text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/93

 of his life (, 'Brefe Chronycle' in Harleian Miscellany, i. 251). Misled by this, the Elizabethan dramatists pictured Oldcastle, 'my old lad of the castle,' the supposed companion of Henry V's early follies, as the 'aged counsellor to youthful sin.' We have the statement of a not very trustworthy contemporary that he was born in 1378, which is probably much nearer the truth (, Liber Metricus, p. 156).

The conjecture that Oldcastle met Wiclif in hiding at some castle of John of Gaunt's in the west must be relented to the same category as Balers assumption that he was prominent in securing the passing of the great act of præmunire (Archæologia Cambrensis, 4th ser. viii. 125). Weever asserts, in his poetical life of Oldcastle (1601), that in his youth he had been page to Thomas Mowbray, duke of Norfolk [q. v.], who was banished in 1398 and died ahroad in 1399. He makes his first appearance in contemporary authorities as a trusted servant of the crown in the Welsh marches under Henry IV, nearly twenty years after Wiclifs death, and we hear little of his lollard opinions until the clergy took open action against him in the first year of Henry V. In November 1401 'Monsieur Johan Oldecastille' was sent op the Wye to take charge of the castle of Huilth (Ordinances of tlus Privy Council, i. 174). A year or two later Oldcastle was told off to assist the constable of Kidwelly Castle on the Carmarthenshire coast with forty lances and a hundred and twenty archers (ib. ii. 68). In the September following the battle of Shrewsbury, the king empowered Oldcastle to pardon or punish such of his Welsh tenants as were rebels (Fœdera, viii. 331). He sat as knight of the shire for Herefordshire in the lengthy parliament which opened on 14 Jan. 1404 (Returns of Members, i. 265;, i. 400 seq.) In the summer, however, he was called upon to take temporary charge of the castle of Hay on the Wye, some eight miles south-west of Almeley (Ord. Privy Council, i. 237). A few months later he was placed on a commission entrusted with the impossible task of stopping the conveyance of provisions and arms into the rebel districts of Wales (, ii. 5). He was sheriff of Herefordshire in the eighth year of the reign (1406-7), and in the tenth joint custodian of the lordship of Dinas in the present Brecknockshire (, Baronage, ii. 67 ; Calend. Rotul. Chart. p. 359).

The personal friendship between Oldcastle and the Prince of Wales doubtless dated from the years in which Henry was his father's lieutenant in Wales; and in the quieter times which followed the subsidence of Glendower's revolt the fortunes of the Herefordshire knight continued to rise. He was now, for the second time, a widower, and by October 1409 he had secured the hand of a Kentish heiress, Joan, lady Cobham, granddaughter of John, third lord Cobham of Kent, a prominent figure under Richard U, who died at an extreme old age on 10 Jan. 1408 (, i. 67). Cobham Manor and Cowling or Cooling Castle, some four miles north of Rochester, at the edge of the marshes, passed to Joan, who was the only child of Cobham's daughter Joan and Sir John de la Pole of Chnshall in Essex. She was at this time thirty years of age, and had just (9 Oct. 1407) lost her third husband, Sir Nicholas Hawberk, who had served in Wales (Collectanea Topographica et Genealogica, vii. 329 ;, Hist. of Kent, iii. 429 ; Archæologia Cantiana, xi. 49 seq., xii. 113 seq.) Shortly after, and probably in consequence of his marriage with Lady Cobham, Oldcastle was summoned to parliament as a baron by a writ directed to 'Johannes Oldcastell, chevalier,' on 26 Oct. 1409, and received similar writs down to 22 March 1413 (Complete Peerage, by G. E. C, ii. 317). This is now usually regarded as the creation of a new barony in his favour. He is commonly styled, even in official documents, 'John Oldcastle, Knight, and Lord Cobham [dominus de Cobham];' but we find Lady Cobham's second husband. Sir Re^nald Bray broke, called 'Dominus de Cowling,' after a portion of the property which she was to inherit from her grandfather (Collectanea Topographica, vii. 341 ; cf. Walsingham, ii. 291).

The favour of the prince presently secured the newly created oaron a further opportunity of military distinction. In September 1411 the prince, who was practically acting as viceroy for his sick father, took upon himself to despatch an English force under the Earl of Arundel to the assistance of the Duke of Burgundy, and Oldcastle was associated with Arundel and Robert and Gilbert Umphraville in the command (, i. 130). Small as the force was, it at once turned the scale between the warring French factions in Burgundy's favour. By the middle of December the English auxiliaries were dismissed with a remuneration, to raise which the duke had to pawn his jewels. Oldcastle in these years undoubtedly stood high in the favour of the prince, to whose household he seems to have been officially attached (, Vita, p. 31 ;, ii. 291). There is no hint, however, in the contemporary authorities, hostile as they are, to support the view adopted by the Elizabethan dramatists


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/95

 citation was affixed to the doors of Rochester Cathedral on 6 Sept. requiring him to appear before the archbishop at Leeds Castle, near Maidstone, on the 11th of the month (ib. p. 266, cf. ed. 1729, p. 117 ; Fasciculi Zizorniorum, p. 436;, ii. 292). These citations were, according to one account, twice torn down by Oldcastle's friends, and, as he fkiled to appear at Leeds on the appointed day, he was declared contumacious and excommunicated. A further summons was issued calling upon him to appear on Saturday, 23 Sept., to show cause why he should not be condemned as a heretic and handed over to the secular arm. Bale here inserts a confession of faith, begining with the Apostles' Creed and including a definition of the functions of the three estates of the church militant — priesthood, knighthood, and commons — which Oldcastle is alleged to have taken to the king. Henry declined to receive it, and, turning a deaf ear to his further suggestions that a hundred knights and esquires should clear him of heresy or that he should clear himself in single combat, allowed a summons to be served upon him in his own presence. Whereupon Oldcastle produced a written appeal from the jurisdiction of the archbishop to the pope, whom, according to Bale, he had roundly denounced as antichrist in his previous interviews with the king. Bale's narrative is generally based upon the archbishop's official account, of which the fullest form is printed in the 'Fasciculi Zizaniorum,' but he adds a good deal from sources which cannot always be traced even when he mentions his authority.

Oldcastle was arrested under a royal writ ; and when the archbishop opened his court in the chapter-house of St. Paul's on 23 Sept., he was produced by the lieutenant of the Tower (, Issues, p. 324 ; Fasciculi Zizaniorum, p. 467). Arundel, with whom sat Richard Clifford, bishop of London, and Henry Beaufort, bishop of Winchester, was clearly unwilling to go to extremities, and gave Oldcastle another opportunity of securing absolution by submission. But he presented instead a written confession of faith in English, in which he defined his position on the four or five points on which his orthodoxy was principally impugned. He expressed his belief in all the sacraments ordained by God, believed the sacrament of the altar to be 'Christ's body in form of bread,' and, with regard to the sacrament of penance, held that men must forsake sin and do due penance therefor with true confession, or they could not be saved. Images, he said, were merely calendars for the unlearned, to represent and bring to mind the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ and the martyrdom and good living of other saints. 'Hoso putteth feyth, hope, or trust in helpe of hem, as he scholde do to God, he doth in that the grete synne of mawmetrie [idolatry].' As to pilgrimages, he held that a man might go on pilgrimage to all the world and yet be damnea ; but that if he knew and kept God's commandments, he should be saved, 'though he nevyr in hys lyff go on pilgrimage as men use now, to Cantirbery or to Rome, or to eny other place' (ib. p. 438 ; cf., ed. 1729, p. 121). Arundel, after consultation with his assessors, informed Oldcastle that his 'schedule' contained much that was good and sufficiently catholic, but insisted on a fuller statement of his belief on the two points, whether in the eucharist the consecrated bread remained material bread or not, and whether confession to a duly qualified priest where possible was or was not necessary to the efficacy of the sacrament of penance. Oldcastle, however, refused to add anything to what he had said in his schedule on these sacraments, although warned by the archbishop that by refusal he ran the risk of being pronounced a heretic. Informed by the court of what the 'holy Roman Church had laid down on these points in accordance with the teaching of the fathers, he professed perfect willingness to believe and observe what 'holy church' had decreed and God wished him to believe and observe, but denied that the pope, cardinals, and prelates had any power of determining such things. The inquiry was then adjourned unto the Monday (25 Sept.), when the court met at the convent of the Black Friars 'within Ludgate ' (ib. p. 263 ;, p. 107). It. was now reinforced by the presence of Benedict Nicolls [q. v.], bishop of Bangor; besides the bishops, twelve doctors of law or divinity sat as assessors, including Philip Morgan [q. v.], John Kemp [q. v.], and the heads of the four mendicant orders, among whom was Thomas Netter or Walden. Urged again to seek absolution, Oldcastle declared he would do so from none but God (Fasciculi Zizaniorum, p. 443). The scene described by Bale — Oldcastle going down on his knees and imploring the divine absolution for the sins of his youth — is perhaps only an expansion of this declaration. The archbishop then demanded what answer he had to give to the summary of the church's faith and determination on the eucharist, confession, the power of the keys and pilgrimages which had been handed to him 'in English for his better understanding thereof on the Sunday. In reply, he defined quite unmistakably his position on the two critical points raised at

