion (basically no change except from applying your own hints!) Oh, and thank you for introducing me to italic block, which I never even suspected existed before. MODCHK (talk) 00:54, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! How would you make the white space at top/bottom equidistant, however?  Also, italic block doesn't work well in certain instances where I've tried it with lines of poetry in Byron footnotes, but I can't remember why just now.  I'll make a mental note next time I confront an example to see (or ask) why that is.  Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:03, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Okay... So my problem initially with hanging indent was the use of end of line breaks then, right? The hanging indent template creates its own break.  Got it.(?)  I'll have to fiddle around with your use of coordinates too to see what they do/affect... Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:22, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I did get your point about hanging indent introducing new line breaks―which was why I removed all the &ltbr/>s. Unfortunately this only addresses about 80% of the extra space, and I simply don't know how to get rid of the rest of it. line-height is a blind alley. I sincerely look forward to any solution you can come up with; because this one really is beyond me―Sorry! MODCHK (talk) 01:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Additional thought: perhaps another way of looking at the coordinates ("x$1,2,...$" and "y$1,2,...$) might be to think of positive values stepping deeper and deeper into the image area; whilst negative values place the text block further and further outside of it. Hope this helps. MODCHK (talk) 02:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

 * I meant I got the hanging dent issue. As in, "[I] got it.  Sorry that wasn't obvious :) My addition of a question mark was due to the fact that when I think I understand something, I later realize I might not actually get it after all.  So it was my way of giving myself the benefit of the doubt (that I could be wrong).  I'll take a further look at the rest soon. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:40, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Doesn't matter. Faults all `round, as I knew I had not quite addressed the problem as posed. The main thing is at least we appear to to striving in a reasonably common direction.

 * Incidentally (completely unrelated matter), thank you for all the experimentation regarding <ref>s especially "follow=xxx" completions on the next page. Following your recipes has been very useful with Index:A colonial autocracy, New South Wales under Governor Macquarie, 1810-1821.djvu. Much deserved credit where it is due! MODCHK (talk) 01:57, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Also incidentally, I've seen Billinghurst (can't remember where) apply ref name/follow in a somewhat different way (if I recall correctly). I think it had to do with where the ref follow material is placed in the body of the Index page.  Just a recall moment... Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * All useful to know. I would appreciate a pointer should you recall where you saw that. Please don't go out of your way if it doesn't come to mind easily. MODCHK (talk) 21:19, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Back to main issue. Curious (no, not criticising!) why you added
s to both Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 5.jpg and Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 15.jpg. I thought I had vertically centred the text within the frame; but was that only true on my screen, and not yours? For reference, page 5 now shows (to me) as text neatly nestled at the bottom of the frame space, and page 15 more or less central, but with a slightly larger gap above than below (maybe 60:40 ratios of space?) MODCHK (talk) 21:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

 * My screen (with breaks) shows the white space on both pages basically equidistant now relative to top/bottom of border. Must be a screen issue is my guess.  I'll remove the breaks... There really wasn't much of a difference beforehand anyhow. Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Frankly, your answer concerns me, if the results are so different on different screens. I wonder if one of us has a slightly different font being selected (for example.) To somewhat settle the matter, would you be so kind as to view Page:Alices adventures in Cambridge.djvu/7 and let me know if that page looks unbalanced on your display? (It just happens to be another user of overfloat image, but which appears to have been reviewed without adverse comment by several people by now.)

 * I wonder if this might be a matter a little beyond answering between us, and perhaps should consider raising it a little more publicly? MODCHK (talk) 07:26, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Re: Alice: Twice as much white space at top than at bottom in my view. Re: lack of "adverse comment": People look at images/words with different sets of eyes/perspectives.  Some are drawn to white-space use, some to words/meaning, etc., etc.  Some are drawn to all aspects, yet some in differing orders and at different times, etc.  Harkens back to intent. Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:09, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

 * I think I have figured it out, and if I am right I do not like the answer! My browser is Firefox (v.18.0.1) and I happen to have it set for "default font" 'Bitstream Vera Sans' font size 16. If I reduce the font size to (say 10) the page starts looking like that which you are describing. It may be that the root cause of the problem is that your eyesight is simply better than mine!

 * Because of the way the component parts of overfloat image have been constrained (image size, text block width and top-left-corner position, all in px), the only factor with any "give" when the text font size varies is the depth of that same block. My reading of section "See also" of font-size is that WikiSource frowns upon the use of absolute font sizes (which normally seems sensible to me) completely rules out any obvious means of fixing this issue. Yuck!

 * In complete violation of the rules above, I have (temporarily) added an absolute font size to Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 5.jpg. To me it displays the same as it did before. Can you please have a look and I hope you find the vertical spacing is even again... or the page may be completely ruined... MODCHK (talk) 17:03, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Vertical spacing has not changed. Twice as much space at bottom than at top (I almost confused it with 'Alice' above and said vice-versa).  All else does not seem to be affected by any changes. Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Ok. y sub 1 affects top margin, and x sub 1 affects right margin, right? Are there 'coordinates' for bottom/left margins too? Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:47, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh... I guess what happens to the top/right also happens to the bottom/left. Sounds sort of (but not quite) like a corollary—hate those!  Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Changed 65 to 85. How does the page look to you now?  Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:20, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * This may be a measure of my frustration with this matter, but following is a screen capture in hopes it demonstrates (please feel free to delete at your leisure.) Unfortunately the rules of overfloat image don't permit both corners of a text block to be controlled at the same time. MODCHK (talk) 21:27, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

My most recent adjustment (edit) looks good to me in Chrome and IE. The above (as you see it—and thank you for illustrating) is as rendered in Firefox? Desktop/laptop? So could the rules of overfloat image be tweaked? or are there no rules currently in existence written to be so flexible as George Orwell III would like to see available for images, etc.? What exactly is the source of our view discrepancy? Sorry, my thoughts are all over the place. Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:36, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oops, we both edited together. Trying again:
 * Sorry. Similar cerebral back-scatter here as well. Firefox 18.0.1 as above. Desktop. As you can see the text is neatly "flush bottom" within the frame from my point of view.
 * With regards modifying the template... need to think more. Will get back to you!
 * What were GOIII's ideas on images? Variable size capability might solve this? MODCHK (talk) 21:46, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Re: GO3: You can review here. Lots to wade through.  You'll probably understand it better than I do.  No—you definitely will understand it more than I!  Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:50, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the reference which I have now read. Not quite what I was hoping for; but not unrelated either. I am currently thinking either overfloat image requires support for some kind of "middle" alignment, or possibly a table cell. Either way, not quite sure how to bend it without breaking something. On top of which I have to leave for about three hours. To be continued... MODCHK (talk) 22:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Right. Got a version almost fit for human consumption. Sample here: User:MODCHK/Sandbox
 * I have for the sake of experiment thrown away the overfloat image template and resorted to the various
s it used to generate (also now mutilated), now enclosing a single table cell which dynamically centres its content. I have to specify the text block height twice (the 550px and 540px―the difference being allowance for the browser to generate scroll-bars if the text overflows the cell!), which is frankly annoying. Otherwise (only if this works for you) I think the result is simple enough to use directly without modifying overfloat image to handle the new constraints.
 * What do you think, please? MODCHK (talk) 02:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * If you please, I need some time to digest. Could be a day or so, so if you see me editing elsewhere, I'm not ignoring your question, etc., I am merely digesting/retreating/digesting, etc.  Thanks for the research.  Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. Take as long as you like. This is simply the best compromise I have been able to come up with so far. MODCHK (talk) 02:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I can at least testify that what you have in your Sandbox looks right in my browser. It's the technical stuff above that I will mull over. Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:56, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * [Technical stuff is now way over my head, so I will defer to y'all where the rest is concerned. When you reach a best-case-scenario, let me know, and I'll copy your (or whatever collaborative) lead to the other similarly-affected pages.  Thanks for all, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:01, 22 January 2013 (UTC)]
 * Well I'm sorry if you are feeling swamped (I freely confess I've been bailing a fair bit myself!) I think I shall let matters mull for a day or so, and if nobody else comments further, then start putting in train the changes to overfloat image discussed, although technically the template will work well enough as it is―if jumped up and down on hard enough. See Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 15.jpg. I am still hoping Beeswaxcandle's ideas on leading will… lead somewhere usable. MODCHK (talk) 16:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Should that "shall" perhaps read "may" [or "might"?] (Re: letting "matters mull")? I have often made "definitive" statements here (WS), but keep changing my mind after-the-fact! Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

 * That is fine with me. In the interim, I have swallowed my pride and reworked (a copy of) the template to cater for (most of) the changes required. And uncovered an apparent minor logic error in the original, which I have raised with AdamBMorgan. I have not yet received a response. MODCHK (talk) 15:43, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Just a thought from my Desktop Publishing days. In the screen capture above the leading (space between lines of text) is wider in the proofread version than in the scan. I haven't played with the templates in this area as I haven't needed to so far (but I'm watching this conversation with interest as I'm sure to need it at some stage) so I can't point you to something that keeps the same font size but reduces the leading. Even half a point can make a huge difference. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You are indeed quite right, and in fact I was concerned right from the start with this very issue on the "other" page Londonjackbooks presented as it is really obvious here. Unfortunately like yourself I am at a loss as to how to properly address it, so if anything at all comes to mind I will gratefully accept any suggestions! MODCHK (talk) 07:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * After wandering through Category:Formatting templates I've just found Line-height, but the examples don't seem to be different when < 100%. Another possibility is playing with font-size-x. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * line-height doesn't seem to play nicely with the
-based templates as it is based upon a . I have been playing with the same style directives embedded in a
, but the effect of line-height seem to last only to the next paragraph break and have to be reasserted again and again. The code is ugly but seems to work here: Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 15.jpg MODCHK (talk) 15:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Further experimentation reveals the lie in my remarks above. In fact enclosing each "paragraph" in its own style-less
 seems to be one solution to the uneven leading issue; and wrapping the collection thereof in a single line-height appears to happily control the conglomeration. Same example now updated. MODCHK (talk) 22:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Continued...

