text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/108

 Countess Maud, was born about 1299, and was called ‘of Grosmont,’ possibly from the place of his birth. He is said to have gone while a young man to fight as a crusader in Prussia, Rhodes, Cyprus, and Granada, to have been so renowned a captain that he was known as ‘the father of soldiers,’ and the noblest youths of France and Spain were anxious to learn war under his banner (, p. 161). He served with distinction in the Scottish war of 1333, especially at the taking of Dalkeith. In 1334 his father made over to him the towns and castles of Kidwelly and Carwathlan, with other lands in Wales, and on 3 Feb. following he was summoned to parliament as Henry de Lancaster. On 15 April 1336 Edward III, who was his cousin, appointed him to command an army against the Scots (Fœdera, ii. 936); the king went to Scotland in person, and Henry, who was then a knight-banneret, was with him at Perth, and on 12 Dec. was named as a commissioner for the defence of England against the French (ib. p. 953). On 16 March 1337 Edward created him Earl of Derby, one of the titles borne by his father, who was still living, as the heir of Earl Thomas, and assigned him a yearly pension from the customs. In November he was sent, along with Sir Walter Manny, to attack the garrison of the Count of Flanders in Cadsant. There he showed himself a gallant knight, for on landing he advanced so near to the fortifications that he was struck down. Sir Walter Manny saw his danger, and shouting, ‘Lancaster for the Earl of Derby!’ rescued him (, i. 137, 140). When the king sailed from the Orwell for Antwerp in July 1338, Derby sailed from Great Yarmouth in command of the troops conveyed by the northern fleet, and joined the king's ships in the Channel (Fœdera, ii. 1050). He remained with the king, and in October 1339 commanded, under Edward in person, the third battalion of the army at La Flamengrie or Vironfosse [see under ]. Edward was anxious to be again in England, and in December offered to leave Derby in Flanders as a hostage for his return, for he was deeply in debt. However, the earl accompanied him to England in the following February (ib. pp. 1100, 1115), and on 24 June took part in the sea-fight before Sluys, where he behaved with much gallantry (, ii. 37). When Edward returned to England on 30 Nov. he left the earl in prison in Flanders as a security for his debts, and took measures to procure his release through the intervention of the Leopardi Company. Derby was detained for some months, and had moreover lent the king his jewels, which were pledged for 2,100l. (Fœdera, pp. 1143, 1159, 1176). On 10 Oct. 1341 he was appointed captain-general of the army against the Scots. The English had by this time lost nearly the whole country, and this expedition failed to check the progress of the reconquest; Stirling had already been lost, and Edinburgh Castle was soon lost also. A truce for six months was made in December. The earl spent Christmas at Roxburgh, and while there challenged Sir William Douglas, the knight of Liddesdale [q. v.], to tilt with him; Douglas was vanquished. He also persuaded Sir Alexander Ramsay of Dalhousie to accept his challenge to joust, twenty a side, and in all his exploits gained glory and honour. On 3 April 1342 he was appointed along with others to arrange a peace or a truce with the Scots. In October Derby accompanied the king on his fruitless expedition to Brittany. In the spring of 1343 he was sent on embassies to Clement VI at Avignon, and to Alfonso XI of Castile. While in Spain he and his fellow-ambassador, the Earl of Salisbury, did good service against the Moors at the siege of Algeciras (Chronicle of Alfonso XI). On his return to England he went northwards in August to negotiate with the Scots (cf., p. 158). At the tournament held by the king at Windsor in February 1344 he acted as steward of England, his father's office, and joined in the oath for the establishment of a ‘round table.’ In March he received full powers to treat with the kings of Castle, Portugal, and Arragon, in conjunction with Richard, earl of Arundel (Fœdera, iii. 8).

On 10 May 1345 Derby was appointed lieutenant and captain of Aquitaine, an office which he held until 1 Feb. 1347, and on 22 Sept. succeeded his father as Earl of Lancaster and of Leicester, and steward of England. He sailed from Southampton for Gascony, probably in the middle of June, in company with Sir Walter Manny, and with a force of five hundred knights and esquires, and two thousand archers. His orders were to defend Guienne, and if he thought well, to attack Périgord and Saintogne. Having landed at Bayonne, and spent about a week there and fifteen days at Bordeaux, he set out towards Bergerac, where a number of lords on the French king's side were assembled under the count of Lille-Jourdain to keep the passage of the Dordogne. Pressing on, Lancaster gained the suburbs of the town after a sharp struggle, and the next day, 24 Aug., took the place by assault. He then captured many towns and fortresses in Upper Gascony, failing, however, to take Périgueux, in spite of a plot to deliver it to him. Auberoche


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Weimar

WEIMAR, vī'mär, Germany, the capital of the grand duchy of Saxe-Weimar, on the Ilm, 13 miles east of Erfurt It stands in a beautiful valley surrounded by hills, on ground partly elevated and partly flat. It is irregularly built except in the suburban portions. Its notable public edifices are the grand-ducal palace, a handsome structure erected partly under the superintendence of Goethe; the so-called Red and Yellow castles, now united and occupied by several public departments; the grand-ducal library (in the Green Castle), containing 300,000 volumes and a large collection of maps; the museum; the Stadtkirche, with an altar-piece, one of the finest works of Lucas Cranach, in which he has introduced portraits of himself and Luther and Melanchthon; and the modern Gothic town-house. The public monuments comprise the Goethe-Schiller monument in bronze, statues of Herder, Wieland, the composer Hummel, the Grand-Duke Karl August and various others, and a monumental fountain. Goethe's house is now used as a Goethe National Museum, and Schiller's contains relics of its former distinguished owner. A Goethe and Schiller Archives building was opened in 1896. Goethe and Schiller are interred in the grand-ducal vault in the new cemetery. Stretching away from the palace is a fine park on the banks of the Ilm. Weimar has a gymnasium, a realgymnasium, academy of painting, school of drawing, normal school and other educational institutions. It has neither trade nor manufactures of much consequence, the manufactures of iron, wood, straw, leather and cloth being carried on to some extent, but as

the capital of the duchy it is the seat of the legislature and of all the more important courts and public offices. It long ranked as a sort of “German Athens” in consequence of the enlightened patronage which the Duke Karl August (d. 1828) afforded to the four great literary men of Germany, Goethe, Schiller, Herder and Weiland. In 1919 the National Assembly of the German nation met at Weimar and there the constitution of the new German Republic was made and adopted. The Treaty of Versailles (1919) was ratified at Weimar during the session of the assembly. Pop. 33,000.

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


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/109

 surrendered without a blow, and the earl advanced to Libourne, which then belonged to the English (M. Luce has pointed out Froissart's error on this matter). Hearing that the Count of Lille-Jourdain and all the Gascon lords of the French party were besieging the garrison which he had left in Auberoche, he hastened thither without waiting to be reinforced by the Earl of Pembroke, who was in garrison at Bergerac, and, though his force consisted only of about three hundred lances and six hundred archers, gave battle on 21 Oct. to the French lords, who are said to have had more than ten thousand men. He won a splendid victory, and treated his many prisoners with courtesy (, iii. 62–73, 292–5). He afterwards seems to have divided his forces into two bodies, which acted at once on the Garonne and the Lot, occupying Aiguillon, and taking Meilhan, Monsegur, La Réole, which offered a stout resistance, Castelmoron, and Villefranche (ib. pp. 91, 92). The king ordered that thanksgivings for these successes should be made in England in May 1346. The coming of the Duke of Normandy with a large army into Gascony prevented the earl from making further advances, and he was fully occupied for some months in sending help to Aiguillon, to which the duke laid siege before the middle of April, in cutting off the besiegers' supplies, and in such other operations as the small force at his disposal rendered possible. When the duke knew that King Edward had landed in Normandy, he was anxious to make a truce with the earl, and as this was refused raised the siege of Aiguillon on 20 Aug. Lancaster being thus rid of the duke's army marched into Agenois, took Villeréal and other towns and castles, occupied Aiguillon, and strengthened the fortifications. Marching again to La Réole, he gathered the Gascon lords of the English party, and after dividing his forces into three bodies led one into Saintogne, and on 12 Sept. occupied Sauveterre, and a week later arrived at Châteauneuf on the Charente, and strengthened the bridge there, and then advanced to St. Jean d'Angély and took it. Having carried Lusignan by assault, he summoned Poitiers on 4 Oct., and his summons being rejected stormed the town; his men made a great slaughter, sparing neither women nor children, and took so much rich booty that it was said that they made no account of any raiment save cloth of gold or silver and plumes. After staying eight days at Poitiers he returned to St. Jean d'Angély (Letter from Lancaster,, pp. 372–6), where he entertained the ladies splendidly. The campaign ended, and he returned to London on 13 Jan. 1347. Towards the end of May he took over supplies and reinforcements to the king, who was besieging Calais, and remained there during the rest of the siege with a following of eight hundred men-at-arms and two thousand archers. When King Philip attempted to raise the siege in the last days of July, the earl held the bridge of Nieuley over the Hem, to the south-west of the town, so that the French could not get to the English camp except by the marshes on the Sangate side, and while occupied on this service he was one of the commissioners appointed to meet the two cardinals who tried to arrange a peace (ib. p. 393;, iv. 51). His expenses during the siege amounted to about 109 marks a day, and in return the king granted him the town and castle of Bergerac, with the right of coinage, and gave him the prisoners of war then at St. Jean d'Angély.