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


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/96

 the end of his first examination. If the church had determined that the consecrated bread was bread no longer, it must have been since the poison of property had infected her. As to confession to a priest, it was often salutary, but he could not hold it essential to salvation. There followed an argument of which Bale gives a much fuller account than Arundel, partly based on Walden's writings, and in the main, perhaps, trustworthy. Both sides quoted scripture freely in support of their views, and grew so warm that at length Oldcastle roundly denounced the pope as the head of anti-christ, the prelates his members, and the friars his tail. He finally turned to the bystanders and warned them against his judges, whose teaching would lead them to perdition if they listened to it (ib. pp. 443-6 ;, pp. 264-72). Arundel then delivered sentence. Oldcastle was declared a heretic, and handed over to the secular arm. But the king, if not the archbishop, was anxious to save his life if possible, and a respite of forty days was allowed him in the hope that he would recant (Gesta Henrid, p. 3; cf., ii. 296). Nevertheless, the Lollards were driven desperate by the prospect of what awaited them if the king's own friend were only spared on such conditions, and a hundred thousand men were declared to be ready to rise in arms for the lord of Cobham. The government is said to have replied by publishing the abjuration purporting to be made by Oldcastle, which IS printed in the 'Fasciculi Zizaniorum' S). 414 ; cf., i. 178, n, 6). It is undated, and may only be a draft prepared for a signature which was withheld.

Henry's chaplain, who wrote before 1418, says that Oldcastle was relieved of his fetters by promising to recant and submit to the judgment of the convocation which was to meet in November, and seized the opportunity to escape from the Tower. His escape, which some of his enemies ascribed to demoniacal agency, was certainly, rather mysterious (, Liber Metricus, p. 99). One William Fisher, a parchment-maker in Smithfield, in whose house he secreted himself, was hanged in 1416 on a charge of arranging the escape (, i. 180; Chron. ed. Davies, p. 183). Sir James Ramsay gives evidence to show that it was effected on 19 Oct. ; but a royal prohibition to harbour Oldcastle, dated 10 Oct., the very day on which Arundel finally ordered the sentence to be publislied throughout England, points to nn earlier date (Fasciculi Zizantorum, p. 449 ;, Life of Henry V, ii. 373). That a widespread lollard conspiracy was presently on foot, and that the fugitive Oldcastle was engaged in it, cannot be seriously doubted, though the evidence is imperfect, and their treason is perhaps painted Blacker than it was. The official indictment afterwards charged them with plotting the death of the king and his brothers, with the prelates and other magnates of the realm, the transference of the religious to secular employments, the spoliation and destruction of all cathedrals, churches, and monasteries, and the elevation of Oldcastle to the position of regent of the kingdom (Rot. Parl. iv. 108). A plan was laid to get possession of the king at his quiet manor of Eltham under cover of a 'mommynge' on the day of the Epiphany, 6 Jan. (Gesta Hen. p. 4 ;, p. 108). But it was detected or betrayed beforehand, and Henry removed to Westminster. News had reached him that twenty thousand armed lollards from all parts of the kingdom were to meet in the fields near St. Giles's Hospital on the western road out of London, and little more than a mile from the palace, on Wednesday the 10th (Rot. Parl. iv. 108 ; Gesta Hen. p. 4). The night before the king ordered the city gates to be closed, thus cutting off the London lollards from those who would presently be flocking from the country into St. Giles's Fields, and drew up his force either in the fields themselves, or, as the mention of Fickett's Field, now Lincoln's Inn Fields, may seem to imply, between St. Giles and the city (, Vita, p. 31 ; the editor of the 'Liber Metricus' is probably wrong in translating 'In Lanacri luce' (p. 97) by 'In Longacre.' It occurs in the passage relating the Eltham attempt, and the glossator renders it 'in festo Epiphaniæ'). The darkness, which caused several bodies of lollards to take the royal force for their friends, and the absence of the London contingent, which no doubt would have been the largest of all, made the task of dispersing a force which was never allowed to consolidate itself an easy and almost a bloodless one (, ii. 298). The greater part, perhaps, heard of what was happening in time to turn and hasten homewards. Many, however, were taken prisoners, and at once brought to trial, but Oldcastle was not among them.

Oldcastle had been lying concealed in London since his escape from the Tower. The day after the collapse of the rising (II Jan.) a thousand marks was offered by proclamation to any one who should succeea in arresting Oldcastle. If the capture were effected by a corporate community, it should be granted perpetual exemption from taxation (Fœdera, ix. 89;, ed. 1729, App. p. 143). Redman (p. 17), who wrote under Heniy VIII, says


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/97

 villeins were promised their liberty if they took him ; but there is no such promise in this proclamation. At all events the loyalty of his lollard friends was proof against the temptation, and he remained at large for nearly four years. He was summoned in five county courts at Brentford to give himself up, and as he did not appear was (1 July) formally outlawed {''Rot. Parl.'' iv. 108). He took refuge in the first place, it would seem, in his own county, for in 1415 he was lurking near Malvern, and a premature report of the king's departure to 'ranee emboldened him to send word to Richard Beauchamp, lord Bergavenny, at the neighbouring Hanley Castle, that he intended to have revenge upon him for the injuries he had suffered at his hands. On receiving this notification Bergavenny hastily collected nearly five thousand men from his estates, and tried to hunt Oldcastle down. He escaped, but some of his followers were taken, and torture elicited from them information as to the place where Oldcastle kept his arms and money in the hollow of a double wall. His standard and banner, on which were depicted the cup and the host in the form of bread, were found with the rest. The news of the failure of Scrope's conspiracy in July 1415 compelled him to lie in strict concealment again (, ii. 306). It was at this time that Hoccleve wrote his appeal to Oldcastle to abandon his lollard errors [see below]. When the impression made by Agincourt had lost its first freshness, the lollards began to move again. An alleged plot against the king's life when he was at Kenilworth at Christmas 1416 was ascribed to a follower of Oldcastle, and fresh proclamations were immediately issued for the arrest of the 'Lollardus Lollardorum' (, i. 254 ; Kalendars and Inventories, ii. 102). He was believed to have been deeply engaged in intriques with the Scots. His 'clerk and chief counsellor,' Thomas Payne, a Welshman from Glamorganshire, was thrown into prison on a charge of arranging an escape of King James from Windsor, and Oldcastle himself was credited with instigating the attack which the Duke of Albany and the Earl of Douglas made upon Berwick and Roxburgh in October during the king's absence in France (, i. 254-5). Walsingham (ii. 325) asserts that this was arranged in an interview between William Douglas and Oldcastle at Pontefract, and that he urged the Scots to send the pseudo-king Richard into England. Otterboume adds (ii. 278) that indentures to this effect between Albany and the lollard leader fell into the hands of the government. If the former writer may be trusted, he lay concealed for some time in the house of a villein at St. Albans. His presence was at length discovered, and the house surrounded by the abbot's servants. They found the bird flown, but seized some of his friends and books, in which the images and names of the saints and of the Virgin had been carefully erased. This may be doubtful, at least as to the time assigned, for local tradition declares that he had been in hiding for a twelvemonth or more in the Welsh marches among the hills between the upper Severn and the Vymwy. A secluded spot on Moel-y-sant, overlooking the latter river near Meifod, and on the Trefedrid estate, is still known as Cobham's Garden. But his refuge became known to his enemies, and towards the close of this year (1417) he was surprised by a number of the followers of Sir Edward Charlton, fifth lord Charlton of Powis [q. v.], one of the chief lords-marcher, headed by the brothers Ieuan ab Gruffydd and Grunydd Vychan of Garth, near Welshpool. The scene of the encounter lay in the hilly district of Broniarth, between Garth and Meifod, and still bears the traditional name of Cae'r Barwn (Baron's field). Oldcastle was only taken after a desperate resistance, in which several on both sides were injured or slain and he himself sorely wounded (Chron. ed, Davies, p. 46). In one version of the story a woman is said to have broken his leg with a stool as he struggled with his assailants (Liber Metricus, p. 158). His injuries were so serious that when an order of the regent Bedford (dated 1 Dec.) reached Welshpool or Powis castle, whither he had been taken, that he should be brought up to London at once, he had to make the journey in a 'whirlicote' or horse-litter (, ed. 1729, p. 144;, ii. 391). Sir John Grey, son-in-law of the lord of Powis, conveyed him safely to the capital. No time was lost in bringing him before parliament on 14 Dec, when he was summarily condemned as an outlawed traitor and convicted heretic. Walsingham says he first implored his judges to temper justice with mercy, and afterwards denied their jurisdiction on the ground that King Richard still lived in Scotland ; but the official record says nothing of any protest, and none would have availed him. He was taken back to the Tower in the 'whirlicote,' and drawn thence the same day on a hurdle to the new lollard gallows at St. Giles's Fields, where he was 'hung and burnt hanging' {''Rot. Parl.'' iv. 108). It is generally supposed that he was suspended horizontally in chains and burnt alive, but the statements of the authorities are con-