 * Query: Is there in fact a page 45 in this work (especially since contents page implies there ought to be 351+ pages in total)? There does not appear to be a corresponding JPG scan … MODCHK (talk) 05:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Short answer: Yes (to be read similarly to "duuhhh"). Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:59, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Long answer (to give you the benefit of the doubt): Page 45 is the first page of the next chapter. I got ahead of myself yesterday thinking in tens.  Photographs vs. scans.  I do not want to break the binding, as the book was a gift. Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Re. "duuhhh": fair cop. Please be kind to your (obviously quite) precious book. I was really trying to draw attention to the empty place holder rather than the incompleteness of the scan. According to Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page iv.jpg, only 300 more to go! MODCHK (talk) 21:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Didn't even notice that page was completed. Thanks.  I wasn't looking forward to proofreading it.  One example of not saving the best for last.  Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Request: I have (finally!) figured out how to integrate the table cell critical to providing vertical centring into the prototype template. Would somebody else please be so good as to verify if User:MODCHK/Sandbox behaves rationally in their browser?
 * Smidgen more white space at bottom in Chrome (like 1/6th or something like that), but looks okay.
 * Your eye is good! Agree. Moved block down 3px and enabled border box for demonstration only. MODCHK (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Renders O.K. with varying default font size in Firefox 18.0.1 under Linux. MODCHK (talk) 07:22, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Chapter transclusion notation
What does it all mean? I 'get' the pages at bottom, but can you please explain what the rest means/does? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:18, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

 * I just got your question. Weather was pretty wild here yesterday (lots of trees blown down etc.) so I got distracted on non-computer tasks.

 * The above is a shameful demonstration how a lot or research and effort can be invested in "simplifying" an issue; with the end result being no better than doing noting at all! I was hoping to come up with a template similar to the Page you used for the other chapters, but which would accept multiple pages (or a page range) ala the way <pages> works for DJVU files. As you can see I was not spectacularly successful. (I know; 'not'―but it sounds better than "spectacularly unsuccessful!")

 * for is an existing template which absorbs the list at the end (i.e. here: 89|90|91|92|93|94|95|96|97|98|99|100|101|102|103|105) and "calls" another template (here PageNumWrapper) repeatedly, each time passing one parameter in the parameter specified by pv (here page.) So far so good; but if you examine your own use of Page you will note that it needs each page number specified twice―one for the "num" parameter, and again in the JPG file name. for only allows one use per iteration, so I had to create the laughably simplistic PageNumWrapper to copy the value into two places; and then invoke Page.

 * Oh, and the "|pc1n=PNWprefix|pc1v=The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page |pc2n=PNWpostfix|pc2v=.jpg" junk is in turn required because this compromise means I cannot let for "use up" the parameter creating the JPG filename, so PageNumWrapper needs these bits to reconstruct it. Un-pretty.

 * To reiterate, I was hoping to create something which might be easier to copy and modify from chapter to chapter, but in reality I think the recipe turned out to be closer to mock turkey (i.e neither entirely beast nor fowl.) Up to you which way you want to carry on. MODCHK (talk) 00:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

 * I wouldn't normally ask this, but could you show me how transclusion would render with straight html (or whatever) without using any templates on the page whatsoever? You don't have to bother with it now (or ever), for I won't be back till tomorrow... but I would be interested.  I haven't read your response above thoroughly, but will do so tomorrow.  Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

 * The direct answer is: "I cannot, because you have asked an impossible question." This is because transclusion is a wiki function which takes place before any HTML can be produced. The question I can address is to show you the wiki coding without templates which will achieve the same effect. I hope this is close enough to satisfy the spirit if not the word of your enquiry.

 * Here is the background, which I warn, you are not going to like due to the quantity of "technical guff" I am going to load on you here (I don't entirely pretend to have a handle on this, so please consult further if need be.) I could not find a "decent" backgrounder on any of the "normal sister" wikis, and so had to resort to the master software site: Extension:Labeled Section Transclusion.

 * Now because of our private running gag about me not being able to use that word, you are really not(!) going to like this. Page uses a wiki system extension function which you might have guessed from the backgrounder above is called Labelled Section Transclusion (parser function #lst.) This function causes transclusion of
-labelled parts of pages. Because we wish to transclude entire (unrestricted) pages, a variant called #lstx which transcludes everything except a labelled section, which we haven't got anyway here; so we don't have to specify that which we don't want, because we want the entire page! (I never said this wasn't going to be a nightmare or exclusions, did I?)

 * On top of everything else, the writer of the function decided that "English" names were appropriate, so #lstx has an alias #section-x. If you have all that under your belt, then the wiki code for transcluding Chapter 9 of the "Pathway of Roses", excluding the "pretty header" stuff becomes, literally:

 * All of the stuff embedded within the double-s is associated with displaying the page number makers down the left borders.

 * Feeling swamped yet? MODCHK (talk) 01:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Not yet. Thanks for the explanation & MW ref link.  As to the use of the word "not": I am not against its use, as I am sure you know... Merely the manner in which two or more instances are used in a sentence resulting in a full-stop to my brain.  'Let your writing be yea, yea; nay, nay' — or better yet, 'let your writing be yea; nay'. :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


text:
Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 24.jpg

24 he knows nothing of. And as a true understanding of higher power can not be found among the many, there are, accordingly, but few who can actually declare, with the whole heart, "Thy will be done." We frequently pray for His will to guide us, nevertheless we inwardly expect to use our own wills in mostly everything we do. But such prayers are not true to the spirit, and therefore they prevent the soul from actually discerning the real meaning of God's will; and also prevent the mind from becoming a perfect channel for the expression of His will.

The universe is orderly from centre to circumference, and everything is established upon the firm foundation of eternal right and universal good. There is a power that lives and moves throughout this vast immensity, and all those things that have a permanent place in the cosmos, or that are instrumental in any way, in promoting the purpose of life, have their source in this one power. All the laws and forces in existence spring originally from this power; it is therefore the centre and source of all that lives and moves; and this power is the will of God. Accordingly, to do the will of the Father is to enter into harmony with the universal order and promote the great eternal plan.

The laws of life are all expressions of Supreme will. God wills eternally the right and the true, and the act of His willing originates and perpetuates the sublime plan of life that harmoniously thrills the entire

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


text:
Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 25.jpg

Rh cosmos during endless eternities. God's will is constant and changeless; therefore all the laws and principles in existence remain ever the same, as they are all the expression of the One Will. All that we see in the life of the universe is the eternal coming forth of Divine Will, and the perpetual returning to the One Source.

The true will in every soul is an individualization of Infinite Will, and the true use of the individual will means the doing of the will of God. The Infinite Will does not seek to control things, but seeks eternally to give itself to things. And here lies the secret in correctly using the human will, and in placing the human will in perfect harmony with God's will. When you can say with the whole heart, "Thy will be done," you are not giving up your own will, but you are placing your own will and the whole of your life in oneness with God and in harmony with the universal order. Therefore, when you do the will of God your own will becomes right, and becomes infinitely stronger than it ever was before.

When we act in perfect accord with the laws of life on all the planes of being, we are doing the will of God because what we call law in life is the will of God in expression in life. He who lives in perfect harmony with nature, who fully appreciates her grandeur and her beauty, and who daily seeks to be inspired by the loveliness of her presence is doing the will of God in the natural world. He who rightly employs all the elements of


text:
Page:The Clipper Ship Era.djvu/380

 302 some of whom have already been mentioned. The Romance of the Seas carried the full-length figure of an ancient navigator, whose original might have stood on the high poop of Magellan's flag-ship, with head bent forward and right hand raised to shade his eager eyes, as he gazed upon an unknown land in an uncharted sea. The Sea Serpent carried a long slender serpent, whose life-like, slimy-looking body, picked out in shades of green and gold, suggested his recent escape from the waters of one of the summer resorts along the Atlantic coast. The Nightingale carried a beautiful bust of Jenny Lind, for whom she was named. The Panama carried at her bow a nude, full-length figure of a beautiful woman with arms extended, pure white and of great artistic merit, perhaps the most beautiful figurehead ever carried by a ship. The Flying Fish carried a fish on the wing, of life-like color and giving a vivid sense of speed; the Witchcraft, a grim Salem witch riding upon her aerial broomstick; the Game-Cock, a fighting bird with outstretched neck and head, apparently eager for combat; the Northern Light, the full-length figure of an angelic creature in flowing white drapery, one graceful arm extended above her head, and bearing in her slender hand a torch with golden flame.

One of the most striking figureheads was the tall square-built sailor, with dark curly hair and bronzed clean-shaven face, who stood at the bow of the Champion of the Seas. A black belt with a massive brass buckle supported his white trousers, which were as tight about the hips as the skin of an eel, and had wide, bell-shaped bottoms

title: Page:The Clipper Ship Era.djvu/380


text:
Page:The Clipper Ship Era.djvu/381

 Rh that almost hid his black polished pumps. He wore a loose-fitting blue-and-white-checked shirt, with wide, rolling collar, and black neck handkerchief of ample size, tied in the most rakish of square knots with long flowing ends. But perhaps the most impressive of this mariner's togs were his dark-blue jacket, and the shiny tarpaulin hat which he waved aloft in the grip of his brawny, tattooed right hand. The only exception that one could possibly take to this stalwart sailorman was that his living prototype was likely to be met with so very seldom in real life. There were many other figureheads that might be mentioned, but these are best remembered.

In those days New York was one of the most beautiful and picturesque seaports of the world; the water-front was lined with majestic clippers, stately Indiamen,and noble packet ships, their American ensigns and well-known house flags of many brilliant colors floating in the breeze. The

title: Page:The Clipper Ship Era.djvu/381


text:
Page:The Clipper Ship Era.djvu/372

294 The abstract log of the Great Republic is as follows:

Lieutenant Maury, in a letter on the subject to the Secretary of the Navy, remarks: "This vessel did not have the luck to get a wind that could keep her up to her mettle for twenty-four hours consecutively. Here and there she got into favorable streaks of wind, but she appears to have run out of them faster than they could follow. She made the run to San Francisco in 92 days.