Lancaster took a prominent part in the tournaments and other festivities which were held after the king's return to England, and was one of the original knights or founders of the order of the Garter [see under ]. On 25 Sept. 1348 he received full powers to treat with the French at Calais about the truce, and on 11 Oct. to treat with the Count of Flanders, and was with the king at Calais in November, when the truce with France was prolonged, and a treaty was made with Louis de Mâle. He was engaged in further negotiations with France during the spring of 1349 (Fœdera, iii. 173, 175, 178, 182;, pp. 98, 102). On 20 Aug. the king created him Earl of Lincoln, on the 21st appointed him captain and vicegerent of the duchy of Gascony, and on 20 Oct. captain and vicegerent of Poitou, giving him a monopoly of the sale of the salt of the bay and of Poitou generally (Fœdera, iii. 189, 190). In November he crossed over to Gascony with Lord Stafford and others to strengthen the province against the attacks of John of France. He took part in the sea-fight called ‘Espagnols-sur-mer’ in August 1350 [see under EDWARD III], and rescued the ship of the Prince of Wales, attacking the huge Spanish ship with which she was engaged. On 6 March 1351 he was made Duke of Lancaster, and his earldom of Lancaster was made palatine, the earliest instance of the creation of a palatine earldom under that name. The only ducal creation before this had been that of the Prince of Wales as Duke of Cornwall. Two days later Lancaster was appointed captain and admiral of the western fleet (Fœdera, iii. 215). About Easter he made a raid from Calais, attacked Boulogne, but was unable to take it because his scaling-ladders were too


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/110

 short, spoiled Thérouanne, Etaples, and other places, burnt 120 vessels of different sizes, and, after riding as far as St. Omer, returned to Calais with much booty. He received powers as an ambassador to Flanders and Germany, and set out in command of a company of nobles to fight as a crusader in Prussia. While he and his band were in ‘high Germany’ they were detained, and he was forced to pay a ransom of three thousand gold pieces. On arriving in Prussia he found that a truce had been made between the Christians and the heathen. After tarrying awhile with the king of Poland (Casimir the Great) he returned to England after Easter 1352. He soon afterwards received a challenge from Otto, son of the Duke of Brunswick, a stipendiary of the French king. On his way to the crusade he had been informed at Cologne that Otto had engaged to waylay him and deliver him to King John. On his return to Cologne he complained of Otto's intended attack before the Marquis of Juliers and many lords and others. Otto thereupon sent him a letter, giving him the lie, and offering to meet him at Guisnes or elsewhere, as the French king should appoint. Having accepted the challenge, and procured a safe-conduct from the French king, he crossed to Calais a fortnight before Christmas 1352 with fifty men-at-arms and a strong company of foot, and as he was marching to Guisnes was met by the marshal of France, who conducted him to Hesdin. There he was met by James, son of Louis, duke of Bourbon, with a valiant company, who accompanied him to Paris, where he was enthusiastically received. King John treated him graciously, and he lodged with his kinsman, the king of Navarre. The day before the combat the French nobles made a fruitless endeavour to arrange the quarrel. The lists were appointed in the presence of the king and his lords, and each combatant swore on the sacrament to the truth of his cause. But after they mounted their chargers Otto trembled so violently that he could not put on his helmet or wield his spear, and at last by his friends' advice declared that he forebore the quarrel, and submitted himself to the king's orders. The duke protested that, though he would have been reconciled before he entered the lists, he now would not listen to any proposals. Otto, however, would not fight, and the king, after making him retract his words, held a feast at which he caused the two enemies to be reconciled. The duke refused the king's offer of rich treasures, and accepting but a thorn from the Saviour's crown of thorns, which he took back with him for his collegiate church at Leicester. He returned to England, and went to St. Albans, where the king was spending Christmas, and Edward received him with much rejoicing (, cols. 2603–5;, pp. 121, 122, 287, 288).

On 6 Nov. 1353 Lancaster was appointed a commissioner to treat with France, and on 26 Jan. 1354 received full powers to form an alliance with Charles of Navarre (Fœdera, iii. 269, 271). On 28 Aug. he was sent as chief of an embassy, which included the Bishop of Norwich and the Earl of Arundel, to take part in a conference before Innocent VI at Avignon, where the pope endeavoured to mediate a peace between England and France. He rode with two hundred men-at-arms, and when he arrived at Avignon on Christmas eve was met by a procession of cardinals and bishops and about two thousand horsemen, and so great a crowd assembled to behold him that he could scarcely make his way across the bridge. He remained seven weeks at Avignon, and during all that time whoever came to his quarters was liberally regaled with meat and drink, for he had caused a hundred casks of wine to be placed in the cellar against his coming. With the pope and the cardinals he was very popular (, col. 2608;, p. 124). At Avignon Charles of Navarre, who had been forced to flee thither by the French king, complained of his wrongs, swearing that he would willingly enter into an alliance with the king of England against the king of France. Lancaster promised that, if the king would, the alliance should be made, and that he would send troops and ships to Guernsey and Jersey to help him. When the conference was over Lancaster returned home, not without some danger from the French. With Edward's approval he fitted out a fleet of thirty-eight large ships at Rotherhithe, each with his streamer, and having on board the king's sons, Lionel of Antwerp and John of Gaunt, and three earls. On 10 July the king went on board, and the squadron sailed to Greenwich. Contrary winds delayed the expedition until news came that Charles of Navarre was reconciled to the French king [see under ]. Lancaster crossed with the king to Calais, and in November took part in the raid which Edward made in Artois and Picardy. He returned with the king when they heard of the taking of Berwick, and served in the winter campaign in Scotland, apparently leading a detachment of troops in advance of the main body, and penetrating further into the country. During May 1356 he collected a force to help the king of Navarre, who was again at enmity with the French king. His army assembled at Southampton, and part of the troops sailed on 1 June; it was thought a marvellous


text: I Dips Me Lid

title: I Dips Me Lid


text: Talk:I Dips Me Lid

title: Talk:I Dips Me Lid


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/111

 thing that the ships landed them at La Hogue and were back at Southampton again in five days. In company with John of Montfort, the youthful claimant of the duchy of Brittany, the duke sailed for La Hogue and landed on the 18th. At Cherbourg he was joined by Philip of Navarre and Geoffrey Harcourt; their united forces numbered nine hundred men-at-arms and fourteen hundred archers. They marched to Montebourg, and thence on the 22nd to Carentan, by St. Lo to Torigny on the 24th, by Evrecy to Lisieux on the 28th, and on the next day to Pont Audemer, for a special object of the campaign was to relieve that and other towns belonging to the king of Navarre which were besieged by the forces of the French king. On the approach of the duke's army the siege was raised, and he remained there until 2 July to strengthen the fortifications; he next marched to Bec Herlewin, and thence by Conches, where he fired the castle, to Breteuil, and so to Verneuil, where he did some damage. Hearing that the French king was coming against him with a large army he retreated to Laigle on the 8th, and when heralds came to him bringing him a challenge to battle from King John he replied that he was ready to fight if the king interrupted him. He continued his retreat by Argentan and Torigny, and returned to Montebourg on the 13th with large booty and two thousand horses, which he had taken from the French (, pp. 462–8;, col. 2612). He next marched towards Brittany, having on 3 Aug. been appointed captain of the duchy by the king, with the concurrence of John of Montfort (Fœdera, iii. 335). He made an attempt to effect a junction with the Prince of Wales in the latter part of the month, but was out-manœuvred at Les Ponts de Cé, near Angers [see under the ]. In Brittany he campaigned successfully on behalf of the widowed duchess and her son, and on 3 Oct. formed the siege of Rennes, which was defended by the Viscount de Rohan and other lords for Charles of Blois. The siege lasted until 3 July 1357, when the duke was reluctantly forced to abandon it in consequence of a truce. During 1358 and a large part of 1359 Lancaster was probably much in England, but he sent Sir Robert Knolles and other captains to uphold the cause of the king of Navarre in Normandy. On 5 April 1359 David II of Scotland [see ] created him Earl of Moray.

About 1 Oct. Edward sent the duke to Calais to keep order among the rabble of adventurers who were gathered there to await the king's arrival and the beginning of a new campaign. In order to keep them employed the duke led them on a raid. He marched past St. Omer, remained four days at the abbey of St. Éloy, turned towards Peronne, marched leisurely along the valley of the Somme, his followers wasting the country; attacked the town of Bray, but failed to take it, and was at Toussaint when he heard of the king's arrival at Calais. He led his host to meet the king, accompanied him to Rheims, and while the army lay before that city on 29 Dec. led a party against Cernay, about eight leagues distant, took the town and burnt it, and after doing damage to other places in the district returned to the camp. When Edward determined after Easter 1360 to leave the neighbourhood of Paris and lead his army into the Loire country, he appointed Lancaster and two others to command the first division. At Chartres the duke persuaded him to listen favourably to the French proposals for peace, and took the leading part in arranging the treaty of Bretigni, which was concluded in his presence on 8 May. At the feast which followed he and the king's sons and other lords served the kings of England and France bareheaded. On 8 July he joined the Prince of Wales in conducting the French king to Calais; on 22 Aug. he was appointed Edward's commissioner in France, and on 24 Oct. was at Calais when the treaty was ratified. He died at Leicester of the pestilence on 13 May 1361. He was buried with much pomp on the south side of the high altar of his collegiate church at Leicester, in the presence of the king and many prelates and nobles, for his death was felt to be a national calamity. By his wife Isabel, daughter of Henry, lord Beaumont, he had two daughters: Maud (d. 1362), who married first Ralph, eldest son of Ralph, earl of Stafford, and secondly, in 1352, with the king's approval, during her father's absence in Poland, William, count of Holland, son of the Emperor Lewis of Bavaria; and Blanche, who married John of Gaunt [q. v.]

Henry of Lancaster was esteemed throughout Western Europe as a perfect knight; he was brave, courteous, charitable, just, and at once magnificent and personally temperate in his habits. He had a thorough knowledge of public affairs, was a wise counsellor, and was loved and trusted by Edward III beyond any other of his lords. Like his father, Earl Henry, he was religious, and during his last days is said to have been much given to prayer and good works, and to have written a book of devotions called ‘Mercy Gramercy.’ In this he set down first all the sins which he could remember to have committed, asking God's mercy on account of them, and then all the good things which he had received, adding a


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/113

 On 1 June they set out for England, and on the last day of the month arrived at Windsor. At the celebration of the feast of St. George at Windsor, on 2 July, the prince was invested with the order of the Garter, on which occasion the English courtiers are said to have been specially impressed by his ‘quick, witty answers, princely carriage, and reverend obeisance at the altar.’ On account of the increase of the plague the prince was the same month removed from Windsor to Oatlands, Surrey, where ‘he took house to himself.’ He also occasionally resided at Hampton Court. During the visit of the Constable of Castile to England in 1604 a proposal was made, at the instance of the queen, for the marriage of the prince to the Infanta Anne, eldest daughter of Philip III, and at that time heiress to the Spanish throne; but the king of Spain demanded that he should be sent to Spain to be educated as a catholic, and the negotiations proved futile. They were renewed again in 1605, and also in 1607, but without any definite result. In August 1605 the prince matriculated at Magdalen College, Oxford (, Fasti, i. 316).