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/99

 of Bale's Chronycle, in Rymer's Fœdera (ix. 61–5), in Wilkins's Concilia (iii. 353–6), and, in its best form, in the edition of the Fasciculi Zizaniorum in the Rolls Series. Walsingham's Historia Anglicana, in the same series, contains an abridgment of it. It forms the basis of John Bale's Brefe Chronycle concernyne the Examinacyon and Death of the Blessed Martyr of Christ, Syr John Oldecastell, the Lorde Cobham. The first edition, printed in black letter, and in octavo, was published in 1544, probably at Marburg; another edition—according to Ames, the second—was printed at London apparently in 1560, also in black letter and octavo. It was reprinted by the nonjuring Bishop Blackbourne in 1729, in the Harleian Miscellany (in vol. ii. of the 1744 edit. from the 3rd edit. of the work, and in vol. i. of the 1808 edit. from the 1st edit.), and in vol. xxxvi. of the Parker Society's Publications (1849). In addition to Arundel's record, Bale also drew upon the Fasciculi Zizaniorum, and the Doctrinale Fidei contra Wiclevistas of Thomas Netter or Walden [q.v.], and two sources vaguely described as Ex vetusto exemplari Londinensium and Ex utroque exemplari. He mentions a brief account by a friend of Oldcastle's, printed by Tyndale in 1530, of which no copy is now known to exist (cf. ‘Three Fifteenth-century Chronicles,’ p. 90). Foxe, in his Acts and Monuments of the Church (ed. Cattley, 1841), embodied Bale's narrative almost without change, and the special lives of Oldcastle which have appeared in this and the last century have been mainly based on Foxe. These are: 1. W. Gilpin's Lives of Wycliffe, Cobham, &c., 1765, which was several times reprinted. 2. Thomas Gaspey's Life and Times of the Good Lord Cobham, 2 vols. 12mo, 1843. 3. Andrew Morton Brown's Leader of the Lollards: his Times and Trials, 8vo, 1848. 4. C. E. Maurice's Lives of English Popular Leaders (1872, &c.), 8vo, vol. ii. To these may be added The Writings and Examinations of Walter Brute, Lord Cobham, &c., 8vo, 1831. The general authorities for Oldcastle's life are: Rotuli Parliamentorum; Ordinances of the Privy Council, ed. Nicolas; Rymer's Fœdera, original edit.; Calendars of Inquisitions post mortem and Patent Rolls, published by the Record Commission; Walsingham, Elmham's Liber Metricus and Redman's Historia Henrici V, in the Rolls Series; Elmham's Vita Henrici V (1727), and Otterbourne (1732), ed. Hearne; Gesta Henrici V, ed. English Historical Society; English Chronicle, 1377–1461, ed. Davies, and Three Fifteenth-century Chronicles, published by the Camden Society; Collectanea Topographica et Genealogica, ed. Nichols; Montgomeryshire Collections (Powysland Club), vol. i.; Pauli's Geschichte Englands, vol. v.; Wylie's History of Henry IV; Ramsay's Lancaster and York. Other authorities in the text. For the literary history of Oldcastle, see Richard James's Iter Lancastrense, Chetham Soc. 1845 (Introd.), and his Poems, ed. Grosart, 1880; Fuller's Church History and Worthies of England, ed. 1811; Halliwell's Character of Falstaff, 1841; New Shakspere Society's Publications, 1879 (Ingleby's Centurie of Prayse); Gairdner and Spedding's Studies in English History, 1881; Anglia, v. 9.]  OLDCORNE, EDWARD (1561–1606), jesuit, who usually passed by the name of, was born at York in 1561, being the son of John Oldcorne, a bricklayer of that city. He was intended for the medical profession, but, having a vocation for the priesthood, he crossed over to France, and after studying for some time is the English College at Rheims, he was sent in 1582 to the English College at Rome, where he received holy orders in August 1587. On 16 Aug. 1588 he and John Gerard (1564-1637) [q. v.] were admitted into the Society of Jesus by the father-general Claudius Aquaviva, and five or six weeks later they were sent to England in company with two secular priests, and landed on the Norfolk coast. Oldcorne was employed for some time in London by Father Henry Garnett [q. v.], superior of the English Jesuits, whom he afterwards accompanied to Warwickshire. In February or March 1588-1589 Garnett placed him at Hindlip Hall, near Worcester, the seat of the ancient catholic family of Habington. There he resided for sixteen years, labouring jealously as a missioner, and making many converts. After the discovery of the gunpowder plot, Humphrey Littleton, who had been imprisoned on a charge of harbouring some of the conspirators, sought to save his own life by informing the privy council that Oldcorne was at Hindlip, and that Garnett also would probably he found there. Garnett and Oldcorne were arrested there, brought to London and imprisoned, first in the Gatehouse, and afterwards in the Tower [see ]. Oldcorne was put to the torture, but he persistently denied all knowledge of the plot. On 21 March 1605-6 he was sent from the Tower to Worcester, where he was arraigned at the Lent assizes. The charges brought against him were, first, that he had invited Garnett, a denounced traitor, to lie concealed at Hindlip; secondly, that he had written to Father Robert Jones in Herefordshire to aid in concealing two of the conspirators, thus making himself an accomplice; and, thirdly, that he had approved the plot as a good action, although it failed of effect. He was found guilty of high treason, and on 7 April 1606 he was drawn on a hurdle to Redhill, near Worcester, and there hanged, disembowelled, and quartered. Littleton, who suffered at the same time, publicly asked pardon of God for having wrongfully accused Oldcorne of the conspiracy.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/100

 Oldcorne's head and quarters were set up in different parts of Worcester, and it is related that 'his heart and bowels were cast into the fire, which continued sending forth a lively flame for sixteen days, notwithstanding the rains that fell during that time, which was look'd upon as a prodigy, and a testimony of his innocence' (, Memoirs of Missionary Priests, ed. 1742, ii. 488). His portrait was engraved by Bouttats, and Bromley was told there was a print of him by Pass.

 OLDE, JOHN (fl. 1545–1555), translator. [See .]

 OLDENBURG, HENRY (1615?–1677), natural philosopher and man of letters, who sometimes signed himself anagrammatically as 'Grubendol,' born about 1615, was the son of Heinrich Oldenburg (d. 1634), a tutor in the academical gymnasium at Bremen, and afterwards professor in the Royal University of Dorpat. The date 1626, usually given as that of Oldenburg's birth, is incorrect (Dr. Althaus in Beilage zur Allgemeinen Zeitung, Munich, 1889, No. 212); and the statement, so often repeated, that he was descended from the counts of Oldenburg appears to have been merely a hasty inference from the fact that he is described in his Oxford matriculation certificate as 'nobilis Saxo.'

Oldenburg was educated at the evangelical school at Bremen, which he left for the Gymnasium Illustre in the same city on 2 May 1633. There he took the degree of master in theology on 2 Nov. 1639, the subject of his thesis being 'De ministerio ecclesiastico et magistratu politico.' About 1640 he came to England, and lived here for some eight years, 'gaining favour and respect from many distinguished gentlemen in parliament,' After 1648 he seems to have travelled on the continent, returning to Bremen about 1652. In August of that year a property which had been held by his father and grandfather, but which was probably of small pecuniary value, the Vicaria S. Liborii, was confirmed to him 'free of all taxation.'