"The shortest passage that in the present state of ship-building will probably ever be made from New York to San Francisco, is 85 days; and the very clever first officer of this ship, writing from California, expresses the opinion that 'should she continue to run between New York and San Francisco, from the experience of this voyage, she will one day make the trip within your possible 85 days.'

"The friends of this noble specimen of naval architecture, however, can scarcely hope for a fair trial and proper display of her prowess until she shall be sent on a voyage to Australia. The brave west winds of the Southern hemisphere, which she will then encounter, will enable her to show

title: Page:The Clipper Ship Era.djvu/372


text: Index:Zodiac stories by Blanche Mary Channing.pdf


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/336

Rh have given lessons to his daughter, afterwards Mrs. Shelley. He painted the Duke of Argyll in 1817, and in 1819 a miniature of his wife on ivory, which so pleased the Marchioness of Stafford that she engaged him to paint her daughter, Lady Belgrave, in the same style. Lord Francis Leveson-Gower, Lord Belgrave, Lord Shelborne, Viscount and Viscountess Ebrington, Lady Frederica Stanhope, the Princess Sophia Matilda, and many others also sat for miniatures. His charge for portraits about 1817 was from three to twelve guineas a head. The most important of his landscapes during this period was the ‘St. John Preaching’ of 1818, in which he displayed great poetical feeling in the union of the landscape with the sentiment of the subject. His first contribution to the Royal Academy (1813), called ‘Bird Catching,’ afterwards known as ‘Kensington in 1814,’ was also notable. In 1814–15 his landscapes were from Wales and Derbyshire, the latter being the result of a tour in North Wales with Mr. G. R. Lewis in 1812 or 1813, and another tour in Derbyshire in 1814, taken in view of illustrations to Walton's ‘Angler.’ Athletic and robust, he boxed, rowed, and swam well, and performed a great part of his journeys on foot.

He married his first wife in 1817, and removed from his father's house to 35 Rathbone Place, and thence at the end of 1818 to 6 Cirencester Place. In 1824 he removed his family to Hampstead, keeping his studio in Cirencester Place.

His plan of life appears to have been to go on making money by portrait-painting until he had laid by sufficient to enable him to devote the rest of his life to landscape. This plan he accomplished, but, judging from the catalogues of the Royal Academy, not till 1847, when he was fifty-five years old. Between 1821 and that year he exhibited over one hundred portraits, including drawings and miniatures, and some ten or twelve landscapes. Among the former were ‘Lady Torrens and Family’ (1821), the Earl of Denbigh (1823), Lady Lyndhurst (1830), A. W. Callcott, R.A. (1832), W. Mulready, R.A., and the Rev. T. R. Malthus (1833), T. Phillips, R.A., and the Marquis of Bristol (1835), Sir Robert Peel and the Archbishop of Dublin (1838), the Marquis of Lansdowne (1840), the Bishop of Chichester (1841), Sir Thomas, Lady, and the Right Hon. Francis Baring (1842), and Thomas Carlyle (1844). Among the other pictures of this period were ‘Christ's Appearance to the two Disciples journeying to Emmaus’ (1835), ‘Philip baptising the Eunuch’ (1840), and ‘The Supper at Emmaus’ (1843).

In 1847 the character of his contributions changed suddenly. Henceforth no more portraits. In that year he sent three landscapes, ‘The Mill,’ ‘Midday,’ and ‘The Morning Walk;’ in the next one a large composition (59 by 88 inches), ‘The Eve of the Deluge’ (which was purchased by Mr. Gillott for 1,000l.), and in the next ‘Sandpits’ and ‘The Return of Ulysses.’ To the close of his life he seldom, if ever, failed to send some fine work to the Academy, but not often more than two. The rich scenery of Surrey generally supplied him with his subjects. Its harvest fields and woodlands, its hills and copses, its glowing sunsets and stormy cloudracks engaged his pencil over and over again. With these splendid records of natural beauty he was generally content, but now and then he conceived with equal force some imaginary scene as the fitting stage of a great event, generally in Bible history. In 1850 appeared ‘Christ and the Woman of Samaria at Jacob's Well,’ and in 1854 ‘The Disobedient Prophet.’ In these works the fine composition and colour and appropriate sentiment of the landscape were united to admirable grouping and expressive action of the figures.

Notwithstanding, however, the high merit of his work, he remained to the end of his days without academical honours. In 1821 he had put down his name as a candidate for associateship, and in 1842 he withdrew it in disgust. Late in life the Academy offered him membership, but he declined it. His reasons for doing so, and his view of the Academy in the light of a national institution, may be read in the ‘Athenæum’ (1867, p. 759), and in his pamphlet, ‘The Royal Academy a National Institution.’

In 1829 he removed from Hampstead to a house which he had built in Porchester Terrace (No. 38), Bayswater, and in 1852 to Redstone Wood, Redhill, Surrey, where he had built another house on his own property. Here he lived till his death, enjoying the practice of his art, surrounded by his friends and family. Several of the latter were distinguished as artists. In 1858 he is styled for the first time J. Linnell, senior, in the catalogue, where the names of three sons, James Thomas Linnell, William Linnell, and John Linnell, junior, appear together for the first time. His daughter married Samuel Palmer [q. v.], the water-colour painter, whose artistic aims were in sympathy with his own.

His last contribution was a picture of ‘Woodcutters,’ sent the year before his death, which took place at Redhill on 20 Jan. 1882. He left behind him a considerable


text:
Page:Beowulf (Wyatt).djvu/219

Rh

13—2

title: Page:Beowulf (Wyatt).djvu/219


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/338

Rh art his profession. He settled in London, and in its environs, as well as at Hastings, the Isle of Wight, and the south coast of England, he found subjects for his earlier works. His first appearance at the Royal Academy was in 1817, when he exhibited ‘Coniston Lake’ and two views at Richmond in Surrey. In the same year he sent to the British Institution a landscape entitled ‘L'Allegro.’ These were followed later by small English landscapes, and by ‘Anacreontic Revels,’ exhibited at the British Institution in 1820; ‘The Landing of the Trojans to consult the Oracle of Apollo at Delos,’ in 1821; and ‘Edinburgh, from the base of Arthur's Seat,’ and a ‘Scene on the Thames, below London Bridge,’ in 1822. In 1823 he sent to the British Institution ‘Morning after a Storm: a scene near Lynton, on the North Devon coast,’ and to the Royal Academy three views in Northwick Park, painted for Lord Northwick.

Linton took an active part in the foundation of the Society of British Artists, and to its first exhibition in 1824 he sent ‘The Vale of Lonsdale’ and ten other works; and to that of 1825 ‘The Vale and Lakes of Keswick’ and ‘Delos.’ The latter work led to a commission from the Duke of Bedford to paint for the dining-room at Woburn Abbey an ‘Italian Scene,’ which was exhibited at the British Institution in 1826. In the same year he sent to the Society of British Artists a fine poetical composition entitled ‘A City of Ancient Greece—The Return of a Victorious Armament,’ which was engraved by J. W. Appleton for Finden's ‘Royal Gallery of British Art,’ and in 1828 ‘Æneas and Achates landing on the coast of Africa, near to Carthage, are directed by Venus, who appears to them in the character of a Spartan Huntress.’ About this time, also, he painted for Lord Egremont ‘A Grecian Seaport—Morning,’ which was engraved by Edward Goodall for the ‘Anniversary’ of 1829. These scenes were painted from imagination, for Linton did not visit Greece until 1840. He paid a first visit to the continent in 1828, and remained in Italy fifteen months, making sketches of the most striking scenery. He returned to England in 1829, and in 1830 sent to the Royal Academy ‘Zagarolo, an ancient town in the Campagna.’ In 1830 also he exhibited at the Society of British Artists ‘Naples,’ and in 1831 ‘Cività Castellana,’ which again appeared at the British Institution in 1832, when he sent to Suffolk Street ‘The Grecian Choirs at the Temple of Apollo.’ He also produced two folio volumes of ‘Sketches in Italy,’ drawn on stone, and published with descriptive text in 1832. Then followed, at the Society of British Artists in 1834, ‘Caius Marius sitting among the Ruins of Carthage,’ which attracted much attention, and was engraved by J. T. Willmore, A.R.A., for Finden's ‘Royal Gallery of British Art,’ and in 1836 ‘Ancient Jerusalem during the approach of the Miraculous Darkness which attended the Crucifixion,’ which was engraved in mezzotint by T. G. Lupton. In 1837 he exhibited at the Royal Academy ‘The Vale of Aosta;’ in 1838, ‘The Lake of Lugano;’ and in 1839, ‘Embarkation of the Greeks for the Trojan War,’ one of the largest of his classical compositions, exhibited again at Westminster Hall in 1847. He sent to the Society of British Artists in 1838 ‘The Ruins of Ancient Tyre,’ and in 1839 ‘The City of Argos, with the Embarkation of Agamemnon for the Trojan War.’ He then, in 1840, set out on a fifteen months' tour through Greece, Sicily, and Calabria, taking Italy on his way, and returned with between two and three hundred sketches, which he exhibited at the gallery of the New Society of Painters in Water-colours.

Linton resigned his membership of the Society of British Artists in 1842, and in that year sent to the Royal Academy ‘The Temple and Acropolis of Corinth,’ and to the British Institution ‘The Lake of Nemi.’ To both these exhibitions he contributed in subsequent years many landscapes, the majority painted from his Italian sketches. ‘The Temples of Pæstum,’ which he bequeathed to the National Gallery, was shown at the Westminster Hall Exhibition of 1847. ‘The Temple of Female Fortune, with the Acqua Felice,’ which appeared at the Academy in 1849, was purchased by Sir Robert Peel, being the last picture added to his collection. In 1851 he exhibited at the Academy ‘A Festa Day at Venice—The Grand Canal,’ to which a prize of 50l. was awarded by the Royal Institution of Manchester; in 1852, ‘Ruins near Empulum, in the Apennines,’ and ‘The Foscari Palace, Venice;’ in 1853, ‘A Mountain Town in Calabria, above the Gulf of Tarento—Brigands driving off Cattle;’ in 1855, ‘Ruins of the Castellum of the Julian Aqueduct, Rome,’ and a ‘Scene near the Mouth of the River Po, on the Adriatic;’ in 1856, ‘The Tiber, with the Church of St. Andrew the Apostle, and the Vatican;’ in 1857, a large view of ‘Derwentwater;’ and in 1859, ‘The Bay of Baiæ,’ after which he ceased to exhibit at the Academy. He continued, however, until 1871 to contribute to the exhibitions of the Society of British Artists, of which he became an honorary member in 1869. His ideal Greek compositions are his best works, but his


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/339

Rh English and Italian landscapes are characterised by an unaffected truthfulness.