In a letter of 31 Oct. 1606 De la Boderie, the French ambassador, writes of the prince: ‘None of his pleasures savour the least of a child. He is a particular lover of horses and what belongs to them, but is not fond of hunting; and when he goes to it it is rather for the pleasure of galloping than that which the dogs give him. He plays willingly enough at tennis, and at another Scots diversion very like mall [golf, no doubt]; but this always with persons older than himself, as if he despised those of his own age. He studies two hours, and employs the rest of his time in tossing the pike, or leaping, or shooting with the bow, or throwing the bar, or vaulting, or some other exercise of that kind; and he is never idle’ (quoted in, pp. 75–6). The prince was clearly fonder of outdoor exercise than of study. The ambassador adds: ‘He is already feared by those who have the management of affairs, and specially the Earl of Salisbury, who appears to be greatly apprehensive of the prince's ascendant; as the prince, on the other hand, shows little esteem for his lordship.’ The prince had also the reputation of being very decorous in his behaviour, strict in his attendance on public worship, and punctilious in regard to the manners of all those in attendance on him or in his service. He ordered boxes at his several houses, ‘causing all those who did swear in his hearing to pay money to the same, which were after duly given to the poor’ (, Account of Prince Henry, 1751 edit. p. 22). He took a special interest both in naval and military affairs, endeavouring thoroughly to master the art of war in all its branches. On 10 June 1607 he was admitted a member of the London Merchant Taylors' Company. In 1608, when the prince's servant and friend Phineas Pett was accused of misdemeanors in connection with the navy, the prince stood by him during the inquiry, and on his being declared innocent expressed the opinion that his accusers ‘worthily deserved hanging.’ The prince was equally outspoken in regard to the treatment of his friend Sir Walter Raleigh, declaring, in reference to Raleigh's imprisonment, that no man but his father would keep such a bird in such a cage.

On 4 June 1610 Henry was created Earl of Chester and Prince of Wales, after which he held his court at St. James's, which was set apart for his residence. It soon became much more frequented than that of his father, who is said to have peevishly exclaimed, in reference to his son's popularity, ‘ Will he bury me alive?’ In April 1611 an application was made to the king of England on behalf of the Prince of Piedmont, eldest son of the Duke of Savoy, for the hand of the Princess Elizabeth, on condition that a marriage were also arranged between the Prince of Wales and the eldest daughter of the duke; but the proposal was received coldly in England. Sir Walter Raleigh wrote in opposition to it. It was not desired by the prince himself, although he veiled his disinclination to it to avoid irritating his father. Latterly, on a choice being submitted to him between the Savoyard princess and the eldest daughter of the regent of France, he gave an undecided answer, hinting that he would prefer not to be bound to either. All the while he nourished a secret plan of accompanying his sister to Germany, where it was his intention to choose a wife for himself. Matters, however, were destined to go no further; for on 10 Oct. 1612 he was seized with a severe illness. During the autumn he had been afflicted with lassitude, and occasionally severe headaches, but apparently gave insufficient heed to these symptoms. Even after being seriously ill he played at tennis in chilly weather with insufficient clothing. Next day he was unable to rise from his bed, and after various fluctuations he succumbed on 6 Nov. (cf. for narrative of the illness, Account, extracts from which are printed in , Desiderata; and also , Opera Medica, 1701; a translation of Mayerne's account is included in Dr. Norman Moore's pamphlet). He was buried in Westminster Abbey 8 Nov. The course of the illness puzzled the physicians, who, beyond declaring


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Weingartner, Felix

WEINGARTNER, vīn'gärt-nĕr, Felix Austrian composer: b. Zara, Dalmatia, 2 June 1863. He studied at the Leipzig Conservatory, having received a government scholarship, and in 1884 his opera, ‘Sakuntala,’ was brought out at Weimar under the patronage of Liszt. He was musical conductor at Königsberg, Dantzig and Hamburg in 1884-89 and in 1891 was appointed court conductor at Berlin. Ill health compelled the resignation of this post, and in 1898 he settled in Munich as conductor of the Kaim concerts. He has composed numerous songs, several symphonic poems, the operas ‘Malawika’ (1886); ‘Genesius’ (1892); ‘Kain und Abel’ (1914); ‘Dome Kobold’ (1916), etc. He has written ‘Die Lehre von der Wiedergeburt und das Musikalische’ (1895); ‘Beyreuth 1876 bis 1896’ (1897). Consult ‘Luies’ by Lusztig and by Raabe, both published in Berlin in 1908.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/114

 it to be fever, were unable further to determine its nature. A general opinion prevailed that he had been poisoned, some even hinting that he owed his death to the king's jealousy of his popularity, while other rumours pointed to Somerset, who was said to have been a rival with the prince for the affections of the Lady Essex. These surmises have been set at rest by the pamphlet of Dr. Norman Moore ‘On the Illness and Death of Henry, Prince of Wales,’ in which it is conclusively demonstrated that the case was one of typhoid fever.

The sudden illness and death of such a promising and popular heir to the throne caused a profound sensation throughout the kingdom, and occasioned an extraordinary number of elegies and lamentations, in prose and verse (see list in, Progresses of James I, pp. 504–12). ‘The lamentation made for him was so general,’ wrote Sir Simonds D'Ewes, ‘as men, women, and children partook of it.’ Bacon described him as slow of speech, pertinent in his questions, patient in listening, and of strong understanding. Bishop Goodman, in his ‘Diary’ (ed. Brewer, i. 250–251), states that ‘he did sometimes pry into the king's actions, and a little dislike them, … and truly I think he was a little self-willed.’ Henry was at least honest and courageous. Probably his abilities were considerably greater than those of his brother Charles; but he was equally headstrong, and there is every reason to suppose that he possessed quite as strict and stern notions in regard to kingly prerogatives.

Portraits by Mierevelt, C. Jonson, G. Honthorst, Paul Van Somer, and G. Jamesone were exhibited at the Stuart Exhibition in 1889, together with two miniatures and a painting of the prince and Anne of Denmark by an unknown artist (Catalogue, pp. 24, 26–8, 32, 70). A portrait by Mytens is engraved in Doyle's ‘Official Baronage,’ and a second portrait by Van Somer is in the National Gallery; at Windsor there is a miniature by Isaac Oliver, which has been engraved by Houbraken. There are other numerous engraved portraits (, Catalogue of Engraved Portraits, p. 47).

HENRY, (1639–1660), styled sometimes, third son of Charles I of England and Henrietta Maria, was born at Oatlands, Surrey, on 8 July 1639. In his infancy he was committed to the care of the Countess of Dorset, but on the surrender of the city of Oxford in April 1646, he was placed, along with his brother the Duke of York and his sister the Princess Elizabeth, under the charge of the Earl of Northumberland (, Hist. of the Rebellion, ed. 1819, iii. 94). They were sent to the earl's house at Sion, and when the king their father came to Hampton Court, had liberty to attend on him when he pleased (ib. p. 109). The Duke of Gloucester, the youngest of the three, was specially enjoined by the king ‘never to be persuaded or threatened out of the religion’ (ib.), but it is uncertain whether Charles feared that the puritans or the catholics would seek to convert him. The king also entreated him ‘never to accept or suffer himself to be made king whilst either of his brothers lived, in what part soever of the world they might be’ (ib. p. 110). After the escape of the Duke of York, while under the care of the Earl of Northumberland, Gloucester and the Princess Elizabeth were transferred to the keeping of the Countess of Leicester. The two had a last interview with their father on the day preceding his execution (29 Jan. 1648–9) [see, 1635–1650] (, Two last Years of Charles I). In June following they were sent to Penshurst, a seat of the Earl of Leicester in Kent, orders being given by parliament ‘that they should be treated without any addition of titles, and that they should sit at their meat as the children of the family did.’ Lovel, a gentleman of royalist sympathies, was also permitted to be Gloucester's tutor, and accompanied him also to Carisbrooke Castle in the Isle of Wight, whither the children were sent in August 1650. Elizabeth died at Carisbrooke (8 Sept. 1650); Gloucester remained there till the close of 1652, when Cromwell gave him permission to go abroad, 500l. being granted to defray the expenses of the journey. He set sail for Holland, and afterwards, at the special request of his mother, joined her in Paris. When his elder brother, Charles, left Paris for Germany in 1653, he proposed to take Gloucester with him, but


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Weinman, Adolph Alexander

WEINMAN, Adolph Alexander, American sculptor: b. Carlsruhe, Germany, 11 Dec. 1870. He came to the United States when a child and later studied art in New York, under Saint Gaudens at the Art Student's League, and at Cooper Union. He is a member of the National Academy, the National Sculpture Society and the National Institute of Arts and Letters. In 1915 he served on the International Jury of Awards at the Panama Exposition. Among his works are the General Macomb monument, Detroit, Mich., the Lincoln memorials at Hodgenville, Ky., and at Madison, Wis., the Lincoln statue at the State Capitol, Frankfort, Ky., the statuette of Lincoln at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, and the Indian head at the Brooklyn Institute Museum.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/115