In the summer of 1653 the council of Bremen sent Oldenburg as their agent to negotiate with Cromwell some arrangement by which the neutrality of Bremen should be respected in the naval war between England and Holland. His appointment was ineffectually opposed, on the grounds that during his former residence in England he had taken the king's side against the parliament, and that he had 'a peculiar temper, which prevented him from agreeing well with others,' His instructions were dated 30 June 1653. In a letter dated London, 7 April 1654, preserved in the 'Acts of the Senate 'at Bremen, he announced the conclusion of peace between England and Holland on 5 April, and offered his further services. This offer the council accepted when Sweden attacked Bremen in the summer of that year. Oldenburg's new letters to Cromwell were dated 22 Sept.

While diplomacy occupied a part of Oldenburg's time in England, he chiefly devoted himself to scientific study or to literature. In 1654 he made the acquaintance of John Milton, then Cromwell's Latin secretary. Several of Milton's letters to Oldenburg are Published in Milton's 'Epistolæ Familiares.' In the earliest of them (6 July 1654), Milton complimented Oldenburg on speaking English more correctly and idiomatically than any other foreigner that he knew. In May 1656 Oldenburg was in Kent. Later in the year he was acting as tutor to Henry O'Brien, son of, sixth earl of Thomond [q. v.], and to Richard Jones, son of Catherine, lady Ranelagh, the sister of the Hon. Robert Boyle; and early in 1656 he arrived with his pupils in Oxford. In June he himself was entered a student of the university, 'by the name and title of Henricus Oldenburg, Bremensis, nobilis Saxo' (, Fasti Oxon. pt. ii.) With Boyle, the uncle of his pupil Jones, Oldenburg enjoyed constant intercourse at Oxford. Wilkins, Wallis, and Petty were also among his friends there. Encouraged by their example, he devoted himself to 'the new experimental learning.' Writing to Milton early in 1656, he declared: 'There are two things I wish to study—Nature and her Creator.' And later in the year he wrote to another friend, Edward Lawrence, that he believed there were still some few who sought for truth, instead of hunting after the vain shadows of scholastic theology and nominalist philosophy—men who dared to forsake the old Aristotelian methods, and cherished the belief that the world is not yet too old nor the living race


text:
Hoyle's Games Modernized/Bézique

BÉZIQUE.

Bézique is a game for two players. The piquet pack of thirty-two cards is used, but in duplicate, two such packs of like pattern being shuffled together.

The players cut for deal, the highest card having the preference. The rank of the cards in cutting (as also in play) is as under: ace, ten, king, queen, knave, nine, eight, seven. Eight cards are dealt (by three, two, and three) to each player; the seventeenth card being turned up by way of trump, and placed between the two players. The remaining cards, known as the "stock," are placed face downwards beside it. Should the turn-up card be a seven, the dealer scores ten.

The non-dealer leads and the dealer plays to such lead any card he pleases. If he play a higher card (according to the scale above given) of the same suit, or a trump, he wins the trick; but he is not bound to do either, or even to follow suit. Further, he is at liberty to trump, even though holding a card of the suit led. If the two cards played are the same (e.g. two nines of diamonds), the trick belongs to the leader.

The winner of one trick leads to the next, but before doing so he marks any points to which his hand may entitle him, leaving the cards so marked on the table, and draws one card from the top of the stock. His opponent draws a card in like manner, and so the game proceeds until the stock is exhausted.

The holder of the seven of trumps is entitled to exchange it for the turn-up card, at the same time scoring ten for it. The holder of the duplicate seven of trumps scores ten for it, but gains no further benefit thereby.

The game is usually 1000 up, but, as the score proceeds by tens or multiples of ten, this number is pretty quickly reached.

At the earlier stage of the game, the player scores for the cards he holds in his hand; certain cards or combinations of cards, duly "declared," entitling him to score so many points, as under:—

In order to score, the cards composing the given combination must be all at the same time in the hand of the player. A card played to a trick is no longer available (unless a brisque) to score.

A player can only "declare" after winning a trick. Having won a trick, he is at liberty to score any combination he may hold, laying the cards forming it face upwards on the table. If the cards exposed show two combinations he may declare both, but must elect which of them he will score, reserving the other till he again wins a trick. Thus, having king and queen of spades and knave of diamonds on the table, he would say, "I score 40 for Bézique, and 20 to score." When he has again won a trick, having meanwhile retained the needful cards unplayed, he can then score the second combination (Marriage).

A card which has once scored cannot be again used to form part of a combination of the same kind: e.g. a queen once used to form a Marriage cannot again figure in a Marriage, though it may still score as part of a Sequence, or as one of "Four Queens." In like manner, a card which has once figured in "Bézique" cannot be used to form part of a second Bézique, though it may be used to score Double Bézique. Neither can a card which has been declared in a given combination again be declared in a combination of an inferior order; e.g. if a king and queen have been declared as part of a Sequence, a Marriage cannot afterwards be declared with the same cards—though their having figured in a Marriage would be no bar to their subsequent use as part of a Sequence.

The declared cards, though left face upwards on the table, still form part of the hand, and are played to subsequent tricks at the pleasure of the holder.

When no more cards are left in the stock, the method of play alters. No further declarations can be made, and the only additional score now possible is for the brisques (aces or tens) in the remaining tricks (scored by the winner of the trick), with ten for the last trick, as before stated.

The mode of play as to these last eight tricks is according to Whist rules. Each player must now follow suit, if he can; if not, he is at liberty to trump.

In the earlier stage of the game, tricks are of no value save in so far as they contain brisques, or enable the winner to "declare," the scoring of the different combinations being the main object of the game. The player will probably at the outset find that he has in hand some of the component parts of two or more combinations; but as he must furnish a card to each trick, he will be forced to abandon the one or the other. In choosing between them, two points should be considered; viz. first, the value of the combination, and, secondly, the prospect of making it. As to the last point, he may derive important information from the cards declared by his opponent. Suppose, for instance, that he holds a queen of spades and two knaves of diamonds. These he would naturally retain at any cost, in the hope of making Double Bézique; but should his adversary declare a marriage in spades, showing that he holds the remaining queen of that suit, all hope of Double Bézique is clearly at an end. In the case supposed, it would be the policy of the opponent, knowing or suspecting that Double Bézique was aimed at, to keep the queen of spades in his hand as long as he possibly could, even at some considerable sacrifice.

When a brisque is led, the second player should win the trick if he can do so without too great a cost, for, though a brisque only scores ten to the winner, the capture of the trick means a loss of ten to the opposite party, and practically, therefore, makes a difference of twenty to the score.

Unless a brisque be led, or you have something to declare, pass the trick or win it with a brisque. The best cards to throw away are the sevens, eights, nines, and knaves of plain suits (other than the knave of diamonds, which should be retained on the chance of making Bézique).

It is generally better to risk losing an ace than a queen or king, the two latter having the greater chance of scoring.

If you chance to hold three aces at an early stage of the game, with no prospect of a more valuable combination, retain them, in the hope of drawing a fourth. In any other case, make tricks with aces in plain suits whenever you can.

"Sequence" cards should be kept in reserve as long as possible. A duplicate of a sequence card, though valueless for scoring purposes, should still be held up, as the uncertainty respecting it may hamper your opponent.

Even more important than sequence cards are the bézique cards. After scoring Bézique, the declared cards should still be retained until it becomes clear that Double Bézique is unattainable.

At a late period of the game, when the opportunities for declaration are growing limited, it is often wise to declare (say) Double Bézique without previously declaring single Bézique, or Sequence without previously declaring a Royal Marriage. If you declare the smaller score, and do not again win a trick, you lose the larger score altogether.

When the stock is nearly exhausted, take a trick whenever you can, as you thereby deprive the adversary of the opportunity of scoring his remaining cards. Note at this stage the exposed cards of the adversary, as you will thereby play the last eight tricks to greater advantage.

In the play of the last eight tricks, your main object is to make your brisques, and capture those of the enemy. Reserve, if possible, a good trump wherewith to secure the last trick.

RUBICON BÉZIQUE.

"Rubicon" or "Japanese" Bézique is a modification of the ordinary game, which has for some years found much favour in Paris. In 1887, a code of laws, which we append, was drawn up by a committee of the Portland Club, and Rubicon Bézique may now be regarded as the standard game.

Four packs, of like pattern and shuffled together, are used. The cards rank as at ordinary Bézique; but nine instead of eight cards are dealt, singly or by threes, to each player. There is no "turn-up," the first "marriage" scored determining the trump suit. If a "sequence" be declared and scored before any marriage, such sequence determines the trump suit.