Linton was well versed in the chemistry of colours, and served as an associate juror in the chemical class at the Great Exhibition of 1851. He published in 1852 ‘Ancient and Modern Colours, from the earliest periods to the present time: with their chemical and artistical properties.’ He was also the author of ‘The Scenery of Greece and its Islands,’ with fifty views executed on steel by himself, 1856, 4to, 2nd edit. 1869, and of ‘Colossal Vestiges of the Older Nations,’ 1862, 8vo.

He died at 7 Lodge Place, St. John's Wood Road, London, on 18 Aug. 1876. His remaining works were sold by Messrs. Christie, Manson, & Woods on 15 Feb. 1877.

 LINTON, WILLIAM (1801–1880), army physician, eldest son of Jabez Linton of Hardrigg Lodge, Dumfriesshire, by Jane, daughter of William Crocket of Grahamshill in the same county, was born in 1801 at Kirkpatrick Fleming. He was educated at Edinburgh University, and graduated L.R.C.S. in 1826. But he had already utilised four summer vacations as surgeon on a whaler in the arctic regions. He entered the army medical department in 1826, graduated M.D. at Glasgow in 1834, and became staff surgeon of the first class in 1848. After serving in Canada, the Mediterranean, and the West Indies, he was appointed deputy inspector-general of hospitals of the first division of the army in the Crimea, was present in every action up to the battle of Balaclava, and had care of the barrack hospital in Scutari shortly after its establishment in 1854 until the British forces came home. On his return in 1856 he was created C.B. In the following year he proceeded to India as inspector-general of hospitals, to which was soon added the post of principal medical officer of the European army. He held the offices throughout the Indian mutiny. His unremitting zeal was rewarded by his being in 1859 enrolled among her majesty's honorary physicians, and in 1865 he was advanced to the dignity of K.C.B. Linton retired from the active list in 1863, and died unmarried at his residence of Skairfield, Lockerbie, Dumfriesshire, on 9 Oct. 1880.

 LINTOT, BARNABY BERNARD (1675–1736), publisher, the son of John Lintott, yeoman, was born at Southwater, Horsham, Sussex, on 1 Dec. 1675. He was probably a nephew of the Joshua Lintot who was printer to the House of Commons between 1708 and 1710. He was bound apprentice at Stationers' Hall to Thomas Lingard in December 1690, was afterwards turned over to John Harding, and was made free of the company in March 1699. He rarely used the name Barnaby, and after some years spelt his surname with one ‘t.’ In 1698 his name appears on the imprint of Crowne's ‘Caligula’ and Vanbrugh's ‘Relapse’ as ‘at the Cross Keys in St. Martin's Lane;’ but he afterwards moved to the Cross Keys and Crown, next Nando's Coffee-house, which was the first house east of Inner Temple Lane. On 13 Oct. 1700 Lintot was married at St. Bartholomew's, Smithfield, to one Katherine, who was born in January 1664. A son, Henry, was born in 1703. In 1702 he published ‘Examen Miscellaneum, consisting of verse and prose,’ and besides books on graver subjects he afterwards published poems and plays for Pope, Gay, Farquhar, William King, Fenton, Parnell, Steele, Rowe, &c. Farquhar received from 15l. to 30l. each for his plays, Gay 43l. each for ‘Trivia’ and ‘Three Hours after Marriage,’ King 32l. 5s. each for the ‘Art of Cookery’ and the ‘Art of Love,’ Rowe 50l. 15s. for ‘Jane Shore’ and 75l. 5s. for ‘Lady Jane Grey,’ and Steele 21l. 10s. for the ‘Lying Lovers.’

In 1708 Lintot was called on by the Company of Stationers to take upon him their livery; in 1715 he was renter-warden, in 1722–3 he was elected into the court of assistants, and in 1729 and 1730 was under-warden. In 1709 he published Fenton's ‘Oxford and Cambridge Miscellany Poems,’ and in 1712 ‘Miscellaneous Poems and Translations, by several hands,’ in opposition to ‘Tonson's Miscellany.’ In some verses which first appeared in this volume, but were afterwards enlarged, Swift said of Lintot, His character's beyond compare, Like his own person, large and fair. The last poem in the book was Pope's ‘Rape of the Lock,’ in its first form. In the following year, after the appearance of Addison's ‘Cato,’ Lintot published a piece by Dennis criticising the play, and Pope seized the


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/340

Rh opportunity of attacking Dennis in the well-known ‘Narrative of Dr. Robert Norris,’ in which Lintot was described as a friend in attendance on Dennis in his madness. Steele thereupon wrote to Lintot to say that Addison wholly disapproved of the way in which Dennis had been treated in this piece.

In 1713 Pope put forth proposals for a translation of the ‘Iliad,’ in six quarto volumes, to be published by subscription. Lintot, the highest bidder among the booksellers, became proprietor, and articles of agreement were signed on 23 March 1713–14, by which he agreed that Pope should have two hundred guineas for each volume, and all the subscription money (Egerton Charters, Brit. Mus. 128). Subscriptions were received for 654 copies, and only 660 were printed. Pope therefore received, altogether, about 5,300l., for Lintot supplied the subscription copies free of charge. The first volume appeared, after unavoidable delay, on 6 June 1715, and on 10 Feb. 1715–16 a new agreement was signed, by which Pope was to receive four hundred guineas in lieu of the subscription money for the second volume, then in the press (Egerton MSS. Brit. Mus. 1951, f. 2). The last volume appeared in 1720. Lintot hoped to recoup himself by the copies of the work which he printed in folio, in paper of two sizes; but owing to the appearance in Holland of a pirated duodecimo edition he was compelled at once to issue a similar but more convenient cheap edition.

In a ‘merry’ letter to Lord Burlington, written about 1716, Pope describes a conversation which he had with Lintot while riding to Oxford, and explains how Lintot, who knew no languages himself, arranged for work to be done by translators and critics. During the severe frost of 1715–16 Lintot seems to have set up business on the Thames: ‘In this place Boyer plies; there's Lintot's stand’ (, Literary Anecdotes, i. 118). In 1717 he published a collection of ‘Poems on several occasions,’ by various hands, and an edition of Pope's ‘Poems’ (Egerton Charters, 129). After the accession of George I he was disappointed at not being made one of the stationers and booksellers to the king, and he subsequently wrote to Lord-justice Parker that he was pressing his interest to serve the prince and princess (Stowe MSS. No. 233). He was, however, appointed, with Tonson and William Taylor, to be one of the printers of the parliamentary votes, and he kept this office until 1727. In 1719 he paid 51l. 5s. for a twentieth share in the ‘Daily Courant,’ and in 1722 Tonson assigned to him half of Steele's ‘Conscious Lovers’ for 70l. On 6 Feb. 1718 Lintot had entered into a partnership agreement with Tonson for the purchase of plays during eighteen months following that date.

For Pope's ‘Odyssey,’ for which Broome and Fenton were largely responsible, Lintot agreed, on 18 Feb. 1723–4, to pay Pope 600l. for the five volumes, and to supply free of charge copies for Pope's subscribers (Egerton Charters, 130). The first volume appeared in April 1725, and the last in June 1726. A quarrel afterwards arose because Lintot objected to supply free copies not only to Pope's but to Broome's private subscribers, and Lintot threatened proceedings in chancery. Pope and Fenton called Lintot a scoundrel and wretch, but he cannot have made much by the ‘Odyssey,’ and Pope doubtless misled him as well as the public as to the amount of the translation that would be contributed by Broome. In 1728 Pope introduced Lintot into the ‘Dunciad,’ and in 1735 into the ‘Prologue to the Satires;’ but he made no more serious charges than that Lintot was stout and clumsy, and that he adorned his shop with ‘rubric posts,’ to which titles of books, in red letters, were affixed. Dr. Young says that Lintot was a ‘great sputtering fellow,’ liable to fits of rage (, Anecdotes, and Love of Fame, Satire iv.)

In 1726, having made additions to his father's property in Sussex, Lintot tried, without success, to ascertain his pedigree and arms. From 1730, when his son Henry was admitted to the freedom of the Company of Stationers, and obtained the livery, the business was carried on in the joint names of father and son, and Lintot probably spent most of the remaining years of his life at Horsham. Broome House, Fulham, is said to have been his residence, but was more probably that of his son (, Environs of London, p. 224). In November 1735 he was nominated high sheriff for Sussex, but he did not live to enjoy the honour, which was, however, at once bestowed upon his son. He died on 3 Feb. 1736, ‘the next week after he came to town’ (Pope to Broome, 25 March 1736), and his will, made in 1730, was proved on 14 Feb. by his son, the sole executor.

(1703–1758), son of the above, died in 1758. By his first wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Aubrey, bart., whom he married in 1730 (she died in 1734), he had a son Aubrey, who died young, and a daughter Catherine, who carried on business as a law printer in partnership with Richardson the novelist, made a fortune of 45,000l., and married, in 1768, Captain Henry Fletcher. She died in 1816, and was buried in the church of Walton-on-Thames. By his second


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/341

Rh wife, who died in 1763, Henry Lintot had no children.