 the queen urged the advantages of Paris in perfecting his education after his long confinement in England, and Charles allowed him to remain, on the express condition that no attempt were made to pervert him from his religion. About the beginning of 1654 Gloucester was, however, committed by the queen to the care of her almoner, the Abbé Montague, at his abbey near Pontoise, and during the temporary absence of his tutor Lovel he was pressed by the abbé to consider the claims of the catholic religion. Gloucester deeply resented this ‘mean and disingenuous action.’ Soon afterwards the queen avowed her responsibility, and joined her entreaties to those of Montague. Gloucester was obdurate, and it was resolved to send him to a jesuits' college. The news reached Charles, who despatched the Marquis of Ormonde to Paris to bring Gloucester to him at Cologne. Ormonde enabled him to recover his liberty and to return to Paris. Gloucester then assured the queen that he intended at all hazards to adhere to the protestant religion, and she bade him ‘see her face no more’ (, Life of Ormonde, iii. 641). His horses were turned out of her stables, the sheets were torn from his bed, food was denied him, and he was thus driven from the palace. He went to Lord Hatton's house for two months, until Ormonde could borrow sufficient money to carry them to Cologne (ib. p. 644). Gloucester remained at Cologne with Charles till 1656, when they removed to Bruges. There Gloucester was admitted a member of the confraternity of Archers of St. George. In December he became colonel of ‘the Old’ English regiment of foot in the Spanish army, and volunteered for active service with the Spaniards in 1657 in the Low Countries. He fought side by side with his brother the Duke of York at Dunkirk (17 June 1658), where both displayed great gallantry. When Dunkirk fell, he escaped capture by collecting some of the scattered troops, and made a desperate charge through the enemy (, Hist. of the Rebellion, ed. 1819, iii. 856). Gloucester had his sword struck out of his hand, and while Villeneuve, master of horse to the Prince de Ligne, alighted from his horse and recovered it, Gloucester covered him with his pistol. Charles knighted him, 26 Feb. 1657–8; made him a privy councillor, 27 Oct. 1658, and created him Earl of Cambridge and Duke of Gloucester, 13 May 1659, although he had borne the latter title from his birth. At the Restoration he accompanied Charles to England, 5,000l. being voted him by parliament to defray his expenses. On 13 June 1660 he was made high steward of Gloucester, and on 3 July ranger of Hyde Park. Shortly afterwards he was seized with small-pox, then prevalent in London, and died on 13 Sept. 1660. On the 21st his body ‘was brought down to Somerset House to go by water to Westminster’ (, Diary). He was buried in the same vault as Mary Queen of Scots and Arabella Stuart. Clarendon wrote enthusiastically of him as the finest youth, ‘of the most manly understanding that I have ever known’ (Clarendon State Papers, vol. ii.), and as ‘a prince of extraordinary hopes, both from the comeliness and gracefulness of his person and the vivacity and vigour of his wit and understanding’ (, Hist. iii. 703). Burnet says ‘he was of a temper different from that of his two brothers. He was active and loved business, was apt to have particular friendships, and had an insinuating temper, which was generally very acceptable’ (Own Time, ed. 1826, p. 116). Reresby mentions that he was ‘far from insensible to female charms.’ ‘His death,’ according to Burnet, ‘was much lamented by all, but more particularly by the king, who was never in his whole life seen so much troubled as he was on that occasion.’ Sir John Denham grandiloquently apostrophises him as ‘more than human Gloucester.’

A portrait (in armour), by William Dobson, belongs to the Hon. A. Holland Hibbert; another, by Lely, to the Duke of Northumberland. A portrait of him as a boy of from ten to twelve, with his tutor M. Lovel, is in possession of the widow of the late Archdeacon Groome at the Manor House, Pakenham, Bury St. Edmunds. A sketch of the same portrait is in the Bodleian. A painting by Luttichuys was engraved by C. v. Dalen, jun., and by Faithorne. Other engravings are attributed to Gaywood, Cooper, Hollar, Vaughan, Vertue, and White.

 HENRY FREDERICK, (1745–1790), born 27 Oct. 1745, was fourth son of Frederick, prince of Wales, by Augusta, daughter of Frederick II, duke of Saxe-Gotha, and therefore grandson of George II and brother of George III. He was educated by his mother, who allowed him to mix with no sort of society save that of dependents, and when released from her control he became notorious for excesses. In 1765, on the death of his uncle, the well-known Duke of Cumberland, George III made Prince Henry ranger of


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/118

 authorities at dates ranging from 1150 to 1157; the date of Henry's martyrdom, therefore, remains in a like uncertainty. The name of his slayer, Lalli, seems to be preserved in a Finnish proverb (Scriptt. Rer. Svecic. vol. ii. pt. i. p. 332). No authority is known for the statement of Vastovius that St. Henry was canonised by Adrian IV in 1158; but he was undoubtedly recognised in the fourteenth century, if not earlier, as the apostle of Finland, and one of the patron saints of Sweden. Two festivals were kept in his honour, that of his martyrdom on 19 Jan., and that of his translation on 18 June; the latter commemorated the removal of his relics from their original burial-place at Nousis, near Abo, to the cathedral church of Abo itself, built after the foundation of a bishopric in that town, A.D. 1300, and dedicated to St. Henry. The relics, enclosed in an iron chest which had replaced the silver shrine made for them by the first bishop of Abo, were still there in the middle of the seventeenth century.

HENRY (d. 1437), warden of Merton College, Oxford, was presumably a native of Abingdon, Berkshire. He was elected fellow of Merton College in 1390, and was ordained deacon 22 Feb. 1398 by Robert de Braybroke, bishop of London. He was presented to the living of Weston Zoyland, Somerset, in 1403. He became a doctor of divinity, and in 1414 was one of the delegates from the university to the council of Constance, where he defended the claim of Oxford to priority over Salamanca and of England over Spain, in the latter case with success. In 1421 he was elected warden of Merton College. During his wardenship the chapel was completed in 1425 by the addition of the tower and transepts; a new peal of five bells was also provided, partly at his expense, and his name was put on the tenor or great bell; the peal was recast in 1656 (, ‘Life,’ p. xxvii, in Bliss's edition of the Athenæ). In December 1432 he received permission to go to the council of Basle as one of the representatives of the clergy (Fœdera, x. 532, orig. ed.). He was a prebendary of Wells, and in 1436 received the vicarage of West Monkton, Somerset. He died towards the end of 1437. Tanner cites Wood as his authority for ascribing to him ‘Quæstiones in primum librum Sententiarum;’ a ‘Replicatio primi libri Sententiarum contra magistrum Henricum de Abyndon de Collegio Merton’ is extant (C. C. C. Oxford MS. 116). Abendon was the donor of Merton College MS. 154, which contains the commentary of Hugh de St. Caro on Ecclesiasticus and a treatise on confession and absolution; he directed it to be chained in the library for the use of the scholars.

HENRY (d. 1171), bishop of Winchester, fourth son of Stephen, count of Blois, and Adela, daughter of William the Conqueror, and brother of Theobald, count of Blois and Champagne, and of King Stephen, was brought up from childhood in the monastery of Clugny, and was in 1126 invited to England by his uncle, Henry I, who procured for him the abbacy of Glastonbury. In October 1129, when he could not have been more than twenty-eight, he was elected to the see of Winchester, and was consecrated at Canterbury on 17 Nov. From both the pope and the king he received permission to hold his abbey along with his bishopric, and he continued to do so until his death. During his forty-five years' administration at Glastonbury he showed himself an active and exemplary ruler; he maintained discipline, and increased the prosperity of the abbey, recovering for it several estates which had fallen into other hands. He built there a palace called the Castle, a gateway, the cloister, the refectory, and the rest of the domestic buildings, besides the bell-tower of the church, which seems in other respects to have almost been completed by his two predecessors. At Winchester and in other places in his diocese he also built much and splendidly. Sufficiently learned, noble, rich, liberal, and magnificent, he soon became the most powerful of the English bishops. Like his uncle, King Henry, he was fond of zoology, and formed a collection of beasts and birds, some of them of curious kinds. His temper was calm and his will resolute; he was eloquent and courageous. Throughout his life his policy was determined by his desire to promote what he held to be the interest of the church; he was thoroughly imbued with the Clugniac spirit, and used the vast


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/119

 power which he acquired to uphold and magnify the position of the clergy. He was ambitious for himself, and did not hesitate to employ worldly means in the pursuit of his aims; like other prelates of his time, he was, it was said, half monk and half knight (De Contemptu Mundi, p. 315). Yet he was highly esteemed by such men as Peter the Venerable and Archbishop Becket; his life was pure, and John of Salisbury speaks warmly of his universal liberality towards the church (Ep. ii. 164).

On the death of Henry I, Henry of Blois made strenuous but fruitless efforts to persuade William of Pont l'Arche, the treasurer at Winchester, to give him up the castle, in order that he might secure the royal treasure for Stephen. Stephen, whose success depended largely on his brother's influence, went at once to Winchester after his election in London. Henry met him at the head of the principal citizens, and received him as king. When William of Corbeuil, archbishop of Canterbury, hesitated to perform the coronation rite, he offered himself as surety that his brother would preserve the liberty of the church, and so procured him the crown. He joined Stephen at the siege of Exeter, and persuaded him to reject the terms offered by the besieged, for he saw by their wasted faces that they would soon be forced to surrender at discretion [see under ]. On the death of Archbishop William in 1136 he hoped to succeed to the see of Canterbury, and is said to have actually been elected (, p. 908). In Advent he left England to obtain the papal sanction to his translation, sent messengers to Innocent II, and spent the rest of the winter in northern France. Innocent refused his consent, and Theobald was elected in December 1138. Henry was deeply mortified: it is said that the pope's refusal was due to the influence of Stephen and his queen, and that Henry's later desertion of his brother's cause was due to his anger at their interference. It is probable that Stephen was unwilling to see him acquire greater power, but his change of sides was decided by other causes. The pope thought highly of him, and on 1 March 1139 appointed him legate in England. This appointment, which he did not at once make known, was greatly to the prejudice of the see of Canterbury, for it gave him higher authority than the metropolitan. One of his early acts as legate was to send back to their old house the body of canons which the convent of Christchurch had planted at Dover. He had for some time been engaged in building. In 1138 he pulled down the palace of the Conqueror, which stood near his church, and with the materials built the strong castle known as Wolvesey House, and further built the castles of Farnham, Merdon, Waltham, Dunton, and Taunton. He also began the hospital of St. Cross outside Winchester.