The scores at Rubicon Bézique are as under:—

The procedure as to playing and drawing is the same as at ordinary Bézique, save that the tricks are left face upwards in a heap between the players until a brisque is played, when the winner of the trick takes them up, and turns them face downwards, near himself. The value of each brisque is ten points, but they are not scored till the close of the game, and in certain events (see post) may not be scored at all.

Only one declaration can be scored at a time, and that only (save in the case of carte blanche) by the winner of a trick; but if, on the cards exposed, the player has more than one combination to score, he may score whichever he prefers, at the same time calling attention to his further claim by saying, "And —— to score." A player is not bound to declare any combination, even when exposed upon the table, unless he thinks fit. If he is compelled to play a card of the combination before he has actually scored it, the right to score is at an end.

A card declared in a given combination may not again be declared in an inferior combination of the same class—e.g. a king and queen declared in Sequence cannot be afterwards made available to score a Royal Marriage. The same card may, however, be used in conjunction with a new card or cards to form, not merely a combination of the same kind, but the same combination over again. Thus, if Four Queens have been declared, the player may play one of them, and, when he next wins a trick, add a fifth queen to the three left on the table, and again score four queens.

If a combination, duly scored, is broken up, one or more cards must be substituted, either from the cards upon the table or from the hand of the player, to entitle him to a fresh score. There is an apparent exception to this rule in the fact that, if a player has declared two independent marriages in the same suit, and all four cards are on the table simultaneously, he may make two more declarations of marriage with the same cards. In truth, however, this merely follows the rule. King 1 (already "married" to queen 1) may again be married to queen 2; and king 2 (already married to queen 2) to queen 1 in like manner.

A player who has two or more declarations to score may elect which he will score first, the other remaining in abeyance; e.g. a player having declared Four Kings, including the king of spades, and subsequently declaring Bézique (the king of spades still remaining on the table) would ipso facto become entitled to score a Marriage, royal or ordinary, as the case might be. We will suppose the former. In such a case, he would say, "I score forty, and forty for marriage to score." This declaration should be repeated, by way of reminder, after each trick, till actually scored. If, in the meantime, the player becomes entitled to score some other combination, he may, on winning a trick, score the latter in preference to the one previously declared, still keeping this in reserve. The mere fact of having declared a given combination "to score" does not preserve the right to score it, if in the meantime the declarant either plays one of the cards composing it or makes use of them to score some higher declaration of the same class.

The last nine tricks are played like the last eight in the ordinary game; but the winner of the last trick, instead of 10, scores 50.

The game is complete in one deal, and is won by the player who scores most points, according to the foregoing table, exclusive of brisques. These latter are only taken into account where the scores are otherwise equal. If, after the addition of the brisques, the scores are still equal, the game is drawn.

There is one other case in which the brisques are reckoned. The score of 1000 points is known as the "Rubicon," and a player not reaching this score is "rubiconed." In this case, also, each player adds in his brisques; and if the score of the loser is thereby brought up to 1000, he "saves the rubicon."

Assuming that the rubicon is saved, the score of the loser is deducted from that of the winner, fractions of a hundred being disregarded in both cases. To the difference are added 500 points for game, and the total is the value of the game, the stakes being usually so much per hundred points. If it happen that the difference between the two scores is less than 100, it is reckoned at that figure, making, with the 500 for game, 600. Thus, if the respective scores are, A, 1510; B, 1240; A wins 1500 - 1200 + 500 = 800. If A's score were 1550, and B's 1520, A would win 100 + 500 = 600.

If B is rubiconed, the value of the game is computed after a different method. The points made by him (still disregarding fractions of a hundred) instead of being subtracted from, are added to the score of the winner, who is further entitled to 1000 for the game and 300 for brisques. Thus, if A has won 1320, and B 620, the value of A's game will be 1300 + 600 + 1000 + 300 = 3200.

If the rubiconed player has scored less than 100, that amount (100) is added to the score of the other player, as well as the 1000 for game and 300 for brisques, as before mentioned.

THE LAWS OF RUBICON BÉZIQUE.

1.—Rubicon Bézique is played with four packs of thirty-two cards, shuffled together.

2.—Each player has a right to shuffle the pack. The dealer has the right of shuffling last.

3.—The pack must not be shuffled below the table, nor in such manner as to expose the faces of the cards.

4.—A cut must consist of at least five cards, and at least five must be left in the lower packet.

5.—The cards rank as follows, both in cutting and in playing: ace (highest), ten, king, queen, knave, nine, eight, seven (lowest).

6.—The player who cuts the higher card has choice of deal, seats and markers. The choice determines both seats and markers during the play.

7.—If, in cutting for deal, a player expose more than one card, he must cut again.

8.—The cut for deal holds good even if the pack be incorrect.

9.—If, in cutting to the dealer, or in reuniting the separated packets, a card be exposed, or if there be any confusion of the cards, there must be a fresh cut.

10.—The dealer must deal the cards by one at a time, giving the top card to his adversary, the next card to himself, and so on; or by three at a time, giving the top three cards to his adversary, the next three to himself, and so on; until each player has nine cards. The undealt cards (called the "stock") are to be placed face downward, in one packet, in the middle of the table, to the left of the dealer.

11.—If the dealer deal the cards wrongly, he may rectify the error, with the permission of his adversary, prior to either player having taken up any of his cards.

12.—If, after the deal, and before the dealer has played to the first trick, it be discovered that either player has more than nine cards there must be a fresh deal. If it be similarly discovered that either player has less than nine cards, the deal may be completed from the top of the stock by mutual agreement, otherwise there must be a fresh deal.

13.—If the dealer expose a card belonging to his adversary or to the stock, the non-dealer has the option of a fresh deal. If the dealer expose any of his own cards, the deal stands good.

14.—If a faced card be found in the pack before the play of the hand has begun, there must be a fresh deal.

15.—If a player have a hand dealt him without king, queen or knave, he may declare carte blanche before playing a card. Carte blanche must be shown by counting the cards, one by one, face upward, on the table.

16.—If, after playing a card, a player who has declared carte blanche draw a card other than king, queen or knave, he is entitled to declare another carte blanche on showing the card drawn to his adversary; and so on after every card drawn, until he draws a king, queen or knave.

17.—If a player play with more than nine cards he is rubiconed; but the amount to be added to his adversary's score is not to exceed nine hundred, exclusive of the thirteen hundred for a rubicon game.

18.—If both players play with more than nine cards, the game is null and void.

19.—If a player play with less than nine cards, the error cannot be rectified. He is liable to no penalty; his adversary wins the last trick.

20.—If both players play with less than nine cards, the deal stands good, and the winner of the last trick scores it.

21.—If one player play with more than nine cards, and the other with less than nine, the deal stands good. The player with more than nine cards is rubiconed (as provided in Law 17), and neither player scores the last trick.

22.—If a faced card be found in the stock after the play of the hand has begun, it must be turned face downward, without altering its place in the stock.

23.—A card led in turn may not be taken up after it has been played to. A card played to a trick may not be taken up after the trick has been turned, or after another card has been drawn from the stock; but if two or more cards be played together, all but one may be taken up; and cards accidentally dropped may be taken up.

24.—A card led out of turn must be taken up, unless it has been played to. After it has been played to, it is too late to rectify the error.

25.—A player who wins a trick containing a brisque should at once take up all the played cards on the table, and turn them face downward near himself. If he fail to do so, his adversary is entitled, as soon as he has won a trick, to take up all the played cards on the table. Tricks turned may not be looked at (except as provided in Law 27).

26.—The stock may be counted, face downwards, at any time during the play. A player counting the stock should be careful not to disturb the order of the cards.

27.—A player may not count the brisques in his tricks so long as more than twelve cards remain in the stock.

28.—If the winner of a trick see two cards when drawing from the stock, he must show the top card to his adversary.

29.—If the loser of a trick draw the top card of the stock and see it, he must restore the card drawn in error, and must show the next card to his adversary; but, if the loser of a trick draw the top card, and the winner draw the next card and see it, it is too late to rectify the error, and the players retain the cards erroneously drawn.

30.—If the loser of a trick, after the winner has drawn, see two cards when drawing from the stock, his adversary has choice of the two cards of the following draw, and is entitled to look at both before choosing. If he choose the second card, he need not show it.

31.—If a player see several cards when drawing from the stock, his adversary has choice of the two cards of the following draw, and then of the cards of the next draw; and so on, as long as any card which has been seen remains undrawn; and he is entitled to look at the cards before choosing.

32.—If there be an odd number of cards in the stock, the last card is not drawn.

33.—Declared cards must be placed face upward on the table separate from the tricks, and (except in the case of carte blanche) must remain there until played, or until the stock is exhausted.