LINWOOD, MARY (1755–1845), musical composer and artist in needlework, was born in 1755 at Birmingham, where she was still living in 1776. She afterwards removed to Leicester. She obtained a considerable reputation for her clever imitation of pictures in worsted embroidery, two or three of which were worked before she was twenty. In both 1776 and 1778 she exhibited a specimen of her needlework at the exhibitions of the Society of Artists, and a Mrs. Hannah Linwood, probably her mother, exhibited a piece of needlework in the former year. In 1798 she opened at the Hanover Square Rooms an exhibition of her work, which she afterwards removed to Leicester Square, to Edinburgh, Dublin, and the chief provincial towns. It contained one hundred copies of pictures by the old and modern masters, and a portrait of herself after Russell, taken in her nineteenth year. The Countess of Wilton, writing in 1841, speaks of the exhibition as still open in London, and in terms of great admiration. ‘Miss Linwood's exhibition,’ she writes, ‘used to be one of the lions of London, and deserves to be so now.’ She worked with stitches of different lengths on a fabric made specially for her, and she superintended the dyeing of her wools. ‘Salvator Mundi,’ after Carlo Dolci, was regarded as her masterpiece. Her last work, ‘The Judgment of Cain,’ occupied her ten years, and was finished in her seventy-fifth year. After this the failure of her sight prevented her from using her needle. A good example of her work, a portrait of Napoleon, is in the South Kensington Museum. Among her musical compositions were ‘David's First Victory,’ an oratorio, some songs, and other vocal music. She died at Leicester on 2 March 1845. She published ‘Leicestershire Tales,’ 4 vols. London, 1808, 12mo.

LINWOOD, WILLIAM (1817–1878), classical scholar, born in 1817, was the only son of William Linwood of Birmingham. He was educated at Birmingham grammar school under Dr. Cooke and Dr. Jeune (Academy, 5 Oct. 1878, p. 337), and at Christ Church, Oxford, where he matriculated 10 Dec. 1835, and graduated B.A. 22 May 1839, M.A. 26 May 1842 (Cat. Oxf. Grad.) He was student of his college from 1837 to 1851. In 1836 he gained the Hertford, Ireland, and Craven scholarships, and in 1839 obtained a first-class in classics and the Boden Sanskrit scholarship. He took orders, and was for some time assistant-master at Shrewsbury School. In 1850–1 he was public examiner at Oxford. He died on 7 Sept. 1878. Linwood is described as using ancient Greek like a vernacular tongue, and as being able to compose any number of Euripidean verses impromptu. His scholarship hardly found full scope in his publications, which are more or less intended for elementary students. The best known are his ‘Lexicon to Æschylus,’ ‘a clearly arranged and serviceable work, containing some emendations of his own very modestly proposed,’ and his edition of Sophocles, which was long used in English schools. Blaydes and Paley (in Sophocles, in ‘Bibliotheca Class.’ i. p. xxxiv; ii. p. vi) speak of the notes to Linwood's ‘Sophocles’ as being hurriedly compiled. Linwood published: 1. ‘A Lexicon to Æschylus,’ London, 1843, 8vo; 2nd ed. 1847, 8vo. 2. ‘Suggestions for the Improvement of Greek and Latin Prose Composition,’ Oxford, 1845, 8vo. 3. ‘Remarks on the Present State of Classical Scholarship … in the University of Oxford,’ 1845, 8vo. 4. ‘Anthologia Oxoniensis, decerpsit G. L.,’ London, 1846, 8vo. 5. ‘Sophoclis Tragœdiæ’ (with Latin notes), 1846, 8vo; 1852, 8vo; 4th ed. 1877, 8vo. 6. ‘A Treatise on Greek Tragic Metres, with the choric parts of Sophocles metrically arranged,’ London, 1855, 8vo. 7. ‘Remarks and Emendations on some Passages in Thucydides,’ 2 pts., London, 1860, 8vo (2nd issue). 8. ‘Observata quædam in nonnulla Novi Testamenti loca,’ London [1865], 8vo. 9. ‘De Conjecturæ ope in Novi Testamenti emendatione admittenda,’ London, 1867, 8vo. 10. ‘Remarks on Conjectural Emendation [of the] New Testament,’ London, 1873, 8vo. 11. ‘The Theban Trilogy of Sophocles’ (with notes), 1878, 8vo. 12. Various sermons.

LIONEL, and  (1338–1368), third son of Edward III and his wife Philippa of


text: Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/112


text: Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/113


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/342

Rh Hainault, was born at Antwerp on the vigil of St. Andrew, 29 Nov. 1338 (, Cont. Chron. p. 87), during the long stay made by his parents in the Low Countries by reason of the war against France. He was baptised Lionel, either, we are told, ‘from being the offspring of the Lion of England,’ his father, or ‘to revive the British name Llywelyn.’ From the place of his birth he derived his usual surname ‘of Antwerp.’ When he was only three years old his father obtained for him the prospect of a rich marriage, which foreshadowed the later policy of Edward of concentrating the great fiefs in the hands of his children. In 1332 the young William de Burgh, sixth lord of Connaught and third earl of Ulster [q. v.], and the head of one of the greatest of the Anglo-Norman houses in Ireland, had been murdered, leaving an only child, a daughter, Elizabeth, by his wife, Maud of Lancaster. About 1341 Edward arranged to marry Lionel to Elizabeth de Burgh, then a girl of about nine, and six years the senior of her destined husband, to whom she brought the ample marriage portion of western and northern Ireland. Moreover, to make this great inheritance more of a reality, Edward III appointed Ralph Ufford—a gallant soldier, who had married the widowed Countess of Ulster, Elizabeth's mother—governor of Ireland. This was in February 1344. No great success, however, attended Ufford's efforts on behalf of Lionel and Elizabeth. He died in 1346.

Lionel's first public office was obtained on 1 July 1345, when he was appointed guardian and lieutenant of England during his father's absence abroad. He was reappointed to the same office on 25 June 1346 (, Official Baronage, i. 396). Not later than January 1347 he was created Earl of Ulster, whereupon Edward III ordered that all proceedings connected with Elizabeth's inheritance should be henceforth transacted in his name. In 1352 the actual marriage took place. In 1355 Lionel was made a knight and entered into the career of arms. In September he went with his father on an expedition to the north of France (, p. 427;, Hist. Anglicana, i. 280; Chron. Angliæ, 1328–88, p. 33). The French, however, retreated as Edward advanced from Calais, and nothing important was done. On 8 May 1359 Lionel became steward of the manor of Westraddon, Devonshire (, i. 396).

During these years the state of Ireland had grown steadily worse, and very little of Elizabeth's vast heritage was really in the hands of herself or her husband. In 1361 Edward III resolved to send Lionel as governor, believing ‘that our Irish dominions have been reduced to such utter devastation, ruin, and misery, that they may be totally lost if our subjects there are not immediately succoured.’ A great gathering of English holders of land in Ireland was assembled at Easter. The assembled lords were ordered to provide soldiers and accompany Lionel to defend their estates. On 1 July Lionel was appointed the king's lieutenant in Ireland, having been previously made a knight of the Garter. He landed in Dublin in September 1361, accompanied by his wife and many great landowners. The young viceroy displayed some vigour. He provided for his own safety by prohibiting any man born in Ireland from approaching his army (‘Annals of Ireland’ in Cartularies, &c., of St. Mary's, Dublin, ii. 395), but he lost a hundred of his mercenaries on an inroad into the O'Byrne's country, and he was soon glad to rely as usual upon the aid of the Norman lords. On 10 Feb. 1362 Edward strove to strengthen his son's hands by reiterating the orders issued in the previous year to the possessors of Irish estates. On 13 Nov. of the same year Lionel was created Duke of Clarence, at the same time as his brother John was made Duke of Lancaster. The title was derived from the town of Clare in Suffolk, the lordship of which, with other shares in the divided Gloucester estates, had been inherited by Elizabeth from her grandmother, Elizabeth of Clare [q. v.], the sister and coheiress of Gilbert of Clare (1291–1314) [q. v.], the last earl of Gloucester of the house of Clare. The special occasion for the grant was the celebration of the king's fiftieth birthday (Chron. Angliæ, p. 52). Lionel, however, remained in Ireland, and was thus precluded from a personal investiture before the assembled estates. His salary was now doubled, and his army increased. He busied himself with various works, ‘agreeable to him for sports and his other pleasures as well within the castle of Dublin as elsewhere.’ He made inquiries into the rights of the chartered towns and carried out many expeditions against the Irish. In the same year his wife Elizabeth died, leaving an only child, a daughter named Philippa, whose marriage in 1368 to Edmund Mortimer, third earl of March [q. v.], ultimately transferred her claims to the throne to the Yorkist house.

Lionel was absent from his government between April and December 1364, when the Earl of Ormonde acted as his deputy. He was again in England in 1365, on which occasion he was represented in Ireland by Sir Thomas Dale (Cartularies, &, of St. Mary's,


text:
Page:Grimm's household tales, volume 2 (1884).djvu/126

112 and struck the ground thrice with the knot, and said, "Earth-workers, come forth." In a moment a great many little earth-men came and asked what she desired, and she told them that in three hours' time, they must have the fish-pond entirely cleaned out, and it must be so clear that people could see themselves reflected in it, and every kind of fish must be in it. The little earth-men went away and summoned all their kindred to help them, and in two hours it was done. Then they returned to her and said, "We have done as thou hast commanded." The King's daughter took the handkerchief and once more struck thrice on the ground with it, and said, "Earth-workers, go home again." Then they all went away.

When the King's son awoke the fish-pond was done. Then the King's daughter went away also, and told him that when it was six he was to come to the house. When he arrived at the house the King asked, "Hast thou got the fish-pond done?" "Yes," said the King's son. That was very good.

When they were again sitting at table the King said, "Thou hast certainly done the fish-pond, but I cannot give thee my daughter yet; thou must just do one thing more." "What is that, then?" asked the King's son. The King said he had a great mountain on which there was nothing but briars which must all be cut down, and at the top of it the youth must build up a great castle, which must be as strong as could be conceived, and all the furniture and fittings belonging to a castle must be inside it. And when he arose next morning the King gave him a glass axe and a glass gimlet with him, and he was to have all done by six o'clock. As he was cutting down the first briar with the axe, it broke off short, and so small that the pieces flew all round about, and he could not use the gimlet either. Then he was quite miserable, and waited for his dearest to see if she would not come and help him in his need. When it was mid-day she came and brought him something to eat. He went to meet her and told her all, and ate something, and let her comb his hair and fell asleep. Then she once more took the knot and struck the earth with it, and said, "Earth-workers, come forth!" Then came once again numbers of earth-men, and asked what


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/343

Rh Dublin, ii. 396). He still continued his efforts to obtain real possession of his dead wife's estates; but, though Edward III did his best to provide him with supplies, he only succeeded in getting into his hands a small part of the sea-coast of eastern Ulster. His constant efforts to rule through Englishmen led to a great quarrel between the ‘English by birth’ and ‘English by blood,’ which, in order to unite both factions in the wars against the native Irish, Edward III did his best to appease.