The imprisonment of the bishops of Salisbury and Ely excited his strong disapproval. If they had done wrong, they should, he said, have been judged according to the canons, nor should their possessions have been seized without the sentence of an ecclesiastical council. In company with the archbishop he implored Stephen not to make a breach between the crown and the church. As legate, he called a council of the church to meet at Winchester on 29 Aug., and commanded the attendance of the king. He was looked upon as the ‘lord of England’ (, i. 100). After the council had heard his commission as legate read, he charged Stephen, who appeared by proctors, with treachery and sacrilege, and bade the archbishop and bishops deliberate on the matter, adding that neither his relationship to the king nor the risk of losing lands or life should hinder him from carrying out their sentence. Stephen was compelled to appear in person and receive the rebuke of the church. The council was dissolved on 1 Sept. Immediately afterwards the legate with a large body of knights joined his brother, who was besieging the empress in Arundel Castle. It was said that he had already made terms with the Earl of Gloucester, the chief supporter of the empress, but this was probably untrue (Gesta Stephani, p. 56). He advised the king to let the empress join the earl at Bristol, so that he might act against both at the same time; his advice is said (without proof) to have been treacherous. Stephen agreed, and the legate and the Count of Meulan were sent to conduct Matilda in safety. At Christmas Henry went to the court held at Salisbury, and there urged the appointment of Henry, son of his eldest brother, William de Sully, to the vacant see of Salisbury. His recommendation was rejected, and he left the court in anger (, p. 920). Soon after Whitsuntide 1140 he arranged negotiations for peace, and went to Bath, where, in company with the archbishop and the queen, he appeared for Stephen. Peace was not made, and the declaration of the representatives of the empress that she would submit her cause to the judgment of the church, while the king was unwilling to adopt such a course, probably increased the legate's alienation from his brother. In September he crossed to France, and conferred with Louis VII, with his brother, Count Theobald, and with


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Weir, Harrison William

WEIR, wēr, Harrison William, English artist and journalist: b. Lewes, Sussex, 5 May 1824; d. London, 4 Jan. 1906. He learned the art of wood-engraving, but disliking it turned to painting, and his first exhibition at the British Institution was in 1843. He was the last survivor of the original staff of the London News and was engaged on the Graphic, Pictorial Times, Black and White and other London periodicals. He was an authority on the correct delineation of domesticated animals, was noted for his paintings of country life and as an illustrator of books and periodicals. He wrote and illustrated ‘The Poetry of Nature’; ‘Every-day Life in the Country’; ‘Our Cats and All About Them’, etc. Perhaps his greatest achievement was his work ‘Our Poultry and All About Them’ (1903), the writing and illustrating of which claimed his attention for more than 20 years.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/120

 many members of the monastic orders on English affairs, returning about the end of November with further proposals for peace, which were in favour of the empress rather than of the king. When Stephen rejected them, he probably decided to join the empress's party as soon as a good opportunity for doing so arose.

After the battle of Lincoln the empress sent proposals to him on 16 Feb. 1141, and on Sunday 1 March he went, according to agreement, to confer with her outside Winchester. She offered that, if he would receive her and be faithful to her, she would be guided by him in all the greater affairs of the realm, and especially in all preferments to bishoprics and abbacies, and the chief men of her party guaranteed that she should keep this engagement. On this he swore fealty to her, and the next day led her to the cathedral, where she was received by him and other bishops with much solemnity, as though she was about to receive coronation, the legate pronouncing a blessing on her friends and excommunication against her enemies. On 7 April he held a council at Winchester, to which came Archbishop Theobald, all the bishops, and many abbots. With them he had private conferences, and the next day made a speech in which he advocated the claim of the empress, declared that Stephen had broken his promise to honour the church, dwelt on his bad administration and his violence towards the bishops, and announced that on the previous day the clergy, to whom it chiefly pertained to elect and consecrate their prince, had chosen Matilda as lady of England and Normandy. All present either applauded or at least refrained from dissent, and he then adjourned the session until the arrival of the citizens of London on the following day. When they came they prayed that Stephen might be released from captivity. Henry repeated his oration of the day before, and added that it did not become them to favour Stephen's party. A clerk then handed him a petition from the queen on her husband's behalf. He declared it unfit to be read, but the clerk read it, and he answered him as he had answered the Londoners. Matilda soon offended him by refusing to allow his nephew, Eustace, the continental possessions of Stephen. He left her court; had an informal interview with his sister-in-law, the queen, at Guildford; yielded to her entreaties, and, without consulting the other bishops, absolved Stephen's party from excommunication, and declared that he would do his best to procure the king's liberation. The Earl of Gloucester went to Winchester, and vainly tried to arrange the quarrel, and the empress marched at once to Winchester. As she entered the city the bishop leapt on his horse and rode in haste into Wolvesey Castle. The empress invited him to come and speak with her; he returned answer, ‘I will make myself ready,’ and sent to summon all the king's party to his aid. Meanwhile the empress besieged his palace and his new fortress with a large army, in which were David, king of Scotland, Robert of Gloucester, and other earls and barons. Before long Stephen's lords came to his aid, and with them the queen, and the Flemish mercenaries, and a force of Londoners. Then, in turn, the bishop and his allies besieged the besiegers. Outside Winchester the queen ‘with all her strength’ laid waste the country, and intercepted provisions, so that ‘there was great hunger therein’ (Anglo-Saxon Chron. a. 1140), while from Wolvesey Tower burning missiles were, by the bishop's orders, shot down on the houses of the burghers, who were on the side of the empress. The city was fired, the ‘Nuns’ minster was burnt, and even Hyde Abbey beyond the walls was destroyed. Fire and famine brought the empress's army to despair. Robert of Gloucester prepared to retreat, and on the evening of 14 Sept. the bishop ordered that peace should be proclaimed and the gates opened. The empress escaped, but as Earl Robert was issuing from the city with his force, the bishop gave the signal for attack, and he was overpowered and taken prisoner. Winchester was sacked by the Londoners and others of the king's party, apparently with the bishop's goodwill (Cont. ii. 134). Since he became bishop he had been on bad terms with the Hyde convent, and he ordered the treasure of the house which could be gathered after the fire to be brought to him. A famous cross, with the image of the Lord wrought with much gold, silver, and precious stones, and given to the church by Canute [q. v.], was melted, and the metal brought to the bishop was put at sixty pounds of silver and fifteen pounds of gold. On 7 Dec. the legate held another council at Westminster, at which the king was present. He stated that he had received the empress under compulsion, and that she had since infringed the rights of the church and had plotted against him; he commanded all to obey the king, and denounced all who upheld the Angevin countess as excommunicate. Either fear or reverence kept all the clergy silent, but a layman sent by the empress spoke sharply on his mistress's side, and contradicted the legate to his face. Henry kept his temper, and would not give way.

Henry's power largely rested on his lega-


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/121

 tine office, which would terminate with the life of the pope. Anxious to place it on a firmer basis, he formed a scheme for the exaltation of his bishopric to metropolitan rank. Six sees (Salisbury, Exeter, Wells, Chichester, Hereford, and Worcester) were to be withdrawn from the province of Canterbury; a seventh suffragan was to have his see in Hyde Abbey; and the seven sees were to form a new province under him. It is doubtfully said that he went to Rome on this matter (cf. Annales de Winton, p. 53), and that in 1142 the pope actually sent him a pall (, i. 255). In Lent 1142 the legate held a council in London, in which an attempt was made to check the evils of the civil war. A canon was published forbidding any violation of the right of sanctuary in a church or churchyard or any violence to a clerk or monk under a special penalty, and declaring that the husbandman and his plough were everywhere to be as safe as though in a church. In the summer of 1143 Henry joined his brother in turning the nunnery at Wilton into a fortress to be a check on Salisbury, which was on the side of the empress. On 1 July Earl Robert fired the town and routed the king's troops, so that he and the bishop barely made good their escape.

Henry also acted with his brother in the matter of the archbishopric of York. On the death of Archbishop Thurstan in 1140 he promoted the election of his nephew Henry de Sully, then abbot of Fécamp, but the election was quashed by the pope because the abbot would not give up his monastery. Another of the legate's nephews, William Fitzherbert [q. v.], son of his sister Emma, was then chosen, and the legate sent him to Rome for confirmation. A strong party in the York chapter protested against the election. Nevertheless the legate had his will; he held a council at Winchester in September 1143, at which a bishop and two abbots took an oath that the election was free and canonical, and on the 26th he consecrated his nephew, the Archbishop of Canterbury refusing his assent. Two days previously Innocent II died, and with his death Henry's legatine commission came to an end. He set out for Rome in the hope of obtaining a renewal of it from the new pope, Celestine II. The pope, however, appointed Archbishop Theobald, and Henry spent the winter in retirement in his old monastery at Clugny. Celestine died in the following spring, and Henry went to Rome to apply for the legateship to Lucius II. The empress sent representatives to oppose. Lucius set aside the charges which they brought against him, but declined to make him legate. It is said that while he held the legatine office he introduced the custom of appeals to Rome; but the passage on which this statement is founded seems to refer to appeals to himself as legate (, p. 282). Appeals to Rome were made in earlier times, though they certainly became more frequent during the reign of Stephen (Const. Hist. iii. 349). Henry continued to uphold the right of his nephew William to the archbishopric of York, which was vigorously disputed, and after William was deposed in 1147 took him into his house and treated him as archbishop. His influence at Rome was wholly at an end, for Eugenius III and Bernard, abbot of Clairvaux, favoured Archbishop Theobald, and treated the bishop's efforts in behalf of his nephew as part of the quarrel about the legation, while, as the attempt to establish William at York was bitterly opposed by the Cistercian houses in the north, Henry's policy was specially displeasing to the Cistercian pope and his great adviser. The monks of Hyde Abbey appealed to Rome against him on account of the general injuries which he had done their house and of the destruction of their cross, and Bernard upheld their cause. In 1148 Henry advised Stephen to forbid Archbishop Theobald to attend the papal council at Rheims on 21 March, and he was therefore suspended. The Count of Blois, however, interceded for him, and the sentence was relaxed on condition of his appearing at Rome within six months; this he failed to do, and was therefore under the papal sentence. Theobald returned to England, and at the king's request was reconciled to Henry, who in 1151 went to Rome, travelling in much state. At Rome he had to meet the charges brought against him by the Abbot Bernard, by the monks of Hyde, and many others. He obtained absolution, not, it is said, without payment of a large sum, and efforts were made by his friends to prevail on the pope to grant him either a legatine commission or the exemption of his see from metropolitan jurisdiction; but Eugenius refused, for it was believed, though unjustly, that he had prompted his brother against the church. Still at his request Eugenius bade Henry Murdac, who was then in possession of the see of York, absolve Hugh of Puiset, the treasurer of York and the bishop's nephew, who was doing good service for his uncle by guarding his castles in his absence. Bishop Henry purchased statuary in Italy for his house at Winchester; he had cultivated tastes and liked the society of learned men. He came back by sea with his purchases, and on his way stopped to visit the shrine of


text:
Page:Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or Between International Organizations (1986).djvu/11

1. Without prejudice to articles 19 to 23, the consent of a State or of an international organization to be bound by part of a treaty is effective only if the treaty so permits, or if the contracting States and contracting organizations or, as the case may be, the contracting organizations so agree.