34.—If a declared card be played, and a card which restores any scoring combination or combinations be substituted, these combinations may be declared again.

35.—If a player declare more than one marriage in the same suit, he may declare a fresh marriage whenever he plays one of the declared cards, so long as a king and queen remain on the table.

36.—A player who has declared marriage may afterwards add the ace, ten, and knave of the same suit as the marriage, and declare sequence; or he may declare sequence without first declaring the marriage.

37.—A king or queen, once declared in sequence, cannot be afterwards used to form part of a marriage; but a player, having declared sequence, may declare marriage with a fresh king and queen of the same suit.

38.—Bézique combinations may be declared separately, and may be afterwards united to form a superior combination; or single, double, or triple bézique may be added to any already declared combination, to form a superior one; or, double, triple, or quadruple bézique may be at once declared, without having been previously declared separately. Bézique cards once declared in a superior bézique combination cannot be afterwards used to form part of an inferior one; but they may be used to form part of equal or superior combinations with a substituted card, or with added cards, or with both.

39.—A player who has cards on the table with which he might form a scoring combination, is not bound to declare it.

40.—A player declaring—

41.—The first marriage scored makes the trump suit. If no marriage his been scored, the first sequence scored makes the trump suit.

42.—A player can only score a declaration on winning a trick and before drawing, except in the case of carte blanche, which is scored before playing, and independently of winning a trick.

43.—Only one declaration can be scored at a time; but if a player declare a carte blanche which contains four aces, he may also score four aces if he win the trick, notwithstanding that he has already scored carte blanche.

44.—If the winner of a trick have two or more declarations to score, he may choose which he will first score. On winning another trick, he may similarly choose which of the remaining declarations he will score, or he may make and score a fresh declaration, and leave any unscored declarations still to score on winning another trick.

45.—A player who has a declaration to score should repeat after every trick what he has to score. He may score it at any time on winning a trick, and before drawing.

46.—If a player who has a declaration to score play a card of the combination before scoring it, he loses the score.

47.—If a player have a marriage to score, and, on winning a trick, add to the marriage the ace, ten, and knave of the suit, and score sequence, he loses the score for the marriage.

48.—If a player have an inferior bézique combination to score, and, on winning a trick, add to the bézique combination cards which form a superior bézique combination, and score the superior combination, he loses the score for the inferior one.

49.—A player who has a declaration to score is not bound to score it.

50.—If a player erroneously score a declaration which does not constitute a scoring combination, and the error be not discovered before a card of the next trick has been played, the score marked stands good; and so on for all subsequent scores similarly marked before the discovery of the error.

51.—If an error in marking the score be proved, it may be corrected at any time during the game.

52.—No declaration can be scored after the stock is exhausted.

53.—The winner of the last trick adds fifty to the score.

54.—The winner of the last trick is bound to score it (except as provided in Law 21).

55.—If, during the play of the last nine tricks, a player fail to follow suit when able, or fail to win the card led when able—on detection of the error, the card erroneously played, and all cards subsequently played, must be taken up and replayed.

56.—The brisques (aces and tens) score ten each to the player having them in his tricks; but the brisques are only taken into account as provided in Laws 60 and 61.

57.—The winner of the game deducts the score of the loser from his own (excluding fractions of a hundred), and the difference, with five hundred added for the game, is the number of points won. If the difference between the scores be less than a hundred, the winner adds a hundred to the score of five hundred for the game.

58.—If the loser fail to score a thousand, he is rubiconed. The winner, whether his score reach a thousand or not, adds the score of the loser to his own (excluding fractions of a hundred) and the sum, with thirteen hundred added for the game, is the number of points won.

59.—If a player who is rubiconed has scored less than a hundred, the winner adds a hundred to his score, in addition to the score of thirteen hundred for the game.

60.—If the loser of a game fail to score a thousand, but have in his tricks a sufficient number of brisques to bring his total score to a thousand, he is not rubiconed. Each player adds his brisques to his score, and the game is computed as provided in Law 57.

61.—If the scores be so nearly equal that the brisques must be taken into account in order to decide who wins the game, and the loser be not rubiconed, each player adds his brisques to the score, and the game is then computed as provided in Law 57; but if the loser be rubiconed, the brisques, though taken into account in order to decide who wins the game, are not added to the scores, and the game is computed as provided in Law 58. In the case of a tie after adding the brisques, the game is null and void.

62.—If a pack be discovered to be incorrect, redundant, or imperfect, the deal in which the discovery is made is void. All preceding deals stand good.

63.—If a card or cards which complete the pack be found on the floor, the deal stands good.

64.—Before the pack is cut to the dealer, a player may call for fresh cards at his own expense. He must call for four fresh packs.

65.—Torn or marked cards must be replaced, or fresh packs called for at the expense of the two players.

66.—If a bystander call attention to any error or oversight, and thereby affect the score, he may be called on to pay all stakes and bets of the player whose interest he has prejudicially affected.

title: Hoyle's Games Modernized/Bézique


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/101

 too exhausted to bring forth something better.

Oldenburg remained at the university until May 1667, when he accompanied his pupil Jones on a long journey to the continent. From Saumur, where they spent the first year, Oldenburg sent letters to Milton and Boyle. In the second year he and his pupil visited other parts of France and Germany, and in May 1669 he wrote from Paris, where they remained until their return to England in 1660.

In November 1660 the society which afterwards became the Royal Society, and which had existed in a more or less nebulous condition since 1646, took definite shape. Among the first members proposed and elected (26 Dec.) were Oldenburg and his pupil Ranelagh. Oldenburg was elected a member of the first council and he and Dr. John Wilkins were appointed the first secretaries (22 April 1663); but he received no salary until 1669. In the Birch MSS. at the British Museum (4441, f. 27) is preserved, in Oldenburg's handwriting, an account of the duties of the 'Secretary of ye R. Soc' 'He attends constantly,' the paper recites, 'the meetings both of ye Society and Councill; noteth the observables, said and done there; digesteth ym in private; takes care to have ym entred in the Journal- and Register-books; reads over and corrects all entrys; sollicites the performances of taskes recommended and undertaken; writes all Letters abroad and answers the returns made to ym, entertaining a corresp. wth at least 30 psons [not fifty, as in Weld's 'History']; employes a great deal of time and takes much pains in satisfying forran demands about philosophicall matters, disperseth farr and near store of directions and inquiries for the society's purpose, and sees them well recommended, etc. Q. Whether such a person ought to be left vn-assisted?' It was with the intention that the sale should procure him a remuneration for his gratuitous services that he was authorised in 1664 to publish the ' Transactions of the Society;' but the net profit seldom amounted to 40l. a year. From June 1666 to the following March the sittings of the Royal Society were suspended, owing to the plague. Oldenburg and his family remained in London, but escaped the infection. In September 1666 the great fire of London ruined most of the booksellers, and greatly obstructed the publication of Oldenburg's 'Transactions.' Boyle made vain endeavours to secure for Oldenburg, who was suffering much pecuniary distress, the post of Latin secretary formerly held by Milton.

While he held the secretaryship of the Royal Society, Oldenburg's foreign correspondence grew very large. He could not have coped with it, he said, had it not been his habit to answer every letter the moment he received it. His aim is tersely expressed in his letter to Governor Winthrop (1667): 'Sir, you will please to remember that we have taken to taske the whole Vniverse, and that we were obliged to doe so by the nature of our Dessein. It will therefore be requisite that we purchase and entertain a commerce in all parts of ye world wth the most philosophicall and curious persons, to be found everywhere.' Among his correspondents was Spinoza. Oldenburg had visited Spinoza at Rijnsburg (Rhynsburg) in 1661, and numerous letters passed between them from that year to 1676. At first Oldenburg enthusiastically urged Spinoza to publish his writings: 'Surely, my excellent friend, I believe that nothing can be published more pleasant or acceptable to men of learning and discernment than such a treatise as yours. This is what a man of your wit and temper should regard more than what pleases theologians of the present age and fashion, for by them truth is less regarded than their own advantage.' But afterwards he became cautious, complaining that Spinoza confused God with nature, and that his teaching was fatalistic. In these letters Oldenburg defines his relations to both speculative philosophy and exact science.

The vastness of Oldenburg's foreign correspondence, which, though mainly scientific, was in part political, excited suspicion at the English court, and, under warrants dated 20 June 1667, he was imprisoned in the Tower (cf., 28 June 1667). He was in the Tower for more than two months, and Evelyn visited him there on 8 Aug. On 3 Sept. Oldenburg wrote to Boyle that he had been stifled by the prison air, and had recruited his health on his release at Crayford in Kent, and was now falling again to his old trade.