Lionel transferred the exchequer from Dublin to Carlow, and spent 500l. in walling that town (ib. ii. 396). Early in Lent 1367 he met a famous parliament at Kilkenny. The great work of this assembly was the statute of Kilkenny, which aimed, by a series of minute restrictions and prohibitions, at preventing the tendency to intermixture between the ‘English by blood’ and the native Irish, which was rapidly destroying the basis of English rule and withdrawing the English settlers from English civilisation. With the same object the distinctions between ‘English by blood’ and ‘English by birth’ were, so far as possible, removed.

This was the last important act of Lionel in Ireland. He had grown weary of his thankless task. In November 1366 he returned to England, declaring that he would never go back with his own free will (Eulogium Historiarum, iii. 241). His government was handed over to Gerald Fitzgerald, fourth earl of Desmond [q. v.] His rule, unsuccessful as it was, marks an epoch in the history of the English relations with Ireland. In 1635 the claim of Charles I to the lands of Connaught was partly based on descent from Lionel (Strafford Letters, i. 454–5).

In 1366 a second rich marriage was proposed for Lionel. The Visconti of Milan were anxious to attain a social position among the rulers of Europe corresponding to their wealth and power. Galeazzo Visconti, lord of Pavia, and brother of the more famous Bernabò Visconti, lord of Milan, accordingly proposed that his beautiful and only daughter, Violante, should marry Lionel of Clarence. On 30 July Humphrey Bohun, earl of Hereford, was sent to Milan to negotiate the match (Fœdera, iii. 797). After two years' negotiations a settlement was arranged. Violante brought with her a dower of two million florins of gold and many Piedmontese towns and castles, including Alba, a possession of the Visconti since the days of Archbishop Giovanni, and situated in Montferrat, on the Tanaro, between Cherasco and Asti (Chronicon Placentinum in, Scriptores Rer. Ital. xvi. 510; Ann. Mediolanenses in ib. xvi. 738). On 25 April 1368 the marriage treaty was signed at Windsor, and an instalment of the treasure paid down. There was vague and foolish talk in England of how the princes and towns of Italy had promised to do homage to Lionel, and how in time he might become emperor or king of Italy (, Chronicle, p. 333). The chroniclers believed that Galeazzo had surrendered half his territories to his son-in-law (Chron. Angliæ, p. 61). Lionel married his little daughter to the Earl of March (Cont. Eulogium Hist. iii. 333), and set out from England to fetch his bride. He was magnificently equipped, and took with him in his train 457 men and 1,280 horses (Fœdera, iii. 845). He travelled by way of Dover and Calais to Paris, where he was received with great pomp by Charles V and the Dukes of Berri and Burgundy. He was lodged at the Louvre. He then travelled through Sens to Chambéry, where he was magnificently entertained by the Count of Savoy, whose sister Blanche was the mother of Violante. The count accompanied Lionel over the Alps to Milan. On 27 May Lionel reached Milan, being met outside the Ticino gate by Galeazzo, Bernabò, Galeazzo's son Gian Galeazzo, Count of Virtù, with his wife Isabella of France, and a gorgeously arrayed throng of Milanese grandees. The marriage was celebrated before the door of Milan Cathedral on 5 June (Ann. Mediolanenses, p. 738; the English authorities say on 29 May). There were festivities of extraordinary magnificence, elaborately described in the Milanese chroniclers (, Script. xvi. 738, 739, 1051). Among those present at the wedding feast was the aged poet Petrarch, who sat among the greatest of the guests at the first table (ib. xvi. 739; cf., however,, Petrarca's Leben und Werke, who doubts the fact on the ground of Petrarch's own silence about the marriage). Five months of continuous feasts, jousts, and revels followed, when early in October Lionel was smitten by a sudden and violent sickness at Alba. He had gone through an Italian summer carelessly, and without changing his English habits. The illness grew worse. On 3 Oct. he drew up his will, and on 7 Oct. 1368 he died. There was, as usual in Italy, some suspicion of poison, and one of his followers, Edward le Despenser, declaring for the church in the great contest between the papacy and the Visconti (, Polychronicon, viii. 371, 419), joined Hawkwood and his White Company in their war against Milan, until satisfied of Galeazzo's innocence. There was in truth no motive for such an act, and Galeazzo went almost mad with


text:
Page:Grimm's household tales, volume 2 (1884).djvu/127

113.] her desire was. Then said she, "In the space of three hours they must cut down the whole of the briars, and a castle must be built on the top of the mountain that must be as strong as any one could conceive, and all the furniture that pertains to a castle must be inside it. They went away, and summoned their kindred to help them and when the time was come, all was ready. Then they came to the King's daughter and told her so, and the King's daughter took her handkerchief and struck thrice on the earth with it, and said, "Earth-workers, go home," on which they all disappeared. When therefore the King's son awoke and saw everything done, he was as happy as a bird in air.

When it had struck six, they went home together. Then said the King, "Is the castle ready?" "Yes," said the King's son. When they sat down to table, the King said, "I cannot give away my youngest daughter until the two eldest are married." Then the King's son and the King's daughter were quite troubled, and the King's son had no idea what to do. But he went by night to the King's daughter and ran away with her. When they had got a little distance away, the King's daughter peeped round and saw her father behind her. "Oh," said she, "what are we to do? My father is behind us, and will take us back with him. I will at once change thee into a briar, and myself into a rose, and I will shelter myself in the midst of the bush." When the father reached the place, there stood a briar with one rose on it, then he was about to gather the rose, when the thorn came and pricked his finger so that he was forced to go home again. His wife asked why he had not brought their daughter back with him? So he said he had nearly got up to her, but that all at once he had lost sight of her, and a briar with one rose was growing on the spot.

Then said the Queen, "If thou hadst but gathered the rose, the briar would have been forced to come too." So he went back again to fetch the rose, but in the meantime the two were already far over the plain, and the King ran after them. Then the daughter once more looked round and saw her father coming, and said, "Oh, what


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/347

Rh third, “For the Duke of York” … In which service the colonel had no armour on besides courage, and a good cause, and a good holland shirt; for as he seldom wears defensive arms, so now he put off his buff doublet, perhaps to animate his men, that the meanest soldier might see himself better armed than his colonel, or because it was dark that they might better discern him from whom they were to receive both direction and courage’ (Mercurius Aulicus, 28 Oct. 1644; cf. Military Memoirs of John Gwynne, 1822, pp. 45–56).

In the winter of 1644–5 Lisle became governor of Faringdon, and complains bitterly to Rupert that the place was but one-third fortified, and entirely unprovisioned (Rupert MSS.) In April 1645 he was created honorary D.C.L. by the university of Oxford (, Fasti, ed. 1721, ii. 50). He commanded a division in the king's marching army during the campaign of 1645, took part in the storming of Leicester, and was appointed lieutenant-general of Leicestershire under Lord Loughborough (, Diary, pp. 166, 180, 184). Lisle was present at Naseby, and the plan of that battle shows his ‘tertia’ stationed on the king's left centre (, Anglia Rediviva, 1854, p. 39). He was knighted by Charles at Oxford on 21 Dec. 1645, and is described as being then master of the king's household (, New Cat. of Dukes, Knights, &c., 1658, p. 167). His garrison at Faringdon was besieged by Sir Robert Pye in May 1646, capitulated at the same time as Oxford (20 June), and was allowed the same terms (, pp. 258, 267, 276).

In the winter of 1647 Lisle obtained leave to come up to London to compound for his estate, and seems to have busied himself in getting together men for a new rising (Cal. of Co. for Advance of Money, p. 948; Cal. of Compounders, p. 1654). At the beginning of June 1648 he is described as one of the ‘ringleaders’ of the insurrection in Kent, and he played an important part in the defence of Colchester (, vii. 1135;, A True Relation of the Expedition of Kent, Essex, and Colchester, pp. 151, 155, 206). The town surrendered on 28 Aug. Lisle and the rest of the leaders were obliged ‘to render themselves to mercy,’ and a council of war called by Fairfax fixed on Lisle, with Sir Charles Lucas and Sir Bernard Gascoigne, to be put to death by martial law. Fairfax explained to the parliament that it was done ‘for some satisfaction to military justice, and in part of avenge for the innocent blood they have caused to be spilt’ (, vii. 1243). Lisle being considered a ‘mere soldier of fortune,’ it was thought that a council of war might deal with him, when persons of political importance, such as the peers taken prisoners with him, were reserved for the judgment of parliament (, Short Memorial;, Select Tracts, p. 450). He was accordingly shot on the afternoon of 28 Aug., and met his fate with undaunted courage. ‘I should have thought myself a happy person,’ said he, ‘if I could live to have a larger time of repentance, and to see the king, my master, on his throne again. I was confident my own innocency in this action would have rendered me very clear from any such punishment’ (Clarke MSS. lii. f. 43;, Great Civil War, iii. 460).

Lisle was buried with Sir Charles Lucas in the vault of the Lucas family in St. Giles's Church, Colchester [see ]. At the Restoration his sister, Mary Lisle, petitioned Charles II for a pension, mentioning, besides the execution of Sir George Lisle, the death of another brother, Francis Lisle, at Marston Moor, and the loss of her father, Lawrence Lisle. She was ordered 2,000l. (31 Jan. 1662), but seven years later she had only received 1,100l. out of the sum, and was ‘in great want and misery’ (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1660–1 p. 396, 1661–2 p. 259;, Life of Clarendon, ii. 390).