2. The consent of a State or of an international organization to be bound by a treaty which permits a choice between differing provisions is effective only if it is made clear to which of the provisions the consent relates.

A State or an international organization is obliged to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty when:

(a) that State or that organization has signed the treaty or has exchanged instruments constituting the treaty subject to ratification, act of formal confirmation, acceptance or approval, until that State or that organization shall have made its intention clear not to become a party to the treaty; or

(b) that State or that organization has expressed its consent to be bound by the treaty, pending the entry into force of the treaty and provided that such entry into force is not unduly delayed.

A State or an international organization may, when signing, ratifying, formally confirming, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, formulate a reservation unless:

(a) the reservation is prohibited by the treaty;

(b) the treaty provides that only specified reservations, which do not include the reservation in question, may be made; or

(c) in cases not falling under subparagraphs (a) and (b), the reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/122

 St. James at Compostella, and did not arrive in England until after September 1152. The civil war was dying out, and he sincerely repented of the part which he had had in fomenting it. Accordingly he did all in his power to promote peace, and was active in forwarding the treaty made between Stephen and Duke Henry at Wallingford, and concluded in November 1153 at Winchester, where he received the duke with honour. At the following Easter he entertained his nephew, Archbishop William, at Winchester on his return from Rome before going to his province, for Henry Murdac was then dead.

Stephen died on 25 Oct., and on 19 Dec. Henry assisted at the coronation of Henry II. He is said to have recommended Thomas Becket to the king for the office of chancellor. In 1155 he left England without the king's permission, having sent on his treasure secretly before him. Henry seized on his castles, pulled down the tower of Wolvesey, and destroyed the castles at Merdon and Bishops Waltham. The king's intention of taking his castles from him was no doubt the cause of his leaving the kingdom. He stayed a welcome guest at Clugny, and proved himself, according to Peter the Venerable, the greatest benefactor that the house ever had; for, at the request of Pope Hadrian IV, he paid off the whole debt which was then pressing on the convent and supported the 460 monks for a year. He was urged to return by Archbishop Theobald, probably in 1157, and was back in England in the spring of 1159, but returned to Clugny, and was there in the early part of 1162. On 3 June he consecrated Thomas as archbishop of Canterbury, and before the ceremony began demanded and obtained from the king's representative a full release from all claims which might be made on Thomas in connection with the chancellorship. This is perhaps the origin of the story told by Giraldus that he set before Thomas the necessity of choosing whether he would serve an earthly or a heavenly king. He was present at the council of Clarendon in January 1164, and after the council must have had converse with the archbishop, who withdrew for a while to Winchester. At the council of Northampton in October he was reluctantly obliged to pronounce judgment against Thomas in the suit of John the Marshal, and when the king proceeded to demand a statement of Thomas's accounts as chancellor boldly opposed the demand. The next day he advised Thomas not to listen to those who were recommending him to make an absolute submission. Such a course would, he urged, put the church under the arbitrary control of the crown, and he further pointed out that Thomas had been released from all secular claims at his consecration. When, on a later day of the session, the bishops tried to persuade the archbishop to yield, Henry appears to have shown him some special mark of friendship; he afterwards declared that Thomas had a right to carry his cross when entering the king's hall, and when he heard that the archbishop had left the country wished him God's blessing. Soon after this he seems to have been under the king's displeasure, and Pope Alexander III wrote to Thomas that he heard that it was probable Henry would resign his bishopric on account of the injuries which he had received from the king. Thomas wrote to Henry a letter of sympathy in which he blamed him for having removed a cross. This was probably the Hyde cross which Henry restored in 1167. He did not approve of the line taken by the archbishop while in exile, joined in the bishops' defence of the king in 1166, and appealed against him before the legates in November 1167. Nevertheless he retained his loyalty towards him; he sent him assistance, steadfastly refused to hold communion with those whom he excommunicated, and was regarded by him as ‘a wall of the house of Israel.’ During these his later years he was humble and religious, and about 1168 gave away all his goods in charity, leaving himself and his household bare means of subsistence, and devoting himself to prayer and acts of penitence. Three stories are told of his diocesan government. One, which apparently belongs to about 1159, relates how, after he had vainly tried to make his clergy use silver instead of pewter chalices, he overcame their meanness by making them present their contributions to him in respect of an aid in silver chalices which he gave back to them; while at another time, when other bishops were levying money from their clergy, he gathered his together and, telling them that he did not care to increase his hoard, demanded only prayers and masses. The third story represents him as merciful towards the erring (, vii. 47–9). When he heard of the martyrdom of Archbishop Thomas, he grieved that he, though so much older, was still left on earth.

Bishop Henry was dying when the king returned to England on 6 Aug. 1171. The king at once visited him, and the bishop rebuked him severely for the archbishop's death. On the 8th he died, ‘full of days’ (, i. 347). There seems no reason to doubt that he was buried in front of the high altar of his cathedral church, where the remains of a bishop with a crozier and ring were discovered some years ago. During his lifetime


text:
Page:Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or Between International Organizations (1986).djvu/12

1.A reservation expressly authorized by a treaty does not require any subsequent acceptance by the contracting States and contracting organizations or, as the case may be, by the contracting organizations unless the treaty so provides.

2.When it appears from the limited number of the negotiating States and negotiating organizations or, as the case may be, of the negotiating organizations and the object and purpose of a treaty that the application of the treaty in its entirety between all the parties is an essential condition of the consent of each one to be bound by the treaty, a reservation requires acceptance by all the parties.

3.When a treaty is a constituent instrument of an international organization and unless it otherwise provides, a reservation requires the acceptance of the competent organ of that organization.

4. In cases not falling under the preceding paragraphs and unless the treaty otherwise provides:

(a) acceptance of a reservation by a contracting State or by a contracting organization constitutes the reserving State or international organization a party to the treaty in relation to the accepting State or organization if or when the treaty is in force for the reserving State or organization and for the accepting State or organization;

(b) an objection by a contracting State or by a contracting organization to a reservation does not preclude the entry into force of the treaty as between the objecting State or international organization and the reserving State or organization unless a contrary intention is definitely expressed by the objecting State or organization;

(c) an act expressing the consent of a State or of an international organization to be bound by the treaty and containing a reservation is effective as soon as at least one contracting State or one contracting organization has accepted the reservation. 5. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 4, and unless the treaty otherwise provides, a reservation is considered to have been accepted by a State or an international organization if it shall have raised no objection to the reservation by the end of a period of twelve months after it was notified of the reservation or by the date on which it expressed its consent to be bound by the treaty, whichever is later.

1. A reservation established with regard to another party in accordance with articles 19, 20 and 23:

(a) modifies for the reserving State or international organization in its relations with that other party the provisions of the treaty to which the reservation relates to the extent of the reservation; and

(b) modifies those provisions to the same extent for that other party in its relations with the reserving State or international organization.


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Weir, James

WEIR, James, American physician and author: b. Owensboro, Ky., 17 Oct. 1856; d. there, 9 Aug. 1906. He was graduated from the University of Louisville in 1878 and studied medicine there and in New York. He published ‘Religion and Lust’ (1897); ‘The Dawn of Reason’ (1898); ‘Intelligence in the Lower Animals’ (1898).


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/123

 Peter the Venerable had written to ask him to order that he should be buried at Clugny, and, as there does not appear to be any record of his burial, some have supposed that this was done; but there is no reason to doubt that the bones found at Winchester are the relics of the bishop. He founded the hospital of St. Cross, near Winchester, for thirteen aged men and for providing a hundred poor persons with a daily dinner. His foundation was enlarged by Cardinal Henry Beaufort [q. v.] He was also a benefactor to Taunton Priory, founded by his predecessor, William Giffard [q. v.] (, Hist. Taunton Priory, p. 4). In his cathedral Henry built a treasure-house and enriched the church with many relics, and probably also gave the richly carved font which still exists. He also collected the bones of the great persons buried in the church and placed them in painted chests.

HENRY (d. 1331), prior of Christ Church, Canterbury, doubtless came from the village of Eastry, between Canterbury and Sandwich, the manor of which belonged to the monks of Christ Church, and which sent a constant supply of recruits to that house. The Henry of Eastry who in 1279 was presented to the vicarage of Littlebourne, Kent, by the abbot of St. Augustine's is not, however, likely to have been a monk of a rival foundation like Christ Church (, Letters, iii. 1001, 1016). The future prior became a monk in early youth, and was remarkable for his zeal for scriptural learning. In September 1285 the retirement of Prior Thomas Ringmer, who having quarrelled with the Christ Church monks sought a stricter rule in the Cistercian house of Beaulieu, was followed by the election of Eastry himself as prior on 10 April 1268 (Cott. MS. Galba E. iv. f. 35 b).

Eastry remained prior of Canterbury for forty-six years. He was respected by the monks as a useful and prudent head. He relieved the convent from the crushing burden of three thousand marks of debt, and laid out very large sums on improving the estates and ornamenting the cathedral. He adorned the choir of Christ Church by ‘very beautiful stonework subtly carved.’ He gave his church many precious vestments and ornaments. He repaired the chapter-house, rebuilt or repaired the chapels on most of the manors of the see, and added large rents, lands, and woods to its resources, while enriching the library with costly books treating of a great variety of subjects. A list of his numerous buildings and repairings is given in his ‘Memoriale’ (ib. iv., ‘nova opera in ecclesia et in curia,’ f. 101; ‘nova opera in maneriis,’ f. 102 b). His zeal for the rights of his church led him to deny the crown's right to the custody of the church during a vacancy. He revived the old claims of the priors to exercise spiritual jurisdiction over the province of Canterbury during vacancies in the archbishopric. He quarrelled with the citizens of Canterbury and with the rival abbots of St. Augustine, and came pretty well out of both contests. He had more difficulties in the course of a bitter quarrel with a faction of his monks (Hist. MSS. Comm. 5th Rep. i. 438). He obtained from ‘Bassianus of Milan, count-palatine of the empire,’ a grant of the right to appoint three imperial notaries of his own nomination. But the crown forbade such exercise of power on the ground that the emperor had no jurisdiction in England (, Antiq. Cant. pt. i. App. lii. a. b. c.). In 1297 he followed Archbishop Winchelsey in refusing to pay Edward I's taxes, but Edward took possession of the monastery, sealed up the granaries and stores, and starved Eastry and his brethren into submission (Hist. MSS. Comm. 5th Rep. i. 433). Eastry remained on friendly terms with Winchelsey, who, before returning to England after his exile, appointed him his vicar-general.