The publisher threatened at the time to discontinue printing the 'Transactions,' and Oldenburg, in a letter to Boyle, expressed a wish that he had 'other means of gaining a living.' From the beginning of 1670 he accordingly undertook many translations. His 'Prodromus to a Dissertation by Nicholas Steno concerning Solids naturally contained within Solids,' 8vo, appeared in the following year. 'A genuine Explication of the Book of the Revelation,' by A. B. Piganius, 8vo, 1671 ; 'The History of the late Revolution of the Empire of the Great Mogol,' by F. Bernier, 8vo, 1671; and 'The Life of the Duchess of Mazarine,' followed


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/103

 she was engaged in 1692 at a weekly salary of fifteen shillings, soon increased to twenty. Concerning her hesitation to come on the stage, she said to Chetwood: 'I long'd to be at it, and only wanted a little decent entreaties' (sic). To the same writer she said, concerning her early performances in tragedy: 'I hate to have a page dragging my tail about. Why do they not give [Mrs.] Porter these parts? She can put on a better tragedy face than I can.' Mrs. Cross had in 1699 temporarily deserted the stage, and Anne Oldfield made in that year, according to her biographer Egerton, her first appearance in that actress's part of Candiope in Dryden's 'Secret Love, or the Maiden Queen.' No record of Mrs. Cross in that character is preserved, although she played five years later Florimel in the same piece.

The first character in which Mrs. Oldfield is traced is Alinda, an original part in a prose adaptation by Vanbrugh of the ' Pilgrim ' of Beaumont and Fletcher, produced in 1700 at Drury Lane. In 1700 she was also the original Aurelia in the 'Perjured Husband, or the Adventures of Venice,' of Mrs. Carroll (i.e. Susannah Centlivre [q. v.]), and Sylvia in Oldmixon's opera ' The Grove, or Love's Paradise.' In 1700 she was the original Miranda in the 'Humours of the Age,' attributed to Baker ; Anne of Brittanie in Mrs. Trotter's 'Unhappy Penitent,' the prologue to which she spoKe; and Queen Helen in Settle's ' Virgin Prophetess, or the Fate of Troy; in 1702, Uimene in Higgons's 'Generous Conqueror, or Timely Discovery;' Camilla in Bumaby's 'Modish Husband;' Lady Sharlot in Steele's 'Funeral, or Grief à la mode;' and Jacinta in Vanbrugh's' False Friend,' the prologue to which she recited ; and in 1703 Luda in Furfey's 'Old Mode and the New, or Country Miss with her Furbeloe : 'Lucia in Estcourt's 'Fair Example, or the Modish Citizens;' and Belliza in Mrs. Carroll's 'Love's Contrivance, or Le Médecin malgré lui.' She also played Hellena in 'The Rover.'

During this time her personal graces won recognition rather than her abilities. Wholly inexpert at the outset, she was long in acquiring a method. Colley Cibber, who watched her opening career, had grave doubts as to her future ; and Critick, in Gildon's 'Comparison between the Two Stages,' 1702, speaks of her and Mrs. Rogers as 'rubbish that ought to be swept off the stage with the dust and the filth' (p. 200). Cibber first recognised her merits when, at Bath in 1703, she replaced Mrs. Verbruggen [q. v.] as Leimora in 'Sir Courtly Nice' (see Gent. Mag. 1761, p. 264). From this time she began to improve, and two years later she stood high in public favour. In Steele's 'Lying Lover, or the Ladies' Friendship,' she was, on 2 Dec. 1703, the original Victoria; and on 6 March 1704 the original Queen Mary in Banks's 'Albion Queens.' Owing to the illness of Mrs. Verbruggen and the secession of Mrs. Bracegirdle, the part of Lady Betty Modish in Cibber's 'Careless Husband,' on 7 Dec. 1704, was, with some reluctance, confided to her. In a spirit more magnanimous than he often exhibited, Cibber subsequently owned that a large share in the favourable reception of this piece was due to her, praising the excellence of her acting and her manner of conversing, and saying that many sentiments in the character might almost be regarded as originally her own. In Steele's 'Tender Husband, or the Accomplished Fools,' on 23 April 1705, she was the original Biddy Tipkin. After the union of Drury Lane and Dorset Garden theatres, she was, on 30 Oct. 1705, the first Arabella in Baker's ' Hampstead Heath.' During the season she played the following parts, all original : Lady Reveller in the 'Basset Table' of Mrs. Carroll, Izadora in Cibber's 'Perolla and Izadora,' Viletta in the 'Fashionable Lover, or Wit in Necessity,' and Sylvia in Farquhar's 'Recruiting Officer.' Joining the seceders from Drury Lane to the Haymarket, she made her first appearance at the latter house as Elvira in the 'Spanish Friar,' playing also Lady Lurewell ; Celia in 'Volpone, Monimia in the 'Orphan,' and many other characters ; and being the original Isabella in Mrs. Centlivre's ' Platonick Lady,' Florimel in Cibber s ' Marriage k la mode, or the Comical Lovers,' Mrs. Sullen in Farquhar's 'Beaux' Stratagem,' and Ismena in Smith's 'Phædra and Hippolytus.' At the same house in 1707-8 she created Lady Dainty in Cibber's 'Double Gallant, or Sick Lady's Cure;' Ethelinda in Rowe's 'Royal Convert ; ' and Mrs. Conquest in Cibber's 'Lady's Last Stake,' and she also played Narcissa in Cibber's * Love's Last Shift.' Returning in 1708 to Drury Lane, her principal parts — none of them original — were: Angelica in 'Love for Love,' Elvira in 'Love makes a Man,' Semandra in 'Mithridates,' Second Constantia in the 'Chances,' Euphronia in Æsop,' Lady Harriet in the 'Funeral,' and Teresia in Shadwell's 'Squire of Alsatia.' On 14 Dec. she was the original Lady Rodomont in Baker's 'Fine Lady's Airs, or an Equipage of Lovers;' and on 11 Jan. 1709 Lucinda in 'Rival Fools,' Cibber's alteration of Fletcher's 'Wit at several Weapons.' Once more at the Haymarket, in partnership with Swiney, Wilks, Rh


text:
Hoyle's Games Modernized/Blind Hookey

BLIND HOOKEY.

The players, of whom there may be any number, cut for deal, the lowest having the preference. The pack is then shuffled by the player on the dealer's right hand, and afterwards, if he so please, by the dealer himself, after which it is cut by the right-hand player. The two halves are then re-united, and the pack is passed to the player on the left of the dealer, who cuts from the top a small quantity of cards (not less than four, nor more than his due proportion of the pack). The pack is then passed to the next player, who cuts a similar portion, and so on round the circle, the cards left belonging to the dealer. No one looks at his cards, but makes his stake on pure speculation; hence the name "blind" hookey. The dealer then turns up his cards, and shows the bottom one; the other players do the same. Each player holding a higher card than that of the dealer receives the amount of his stake; all below or equal pay the dealer. This is repeated until a hand occurs in which the dealer is a loser all round, when the deal is at an end, and the next player deals.

A second method is as under: The cards having been shuffled and cut, the dealer cuts them into three portions. Two of these are for the company, the third for himself. The other players place their stakes on whichever two packets they please, the rejected packet being taken by the dealer. The stakes having been made, the cards are turned up, and the players receive or pay as the bottom cards of their packets prove to be higher or lower than that of the dealer.

title: Hoyle's Games Modernized/Blind Hookey


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/104

 Dogget, and Cibber, Mrs. Oldfield played many light comedy parts—Mrs. Brittle, Berinthia in the ‘Relapse,’ and Lætitia in the ‘Old Bachelor’—and was the original Belinda in Mrs. Centlivre's ‘The Man's Bewitched, or the Devil to Pay.’