LISLE, JOHN (1610?–1664), regicide, born about 1610, was second son of Sir William Lisle of Wootton, Isle of Wight, by Bridget, daughter of Sir John Hungerford of Down Ampney, Gloucestershire (, County Genealogies, ‘Hampshire,’ p. 174). On 25 Jan. 1625–6 he matriculated as a member of Magdalen Hall, Oxford, and graduated B.A. in February 1625–6. He was called to the bar from the Middle Temple in 1633 and became a bencher of his inn in 1649 (, Alumni Oxon. 1500–1714, p. 917). He was chosen M.P. for Winchester in March 1639–40, and again in October 1640. He advocated violent measures on the king's removal to the north, and obtained some of the plunder arising from the sale of the crown property. To the fund opened on 9 April 1642 for the ‘speedy reducing of the rebels’ in Ireland, Lisle contributed 600l. (, Hist. Coll. pt. iii. vol. i. p. 565). On the eviction of Dr. William Lewis (1592–1667) [q. v.] in


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/348

Rh November 1644 he was made master of St. Cross Hospital, near Winchester, and retained the office until June 1649. In 1644–5 he sat on the committee to investigate the charges preferred by Cromwell against the Earl of Manchester (Commons' Journals, iv. 25). He displayed his inveterate hostility to Charles in a speech delivered on 3 July 1645, before the lord mayor and citizens of London, with reference to the discovery of the king's letters at Naseby. It was printed. In December 1647, when the king was confined in the Isle of Wight, Lisle was selected as one of the commissioners to carry to him the four bills which were to divest him of all sovereignty. He spoke in the House of Commons on 28 Sept. 1648 in favour of rescinding the recent vote, that no one proposition in regard to the personal treaty with the king should be binding if the treaty broke off upon another; and again, some days later, urged a discontinuance of the negotiation with Charles. He took a prominent part in the king's trial. He was one of the managers, was present every day, and drew up the form of the sentence. He was appointed on 8 Feb. 1648–9 one of the commissioners of the great seal, and was placed on the council of state.

Lisle became one of Cromwell's creatures. He not only concurred in December 1653 in nominating Cromwell protector, but administered the oath to him; and having been reappointed lord commissioner, was elected member in the new parliament, on 12 July 1654, both for Southampton, of which town he was recorder, and for the Isle of Wight. He selected to sit for Southampton. In June previously he had been constituted president of the high court of justice, and in August he was appointed one of the commissioners of the exchequer. Lisle alone of his colleagues proposed to execute the ordinance for the better regulation of the court of chancery, which was submitted to the keepers of the seal, and owing to his subserviency to Cromwell was continued in his office on the removal of his colleagues in June 1655. He was again confirmed in it in October 1656 by Cromwell's third parliament, to which he was re-elected by Southampton. In December 1657 Cromwell summoned Lisle to his newly established house of peers. Richard Cromwell preserved him in his place; but when the Long parliament met again in May 1659, he was compelled to retire. The house, however, named him on 28 Jan. 1660 a commissioner of the admiralty and navy (ib. vii. 825).

When the Restoration was inevitable Lisle escaped to Switzerland establishing himself first at Vevay and afterwards at Lausanne, where he is said to have ‘charmed the Swiss by his devotion’ (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1663–4), and was treated with much respect and ceremony. There he was shot dead on 11 Aug. 1664, on his way to church, by an Irishman known as Thomas Macdonnell. Macdonnell escaped, and Lisle was buried in the church of the city. His first wife was a daughter of Sir Henry Hobart, chief justice of the common pleas. His second wife Alice is noticed separately. With other issue he had two sons, John (d.. 1709), of Dibden, Hampshire, and William, who adhered to the king and married the daughter of Lady Katherine Hyde (ib. 1660–1, p. 341).

LISLE, SAMUEL (1683–1749), successively bishop of St. Asaph and of Norwich, the son of Richard Lisle, esq., was born at Blandford, Dorset, in 1683. He received his education first at the grammar school of his native town, and then at Salisbury, under Edward Hardwicke, ‘one of the most eminent schoolmasters of that time’ (, Memoir). On 4 March 1699–1700, being then seventeen years of age, he matriculated at Wadham College, Oxford, where he was admitted scholar in 1701. He graduated B.A. in 1703, and M.A. in 1706. He became Goodridge exhibitioner in 1707, and the same year was elected fellow, and received holy orders both as deacon and priest. In 1710 he went as chaplain to the Levant Company to Smyrna, where he remained six years, visiting Constantinople, and making several journeys into Ionia, Caria, and other parts of Asia Minor, with the view of collecting inscriptions. In 1716 he exchanged the Smyrna chaplaincy for that of Aleppo, which he held till 1719, taking a journey into the Holy Land, and visiting Jerusalem and the adjacent country. In 1719 he came back to England by way of Italy and France. On his return he was appointed bursar of his college, and soon received much church preferment. In 1720 he was appointed chaplain to Thomas, the second baron Onslow (whose father, Richard, baron Onslow [q. v.], had been a governor of the Levant Company). In 1721 he became rector of Holwell, Bedfordshire, Tooting, Surrey, and St. Mary-le-Bow, London, to which last benefice he was presented by George I. In the same year he was appointed domestic chaplain by Archbishop Wake, himself a Blandford man, by whom in 1724 he


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/349

Rh was appointed archdeacon of Canterbury; and in 1728 he was presented by George II to a prebendal stall in Canterbury Cathedral. He appears also to have held the rectory of Fetcham, Surrey, from 1726 to 1737 ( and, History of Surrey, i. 487). In 1729 he was presented by his patron, Archbishop Wake, to the vicarage of Northolt, Middlesex, which he held in commendam till his death, and became in 1728 deputy prolocutor of the lower house of convocation (which, however, had been practically silenced in 1717), and prolocutor in 1734, and again in 1741. On 22 March 1738–9 he was elected in difficult circumstances warden of Wadham College, Oxford. His predecessor, Thistlethwayt, had had to resign his office and leave the country, and Lisle was generally regarded as specially competent to meet the emergency. He received the degrees of B.D. and D.D. by diploma on 10 April 1739. He held the wardenship for five years, and on the translation of Bishop Isaac Maddox to Worcester was appointed to succeed him at St. Asaph, to which see he was consecrated by Archbishop Potter on 1 April 1744. He only held the bishopric four years, being chosen to succeed Bishop Gooch (translated to Ely) at Norwich on 17 March 1747–1748. He died in Lisle Street, Leicester Fields, on 3 Oct. 1749, and was buried in the church of Northolt. His epitaph is given by Lysons (Environs of London, iii. 312).

Lisle printed one or two sermons, a ‘Concio ad Synodum,’ preached at the opening of convocation in 1734; a sermon preached on the consecration of a predecessor in the wardenship, Dr. W. Baker [q. v.], to the bishopric of Bangor in 1723; and Fast sermons in 1744, 1745. His chief claim to literary fame is based on the valuable series of inscriptions collected by him and his fellow-travellers during his Levant chaplaincies, which were printed in Edmund Chishull's [q. v.] ‘Antiquitates Asiaticæ,’ 1728. Those published formed only a small part of the notes of his eastern journeys, the whole of which, together with his other literary remains, were, according to the directions of his will, burnt by his executor. Two letters from Lisle to Dr. Ward of Gresham College, giving biographical information respecting certain alumni of Wadham, are preserved among the manuscripts at the British Museum (Addit. MS. 6209, f. 137). There is a portrait of Lisle in Wadham College Hall.

LISLE, THOMAS (d. 1361), bishop of Ely, called Lyle by Bale, Lylde in the ‘Historia Eliensis,’ and Lyldus by Godwin, received his education in the Dominican house at Cambridge, where he became a doctor of divinity, and joined the order of Predicant Friars. He acquired celebrity both as a diligent and eloquent preacher and as a theologian ‘ut illa ferebant tempora’, being a disciple of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas. He also gained the royal favour, and being at Avignon, probably on diplomatic business, at the time of the death of Bishop Montacute of Ely in 1345, he was thrust into the see by Pope Clement VI, as acceptable to the king and prince (, Fœdera, v. 474), setting aside Alan of Walsingham, the choice of the monks. He was consecrated at Avignon on 24 July 1345, and was enthroned with great magnificence at Ely on Advent Sunday. The spontaneous breaking of the glass flagon containing the sacramental wine at his consecration, and the spilling of the wine on the altar, was regarded as an evil omen, which was abundantly verified in the episcopate of ‘this unfortunate prelate’ (Hist. Eliens., Anglia Sacra, p. 655;, St. John's, p. 35). The pomp and state with which he commenced his episcopate, surrounded by a large retinue of splendidly habited attendants, led Lisle into expenses which he was unable to maintain. He was speedily compelled to reduce his establishment, and when in the year after his consecration the king demanded a loan he had to excuse himself on the ground of poverty (Reg. Lisle, fol. 47, apud, pp. 160–2). He was, however, an active prelate, visiting every part of his diocese, then one of the smallest in England, and preaching with much acceptance (Hist. Eliens. p. 655). But his haughty bearing and impracticable temper rendered him unpopular. He soon quarrelled with the prior and convent of Ely as to the exercise of their old-established privilege of digging clay and sand for the repairs of the cathedral on the episcopal demesne, and showered excommunications on all who in any way infringed the rights and prerogatives of the see (ib.) He visited the papal court in 1348, and again during the ‘black death,’ which made such ravages in his diocese that no fewer than ninety-two institutions to benefices were made in 1349–50. Great activity in church building prevailed during his episcopate, ten churches having been dedicated by him in the single year 1351–2 (, Ely Episcopal Records, p. 144). Two miracles ascribed to the influences of St. Etheldreda are recorded while he was bishop (Hist. Eliens.


text:
Page:Grimm's household tales, volume 2 (1884).djvu/128

114 shall we do now? I will instantly change thee into a church and myself into a priest, and I will stand up in the pulpit, and preach." When the King got to the place, there stood a church, and in the pulpit was a priest preaching. So he listened to the sermon, and then went home again.

Then the Queen asked why he had not brought their daughter with him, and he said, "Nay, I ran a long time after her, and just as I thought I should soon overtake her, a church was standing there and a priest was in the pulpit preaching." "Thou shouldst just have brought the priest," said his wife, "and then the church would soon have come. It is no use to send thee, I must go there myself." When she had walked for some time, and could see the two in the distance, the King's daughter peeped round and saw her mother coming, and said, "Now we are undone, for my mother is coming herself: I will immediately change thee into a fish-pond and myself into a fish."