Eastry's relations to the weak and incompetent Archbishop Reynolds gave him peculiar political importance. Eastry was reputed to be a man of great wisdom and foresight, and he was consulted by Reynolds in his chief difficulties. His letters to Reynolds form a large and the most important part of the first volume of the ‘Literæ


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Weir, John Ferguson

WEIR, John Ferguson, American painter, sculptor and author, son of R. W. Weir (q.v.): b. West Point, N. Y., 28 Aug. 1841. He was a pupil of his father and became a member of the National Academy in 1866. Since 1869 he has been professor of painting in the Yale School of Fine Arts. As a sculptor he is known by his statues of President Woolsey and Professor Silliman of Yale, and in addition to many portraits he has painted ‘The Gun Foundry’; ‘The Forging of the Shaft’; ‘The Column of Saint Mark's, Venice,’ etc. He has written ‘John Trumbull and His Works’ (1902); ‘Human Destiny in the Light of Revelation’ (1903).


text:
Page:Whymper - Scrambles amongst the Alps.djvu/245

Rh it was 5.30 before we arrived on the spot at which it was intended to camp.

Each one selected his nook, and we then joined round a grand fire made by our men. Fortnum and Mason's portable soup was sliced up and brewed, and was excellent; but it should be said that before it was excellent, three times the quantity named in the directions had to be used. Art is required in drinking as in making this soup, and one point is this—always let your friends drink first; not only because it is more polite, but because the soup has a tendency to burn the mouth if taken too hot, and one drink of the bottom is worth two of the top, as all the goodness settles.

[ While engaged in these operations, the mist that enveloped the glacier and surrounding peaks was becoming thinner; little bits of blue sky appeared here and there, until. suddenly, when we were looking towards the head of the glacier, far, far above us, at an almost inconceivable height, in a tiny patch of blue, appeared a wonderful rocky pinnacle, bathed in the beams of the fast-sinking sun. We were so electrified by the glory of the sight that it was some seconds before we realised what we saw, and understood that that astounding point, removed apparently miles from the earth, was one of the highest summits of Les Ecrins; and that we hoped, before another sun had set, to have stood upon an even loftier pinnacle. The mists rose and fell, presenting us with a series of dissolving views of ravishing grandeur, and finally died away, leaving the glacier and its mighty bounding precipices under an exquisite pale blue sky, free from a single speck of cloud. ] The night passed over without anything worth mention, but we had had occasion to observe in the morning an instance of the curious evaporation that is frequently noticeable in the High Alps. On the previous night we had hung up on a knob of rock our mackintosh bag containing five bottles of Kodier's bad wine. In the morning, although the stopper appeared to have been in all night, about four-fifths had evaporated. It was strange; my friends had not taken any, neither had I, and the guides each declared that they had not


text:
Page:Whymper - Scrambles amongst the Alps.djvu/247

Rh 3716 mètres, or 12,192 feet, above the level of the sea. The lowest point between that mountain and the Ecrins (the Col des Ecrins) is 11,000 feet. The ridge again rises, and passes 13,000 feet in the neighbourhood of the Ecrins. The highest summit of that mountain (13,462 feet) is, however, placed a little to the east of and off the main ridge. It then again falls, and in the vicinity of the Col de la Tempe it is, perhaps, below 11,000 feet; but immediately to the south of the summit of that pass, there is upon the ridge a point which has been determined by the French surveyors to be 12,323 feet. This peak is without a name. The ridge continues to gain height as we come to the south, and culminates in the mountain which the French surveyors have called Sommet de l'Aile Froide. On the spot it is called, very commonly, the Aléfroide.

There is some uncertainty respecting the elevation of this mountain. The Frenchmen give 3925 metres (12,878) as its highest point, but Mr. Tuckett, who took a good theodolite to the top of Mont Pelvoux (which he agreed with his predecessors had an elevation of 12,973 feet), found that the summit of the Alefroide was elevated above his station 4'; and as the distance between the two points was 12,467 feet, this would represent a difference in altitude of 5 metres in favour of the Aléfroide. I saw this mountain from the summit of Mont Pelvoux in 1861, and was in doubt as to which of the two was the higher, and in 1864, from the summit of the Pointe des Ecrins (as will presently be related), it looked actually higher than Mont Pelvoux. I have therefore little doubt but that Mr. Tuckett is right in believing the Aléfroide to have an elevation of about 13,000 feet, instead of 12,878, as determined by the French surveyors.

Mont Pelvoux is to the east of the Aléfroide and off the main ridge, and the Pic Sans Nom (12,845 feet) is placed between these two mountains. The latter is one of the grandest of the Dauphiné


text:
Page:Whymper - Scrambles amongst the Alps.djvu/249

Rh said, and much more; and he added, in 1862, three interesting passes across this part of the chain to those already known. The first, from Ville Vallouise to La Bérarde, viâ the village of Claux, and the glaciers du Selé and de la Pilatte,—this he called the Col du Selé; the second, between Ville Vallouise and Villar d'Arène (on the Lautaret road) viâ Claux and the glaciers Blanc and d'Arsine,—the Col du Glacier Blanc; and the third, from Vallouise to La Bérarde, viâ the Glacier Blanc, the Glacier de l'Encula, and the Glacier de la Bonne Pierre, the Col des Ecrins.

This last pass was discovered accidentally. Mr. Tuckett set out intending to endeavour to ascend the Pointe des Ecrins, but circumstances were against him, as he relates in the following words:—"Arrived on the plateau" (of the Glacier de l'Encula), "a most striking-view of the Ecrins burst upon us, and a hasty inspection encouraged us to hope that its ascent would be practicable. On the sides of La Bérarde and the Glacier Noir it presents, as has been already stated, the most precipitous and inaccessible faces that can well be conceived; but in the direction of the Glacier de l'Encula, as the upper plateau of the Glacier Blanc is named on the French map, the slopes are less rapid, and immense masses of névé and séracs cover it nearly to the summit."

"The snow was in very bad order, and as we sank at each step above the knee, it soon became evident that our prospects of success were extremely doubtful. A nearer approach, too, disclosed traces of fresh avalanches, and after much deliberation and a careful examination through the telescope, it was decided that the chances in our favour were too small to render it desirable to waste time in the attempt. . . . I examined the map, from which I perceived that the glacier seen through the gap" (in the ridge running from Roche Faurio to the Ecrins) "to the west, at a great depth below, must be that of La Bonne Pierre; and if a descent to its head was practicable, a passage might probably be effected to La Bérarde. On suggesting to Croz and Perrn that, though baffled by the state of the snow on the Ecrins, we might


text:
Page:Whymper - Scrambles amongst the Alps.djvu/251

Rh stopped. After a long pause he shouted to his brother, saying that he was not able to return by the way he had ascended. Jean was evidently uneasy about him, and for some time we watched him with much anxiety. At length he began to hew out steps in the snow along the face of the peak towards us. Jean now left us, and, making for the ice-cliff mentioned above, chopped away until, after about a quarter of an hour's labour, he contrived, somehow or other, to worm himself up it, and began to cut steps to meet his brother. Almost every step appeared to be cut right through the snowy crust into the hard ice below, and an incipient stream of snow came hissing down the sides of the peak as they dug it away with their axes. Michel could not have been much more than 100 yards from us, and yet it was full three quarters of an hour before the brothers met. This done, they descended carefully, burying their axe-heads deep in the snow at every step.

Michel's account was that he had reached the arete with great difficulty, and saw that it was practicable for some distance, in fact, as far as he could see; but that the snow was in a most dangerous condition, being very incoherent and resting on hard ice; that when he began to descend in order to tell us this, he found the rocks so smooth and slippery that return was impossible; and that for some little time he feared that he should not be able to extricate himself, and was in considerable danger. Of course the arête could have been reached by the way our guides had descended, but it was so evident that their judgment was against proceeding, that we did not feel justified in urging them on. We had seen so much of them that we felt sure they would never hang back unless there was real danger, and so we gave the word for retreating."

On both of these expeditions there was fine weather and plenty of time. On each occasion the parties slept out at, and started from, a considerable elevation, and arrived at the base of the final peak of the Ecrins early in the clay, and with plenty of


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/126

 Dublin mayoralty. Marleburgh compiled annals of England and Ireland in Latin (in seven books, extending from 1133 to 1421), under the title of ‘Cronica excerpta de medulla diversorum cronicorum, præcipue Ranulphi, monachi Cestrensis, scripta per Henricum de Marleburghe, vicarium de Balischadan, unacum quibusdam capitulis, de cronicis Hiberniæ: Incepta anno Domini 1406, regis Henrici quarti post conquestum septimo.’ The first part is mainly a transcript from previous English writers and Anglo-Irish annalists; the latter and more original portions of the annals, as printed, chiefly deal with affairs of the English settlers in Ireland. Excerpts in Latin from Marleburgh's compilation beginning in 1372 were published by Camden as ‘Descripta e chronicis manuscriptis Henrici de Marleburgh’ (1607). Archbishop Ussher referred to Henry's annals. Sir James Ware, in 1633, published ‘Henry Marleburgh's Chronicle of Ireland,’ fol., and it was reprinted at Dublin in 1809, 8vo. Marleburgh's death is recorded in the old obituary of the congregation of the priory of the Holy Trinity, Dublin, under date of 12 May, but without mention of the year. Manuscript copies of Marleburgh's annals are extant in the Bodleian (excerpts by Ware in MS. Rawlinson, B. 487), British Museum (MS. Cott. Vitellius, E. v. 197), and in the library of Trinity College, Dublin (No. 424 in Bernard's ‘Catalogus MSS. Angl. et Hib.’).