Returning to Drury Lane, which thenceforward she never quitted for any other house, she was, on 7 April 1711, the first Fidelia in ‘Injured Love.’ Between this period and her retirement and death she took many original parts, the principal of which are: Arabella, in the ‘Wife's Relief, or the Husband's Cure,’ on 12 Nov. 1711, Johnson's alteration of Shirley's ‘Gamester;’ Camilla in Mrs. Centlivre's ‘Perplexed Lovers,’ 19 Jan. 1712; Andromache in the ‘Distressed Mother,’ 17 March 1712, adapted by Ambrose Philips [q. v.] from Racine; Victoria in Charles Shadwell's ‘Humours of the Army,’ 29 Jan. 1713; Emilia in ‘Cinna's Conspiracy,’ 19 Feb. 1713; Marcia in Addison's ‘Cato,’ 14 April 1713; Eriphile in Charles Johnson's ‘Victim,’ 5 Jan. 1714; Jane Shore in Rowe's ‘Jane Shore,’ 2 Feb. 1714; Violante in Mrs. Centlivre's ‘Wonder a Woman keeps a Secret,’ 27 April 1714; the heroine of Rowe's ‘Lady Jane Grey,’ 20 April 1715; Leonora in Mrs. Centlivre's ‘Cruel Gift,’ 17 Dec. 1716; Mrs. Townley in ‘Three Hours after Marriage’ of Gay, and, presumably, Pope and Arbuthnot, 16 Jan. 1717; Maria in Cibber's ‘Nonjuror,’ 6 Dec. 1717; Mandane in Young's ‘Busiris,’ 7 March 1719; Celona in Southern's ‘Spartan Dame,’ 11 Dec. 1719; Sophronia in Cibber's ‘Refusal, or the Lady's Philosophy,’ 14 Jan. 1721; Mrs. Watchit in Mrs. Centlivre's ‘Artifice,’ 2 Oct. 1722; Queen Margaret in Philips's ‘Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester,’ 15 Feb. 1723; Princess Catharine in Hill's ‘Henry V,’ altered from Shakespeare, 5 Dec. 1723; the Captive in Gay's ‘Captives,’ 15 Jan. 1724; Cleopatra in Cibber's ‘Cæsar in Egypt,’ 9 Dec. 1724; Lady Townly in the ‘Provoked Husband,’ 10 Jan. 1727; Lady Matchless in Fielding's ‘Love in Several Masques,’ 16 Feb. 1727; Clarinda in the ‘Humours of Oxford,’ attributed to Miller, 9 Jan. 1730; and Sophonisba in Thomson's ‘Sophonisba.’ She kept her powers to the end, acting this last part superbly; in her delivery of the line addressed to Wilks as Massinissa—

she startled him, and carried away the audience. For her benefit, on 19 March 1730, she chose the ‘Fair Penitent,’ presumably playing Calista, ‘a gentleman’ appearing as Lothario. On 28 April 1730 she made, as Lady Brute in the ‘Provoked Wife,’ her last appearance on the stage. In her last years she suffered much pain, and tears are said to have often trickled from her eyes while she was acting. She died on 23 Oct. 1730, in her own house, at 59 (afterwards 60) Grosvenor Street. She had previously resided in New Southampton Street, Strand, and in the Haymarket. After lying in state in the Jerusalem Chamber, her body was buried beneath the monument of Congreve in Westminster Abbey, at the west end of the nave. According to the testimony of her maid, Margaret Saunders, she was interred ‘in a very fine Brussels lace head, a holland shift and double ruffles of the same lace, a pair of new kid gloves, and her body wrapped in a winding-sheet.’ This elicited from Pope the well-known lines:—

Her natural son, Arthur Mainwaring, was the chief mourner at her funeral, the pallbearers being the Lord De la Warr, John lord Hervey of Ickworth [q. v.], George Bubb Dodington, Charles Hedges, Walter Carey, and Captain Elliot. An application by Brigadier-general Churchill for permission to erect a monument to her in Westminster Abbey was refused by the dean.

She left two illegitimate sons, one by Arthur Mainwaring [q. v.], and the other by General Charles Churchill [q. v.] Mainwaring left almost his entire estate to her and Arthur, his son by her. A report was current that she was married to General Churchill. Princess (afterwards Queen) Caroline told her that she had heard of the marriage, and was answered, 'So it is said, your royal highness; but we have not owned it yet.'

Her son by Churchill married Lady Mary Walpole, and Mrs. Oldfield was thus connected with some of the principal families in England, including that of the Duke of Wellington. By her will, proved on 2 Nov. 1730, she left her fortune, which for those days was considerable, between these two youths, after the payment of legacies to her mother, her aunt Jane Gourlaw, and her maid Margaret Saunders. Her house in Grosvenor Street she left to her son Charles Churchill, who died there on 13 April 1812.

Ample testimony is borne to Mrs. Oldfield's beauty, vivacity, and charm, and to the excellence of her acting. As an exponent of both tragedy and comedy she can


text:
The New International Encyclopædia/Cæsarea Palestinæ

CÆS'ARE'A (Gk. Καισάρεια, Kaisareia) PAL'ESTI'NÆ. An ancient seacoast town of Palestine, on the site of which is the modern El-Kaisariyeh, 32 miles north of Jaffa (Map: Palestine, B 2). It was built by Herod the Great and named in honor of Augustus Cæsar. The site was originally called Strato's Tower. Herod made here a magnificent harbor by constructing a strong breakwater (the ruins of which still remain) on which he lavished vast sums of money. The town was built at great expense, with an amphitheatre, temples, and other like structures (Josephus, Ant. xv. 3-5; 9-6; xvi. 5-1). Its water-supply and drainage system were of unusual excellence. It became the military capital of Palestine, where the Roman procurators had their headquarters. It is noted in New Testament history as the place where Peter preached the Gospel to Cornelius, the first Gentile convert to Christianity (Acts x.), and as the scene of Paul's two years' imprisonment (Acts xxiii. 33, xxvi. 32). In the great war with Rome, A.D. 66-70, Cæsarea suffered the almost total extermination of its Jewish inhabitants. Here Vespasian had his headquarters and was proclaimed Emperor, A.D. 69. Soon after he constituted it a Roman colony. After the fall of Jerusalem (A.D. 70) it became the metropolis of Palestine. During the early Christian centuries Cæsarea continued to be a place of importance. Pamphilus, pupil and friend of Origen, had here a famous library (Third Century). Eusebius, the father of Church history, was Bishop of the place 315-318. The town was conquered by the Moslems in the Seventh Century. The Crusaders captured and plundered it in 1101. Among the booty they found, it was claimed, the Holy Grail. (See .) After various fortunes at the hands of the Crusaders, who rebuilt it on a smaller scale, it was finally destroyed by the Sultan Bibars in 1265, The modern place is only a village on the ancient site.


text:
Page:Australian Emigrant 1854.djvu/96

 their graceful forms and giving a tropical character to the scene.

"Is not this an earthly paradise?" said Hugh.

"No:" replied the stranger solemnly, "for it has been stained with human blood."

"I had forgotten that" said Hugh; "why did you call it to my mind? Methought it was a spot whereon a man could dwell for his life, willingly resigning all thoughts of the busy world, and hold converse with the God who made it.—It is most lovely—I never remember experiencing such a feeling of happiness as I do now."

"Happiness!" said the stranger; "I would that I could feel like you.—I did once, but years of——" and here he burst into a rough laugh, and concluded "don't you think I preach well at times?"

"If you can regard a scene like this with indifference," said Hugh, "I do not envy you, and should be inclined to think that the life you appear to have led must have tended to destroy your nobler self."

"I have," said the other, looking up, "been used to such scenes of late years. I felt as you do once; but have wandered long in the woods, and it takes more violent excitements to move me now." He rose, and putting on his knapsack, said, "You have been so kind already to a stranger, that I am emboldened to ask a favor of you; will you spare a little of your flour and ammunition? for I intend leaving this part to day."

Hugh, taking his little store out, put it into his hand, saying, they should reach a station soon, belonging to a Mr. Dodge;" and here," he said, "is a little tobacco, powder, and shot." The stranger preferred bullets, if they could be spared, and received a few in addition. "You should have more," said Hugh, "but our stock is low."

title: Page:Australian Emigrant 1854.djvu/96


text:
The New International Encyclopædia/Cæsarea Philippi

CÆSAREA PHILIP'PI. An ancient town of Palestine, near the foot of the southern slope of Mount Hermon. On its site is the modern village of Banias, formerly Paneas. Close by the place is a cavern whence issues one of the main sources of the river Jordan. In the Greek period this spring was consecrated to the god Pan. About B.C. 20 the Emperor Augustus gave this region to Herod the Great, who built a beautiful temple of white stone near the old Greek sanctuary, dedicating it to Augustus. On Herod's death the place became a part of the

tetrarchy of his son Philip, who built here a town, calling it Cæsarea. It became known as the Cæsarea of Philip (Cæsarea Philippi) (Josephus, Ant. xv. 10-3, xviii. 2-1; Wars of the Jews, i. 21-3, ii. 9-1). Jesus visited the neighborhood for a short period of rest, at which time he more fully disclosed his Messiahship to the disciples (Matt. xvi. 13ff. and parallels). The name of the town was later changed to Neronias in honor of Nero. But the old name Paneas persisted, and outlived the others, since the modern Banias is but a corruption of Paneas.