When the mother came to the place, there was a large fish-pond, and in the midst of it a fish was leaping about and peeping out of the water, and it was quite merry. She wanted to catch the fish, but she could not. Then she was very angry, and drank up the whole pond in order to catch the fish, but it made her so ill that she was forced to vomit, and vomited the whole pond out again. Then she cried, "I see very well that nothing can be done now," and said that now they might come back to her. Then the King's daughter went back again, and the Queen gave her daughter three walnuts, and said, "With these thou canst help thyself when thou art in thy greatest need." So the young folks went once more away together. And when they had walked quite ten miles, they arrived at the castle from whence the King's son came, and close by it was a village. When they reached it, the King's son said, "Stay here, my dearest, I will just go to the castle, and then will I come with a carriage and with attendants to fetch thee."

When he got to the castle they all rejoiced greatly at having the King's son back, again, and he told them he


text:
Page:Grimm's household tales, volume 2 (1884).djvu/129

113.] had a bride who was row in the village, and they must go with the carriage to fetch her. Then they harnessed the horses at once, and many attendants seated themselves outside the carriage. When the King's son was about to get in, his mother gave him a kiss, and he forgot everything which had happened, and also what he was about to do. On this his mother ordered the horses to be taken out of the carriage again, and every one went back into the house. But the maiden sat in the village and watched and watched, and thought he would come and fetch her, but no one came. Then the King's daughter took service in the mill which belonged to the castle, and was obliged to sit by the pond every afternoon and clean the tubs. And the Queen came one day on foot from the castle, and went walking by the pond, and saw the well-grown maiden sitting there, and said, "What a fine strong girl that is! She pleases me well!" Then she and all with her looked at the maid, but no one knew her. So a long time passed by during which the maiden served the miller honourably and faithfully. In the meantime, the Queen had sought a wife for her son, who came from quite a distant part of the world. When the bride came, they were at once to be married. And many people hurried together, all of whom wanted to see everything. Then the girl said to the miller that he might be so good as to give her leave to go also. So the miller said, "Yes, do go there." When she was about to go, she opened one of the three walnuts, and a beautiful dress lay inside it. She put it on, and went into the church and stood by the altar. Suddenly came the bride and bridegroom, and seated themselves before the altar, and when the priest was just going to bless them, the bride peeped half round and saw the maiden standing there. Then she stood up again, and said she would not be given away until she also had as beautiful a dress as that lady there. So they went back to the house again, and sent to ask the lady if she would sell that dress. No, she would not sell it, but the bride might perhaps earn it. Then the bride asked her how she was to do this? Then the maiden said if she might sleep one night outside the King's son's door, the bride might have what she wanted. So the


text:
Page:Grimm's household tales, volume 2 (1884).djvu/130

116 bride said, "Yes, she was to do that." But the servants were ordered to give the King's son a sleeping drink, and then the maiden laid herself down on the threshold and lamented all night long. She had had the forest cut down for him, she had had the fish-pond cleaned out for him, she had had the castle built for him, she had changed him into a briar, and then into a church, and at last into a fish-pond, and yet he had forgotten her so quickly. The King's son did not hear one word of it, but the servants had been awakened, and had listened to it, and had not known what it could mean. The next morning when they were all up, the bride put on the dress, and went away to the church with the bridegroom. In the meantime the maiden opened the second walnut, and a still more beautiful dress was inside it. She put it on, and went and stood by the altar in the church, and everything happened as it had happened the time before. And the maiden again lay all night on the threshold which led to the chamber of the King's son, and the servant was once more to give him a sleeping-drink. The servant, however, went to him and gave him something to keep him awake, and then the King's son went to bed, and the miller's maiden bemoaned herself as before on the threshold of the door, and told of all that she had done. All this the King's son heard, and was sore troubled, and what was past came back to him. Then he wanted to go to her, but his mother had locked the door. The next morning, however, he went at once to his beloved, and told her everything which had happened to him, and prayed her not to be angry with him for having forgotten her. Then the King's daughter opened the third walnut, and within it was a still more magnificent dress, which she put on, and went with her bridegroom to church, and numbers of children came who gave them flowers, and offered them gay ribbons to bind about their feet, and they were blessed by the priest, and had a merry wedding. But the false mother and the bride had to depart. And the mouth of the person who last told all this is still warm.


text:
Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 26.jpg

26 mind and body, and who furthers the purpose of his own being in constant growth and unfoldment is doing the will of God in the human world. He who searches the deep things of God and enters into that high state where God becomes "closer than breathing, nearer than hands and feet;" he who lives and moves and has his being in the infinite sea of divine light, and ever ascends higher and higher into the greater glories of God's kingdom, is doing the will of God in the spiritual world.

Whoever can say with his whole heart "Thy will be done," has placed the whole of his life in perfect accord with God; and henceforth he will seek to live in perfect harmony with all that is, because all is of God. To do the will of God is not only to place one's life in the hands of God, but to be at peace with all the world, and to give one's whole life to all the world. The will of God seeks eternally to give itself to things—all things; the will of man, to be in harmony with the will of God, must do the same.

However insignificant a law may seem to be, it is God working in that part of His universe; and as He is everywhere, manifesting His power everywhere, we must live and work with Him in all things, even the most trivial, if we would be in perfect accord with His life and always do His will. A law in life is a path to greater things; in truth, an open door through which we may pass more closely into His presence. We can meet


text:
Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 27.jpg

Rh God at every expression of life, and whenever we are in the highest state of harmony with our expression of life, we have met God in that place. And also, when we use that expression of life in entering into a larger measure of life, we do the will of God in that place. Therefore, whoever meets God everywhere, and does His will in every place, will realize the fullness of life at all times and under every circumstance. And to realize the fullness of life is to realize the allness of the good.

The incompleteness of human life, in general, is caused by our failure to enter into perfect accord with all the laws in our sphere of existence. We may be wholly right in some things while the very opposite in other things. We may be scrupulous in regard to the right use of some laws, and at the same time continually negligent in regard to others. There are many who take perfect care of their bodies, and comply most rigidly with all known physical laws, yet they violate the laws of mind nearly every hour of their existence. Others are very careful so as to think only the truth, and do their best to remain continually in the most beautiful states of mind; but while aiming to live in mental ideals they are wholly indifferent to the welfare of the body. Not infrequently we find people who live in perfect accord with intellectual laws but violate daily the moral laws. Also, too many who are the reverse. In brief, the majority do the will of God in


text:
Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 28.jpg

28 some realms while living entirely at variance with His laws in other realms. And here we find the simple answer to many perplexing questions.

When some misfortune comes to you that you do not think you deserve, do not think that God is unjust or that fate is unkind. You have simply failed to do His will in all things. Do not blame others, do not blame fate, do not even blame yourself; simply proceed to readjust your life so that you may become one with Him in all things. Then all ills shall disappear, and you shall not only regain what you have lost but you shall, in addition, receive much more. Live in accord with all the laws of life physically, mentally and spiritually; do all things in the consciousness of God; do all things to the glory of God, and follow the light of His spirit in every thought and deed; then you will always do the will of God.


text: Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 29.jpg


text: Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 30.jpg


text:
Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 31.jpg

 CHAPTER III

THE SUPREME POINT OF VIEW

When we are upon the mountain top of life and look upon things from this lofty point of view, we discover that all is well. Wherever we may turn our vision we find the same—all is well. We can see all things and yet all is well with all things; the good alone is in evidence; everything is in the likeness of God, and we conclude that everything actually is as it was originally created by God—very good.

But when we descend to the valley we find many things quite different, and the problem is whether the scene on the mountain top was simply a beautiful vision, or the scene in the valley an unpleasant illusion.

To the mind in the valley the life of the valley alone seems real; to the mind on the heights the beauty and glory of sublime life alone seems real, while the regions below are but the undeveloped beginnings of some better day.

To decide which of these two minds is right is not necessary; we cannot know the truth by what seems to be true from a single point of view. It is results that demonstrate, therefore we must find what effect life in the


text:
Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 32.jpg

32 valley has upon the whole of life, and what effect life on the heights has upon the whole of life.

To live in the valley alone, ignoring everything that may come from lofty realms, is to live in darkness, trouble and pain. This we know. To him who secludes himself in the lower regions of existence, nothing seems to be wholly well; there is usually something wrong or defective with everything with which he may come in contact, and life at best has but little to give.

How different, however, everything becomes when we begin to live on the heights. We not only find that all is well in these upper regions but all things become well in the lower realms the moment we begin to live in the upper. We must therefore conclude that all is well when we are well, but that we are not well unless we live on the heights.

We also conclude that the vision of the soul is true, that the ideal alone is real, and that man can see all things as they are only when entering sublime existence. And as all is well from the viewpoint of sublime existence, to think the truth man must always think that all is well.

To live in the lower realms is to live in pain; to live in the upper realms is to live in peace, freedom and joy. Then why should we continue to live in the lower, while wholly ignoring the upper? Why should we declare that the lower alone is real, and that the


text:
Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 33.jpg

Rh upper is but a pleasant dream? Is pain more real than joy? Is bondage more real than freedom, death more real than life?

True, daily experience sometimes seems to contradict the vision of the soul, but if darkness be present now, does that prove that light is always a mere dream? When we are wholly out of harmony we cannot understand, for the time being, how there can be any harmony; all seems to be discord; but the moment we fully recognize the absoluteness of universal harmony, discord is no more.

When all does not seem to be well in daily life, we may not feel that we can truthfully say that all is well, but there is a marked distinction between the outer appearance of discord and the inner reality of harmony; and it is the inner reality that we should live.

When discord appears on the surface, the cause may be found in the fact that we have descended from our true place; we have tried to go away from harmony and have thus produced discord. But the moment we return to harmony, the discord disappears, and all is well.

We must conclude therefore, that so long as we remain in the reality of harmony, all will be well, because all is always well in the world of harmony, and the world of harmony is the true world, the only true world—the world in which man was created to always live.