HENRY the, or or  (fl. 1470–1492), Scottish poet, was author of a poem on  [q. v.], fortunately preserved in a complete manuscript (dated 1488) now in the Advocates' Library, Edinburgh. The copyist was John Ramsay of Lochmalonie, in the parish of Kilmany in Fifeshire. The biographical facts of Henry's life are only known from a brief notice in John Major's history (1521), and a few entries in the ‘Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer’ (1490–2). Major states that ‘Henry, a man blind from his birth, composed the whole book of William Wallace in the time of my infancy, and collected the popular traditions in a poem in the vulgar tongue, in which he was skilled.’ He adds, in the spirit of a critical historian: ‘I credit such writings only in part, but the poet by reciting these histories before the nobles received food and clothing, of which he was worthy.’ As [q. v.] died in old age in 1549–1550, his infancy would fall within the period between 1470 and 1480, or possibly a little earlier. The statement of Buchanan, in the fragment of his own life, that Major was in extreme old age as early as 1524 is not consistent with the known facts of Major's life. The ‘Treasurer's Accounts’ first refer to Blind Harry on 26 April 1490, when he received 18s. by the king's command at Stirling. Similar payments were made on 1 Jan. and 14 Sept. 1491, ending with one on 2 Jan. 1492 at Linlithgow. This is the last mention of his name, and, as James IV usually continued till their deaths the annual payments to the minstrels who attended his court, it is probable the poet died before January 1493. He is mentioned by William Dunbar in the ‘Lament for the Makaris’ along with Sandy Traill, so that he must have been dead when that poem was written in 1507 or 1508. His own poem was probably composed in the reign of James III, as it was transcribed by Ramsay in the year when James was killed at Sauchie (11 July 1488). The poet speaks in his own person at its close, and may have dictated it to the transcriber. His vivid descriptions have been thought by some incompatible with total blindness, but Major's statement, the best evidence on the point, would be confirmed by his using another hand to write his poem. His surname is unknown, having been eclipsed by the familiar Harry, proving him, like Sandy Traill, Davy Lindsay, and other Scottish poets, to have been a popular favourite in his lifetime. He probably belonged to Lothian, for otherwise he would not have been known to Major in his infancy, which was passed in the neighbourhood of North Berwick. The dialect of his verses is that of Lothian, the best Scotch of that period, which had been adopted by the court and cultivated by earlier poets. There is little of personal allusion in the poem, which is entirely devoted to the description of Wallace, but a few inferences seem legitimate.

From the lines

(bk. xi. l. 1434), he appears to have composed the poem before he began to receive gratuities or pensions either from the nobles or the king.

The frequent references to his ‘Autor’ are explained by the lines:

[q. v.] was a chaplain of Wallace; Sir Thomas Gray, parson of Liberton, and called by Harry ‘priest to Wallace,’ was also among his authorities. Both were contem-


text:
Page:Whymper - Scrambles amongst the Alps.djvu/253

Rh  sky. It had been said that the route must be taken by one of the ridges of the final peak, but both were alike repellent, hacked and notched in numberless places. They reminded me of my failure on the Dent d'Herens in 1863, and of a place on a similar ridge, from which advance or retreat was alike difficult. But, presuming one or other of these ridges or aretes was practicable, there remained the task of getting to them, for completely round the base of the final peak swept an enormous bergschrund, almost separating it from the slopes which lay beneath. It was evident thus early that the ascent would not be accomplished without exertion, and that it would demand all our faculties and all our time. In more than one respect we were favoured. The mists were gone, the day was bright and perfectly calm; there had been a long stretch of fine weather beforehand, and the snow was in excellent order; and, most important of all, the last new snow which had fallen on the final peak, unable to support itself, had broken away and rolled in a mighty avalanche, over schrund, névé, séracs, over hills and


text:
Page:Whymper - Scrambles amongst the Alps.djvu/255

Rh you will have a very faint idea of the face of the Ecrins on which we stood. It was not possible to avoid detaching stones, which, as they fell, caused words unmentionable to rise. The greatest friends would have reviled each other in such a situation. We gained the eastern arête, and endeavoured for half-an-hour to work upwards towards the summit; but it was useless (each yard of progress cost an incredible time); and having no desire to form the acquaintance of the Glacier Noir in a precipitate manner, we beat a retreat, and returned to the schrund. We again held a council, and it was unanimously decided that we should be beaten if we could not cut along the upper edge of the schrund, and, when nearly beneath the summit, work up to it. So Croz took off his coat and went to work;—on ice,—not that black ice so often mentioned and so seldom seen, but on ice as hard as ice could be. Weary work for the guides. Croz cut for more than half-an-hour, and we did not seem to have advanced at all. Some one behind, seeing how great the labour was, and how slow the progress, suggested that after all we might do better on the arête. Croz's blood was up, and indignant at this slight on his powers, he ceased working, turned in his steps, and rushed towards me with a haste that made me shudder: "By all means let us go there, the sooner the better." No slight was intended, and he resumed his work, after a time being relieved by Almer. Half-past ten came; an hour had passed; they were still cutting. Dreary work for us, for there was no capering about to be done here; hand as well as foot-holes were necessary; the fingers and toes got very cold; the ice, as it boomed in bounding down the bergschrund, was very suggestive; conversation was very restricted, separated as we were by our tether of 20 feet apiece. Another hour passed. We were now almost immediately below the summit, and we stopped to look up. We were nearly as far off it (vertically) as we had been more than three hours before. The day seemed going against us. The only rocks near at hand were scattered; no bigger than tea-cups, and most of these, we found afterwards, were glazed with ice. Time forbade cutting right up to the


text:
Page:Whymper - Scrambles amongst the Alps.djvu/257

Rh top simultaneously; that is to say, clustered round it, a yard or two below, for it was much too small to get upon. According to my custom, I bagged a piece from off the highest rock (chlorite slate), and I found afterwards that it had a striking similarity to the final peak of the Ecrins. I have noticed the same thing on other occasions, and it is worthy of remark that not only do fragments of such rock as limestone often present the characteristic forms of the cliffs from which they have been broken, but that morsels of mica slate will represent, in a wonderful manner, the identical shape of the peaks of which they have formed part. Why should it not be so, if the mountain's mass is more or less homogeneous? The same causes which produce the small forms fashion the large ones; the same influences are at work; the same frost and rain give shape to the mass as well as to its parts.

Did space permit me, I could give but a sorry idea of the view, but it will be readily imagined that a panorama extending over as much ground as the whole of England is one worth taking some trouble to see, and one which is not often to be seen even in the Alps. No clouds obscured it, and a list of the summits that we saw would include nearly all the highest peaks of the chain. I saw the Pelvoux now—as I had seen the Ecrins from it three years before—across the basin of the Glacier Noir. It is a splendid mountain, although in height it is equalled, if not surpassed, by its neighbour the Aléfroide.


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Weir, Julian Alden

WEIR, Julian Alden, American artist, son of R. W. Weir (q.v.): b. West Point, N. Y., 30 Aug. 1852; d. New York, 8 Dec. 1919. He studied with his father and at Paris with Gérôme, became a member of the Society of American Artists in 1877 and a National Academician in 1886. Mr. Weir was one of the founders of the Society of American Artists, the first organization to rebel at all effectively against the Academy. These societies were later united and Mr. Weir at once refused the presidency of the Association of American Painters and Sculptors because it was in opposition to the Academy. He painted many kinds of pictures, subjects, still life, portraits, figures, landscapes. In his later career he was identified with the Impressionist School. Examples are to be found in the Luxembourg, Paris, and in nearly every important art museum in the United States, including the National Gallery, Washington, the Art Institute of Chicago, the Albright Gallery, Buffalo, the Pennsylvania Academy, Philadelphia, and the Brooklyn Institute. ‘Breton Interior’ obtained a second-class medal at the Paris Exposition of 1889. His ‘Idle Hours,’ now in the New York Metropolitan Museum, received the $2,000 prize of the American Art Association. In the same gallery are ‘The Red Bridge’ and ‘The Green Bodice,’ the latter one of Weir's masterpieces. Weir's long career as an artist was marked by independence and naturalness. It was only after repeated experiments that he achieved the general recognition which the reticent, refined, and distinguished style of his maturity deserved.


text:
Page:Whymper - Scrambles amongst the Alps.djvu/261

Rh the summit and try the other way down. We were on the very edge of the arête; on one side was the enormous precipice facing the Pelvoux, which is not far from perpendicular; on the other a slope exceeding 50°. A deep notch brought us to an abrupt halt. Almer, who was leading, advanced cautiously to the edge on hands and knees, and peered over; his care was by no means unnecessary, for the rocks had broken away from under us unexpectedly several times. In this position he looked down for some moments, and then, without a word, turned his head and looked at us. His face may have expressed apprehension or alarm, but it certainly did not show hope or joy. We learned that there was no means of getting down, and that we must, if we wanted to pass it, jump across on to an unstable block on the other side. It was decided that it should be done, and Almer, with a larger extent of rope than usual, jumped; the rock swayed as he came down upon it, but he clutched a large mass with both arms and brought himself to anchor. That which was both difficult and dangerous for the first man was easy enough for the others, and we got across with less trouble than I expected; stimulated by Croz's perfectly just observation, that if we couldn't get across there we were not likely to get down the other way.

We had now arrived at C, and could no longer continue on the arête, so we commenced descending the face again. Before long we were close to the schrund, but unable to see what it was like at this part, as the upper edge bent over. Two hours had already passed since leaving the summit, and it began to be highly probable that we should have to spend a night on the Glacier Blanc. Almer, who yet led, cut steps right down to the edge, but still he could not see below; therefore, warning us to hold tight, he made his whole body rigid, and (standing in the large step which he had cut for the purpose), had the upper part of his person lowered out until he saw what he wanted. He shouted that our work was finished, made me come close to the edge and untie myself, advanced the others until he had rope enough, and then with a loud jödel jumped down on to soft snow. Partly by skill and