text:
Page:Valmiki - Ramayana, Griffith, 1895.djvu/13

 CONTENTS. CANTO ciii. The Funeral Libation c iv t The Meeting with the Queens cv. Rama's Speech cvi. Bharat's Speech, cvii. Rama's Speech, cviii. Javali's Speech, cix. The Praises of Truth, ex. The Sons of Ikshvaku. cxi. Counsel to Bharat. ... cxii. The Sandals cxiii. Bharat's Return. ... cxiv.Bharat's Departure, cxv. Nandigram cxvi. The Hermit's Speech cxvii. Anasuya. cxviii. Anasuya's Gifts, cxix. The Forest. BOOK III. TO i. The Hermitage, ii. Viradha. iii. Viradha Attacked, iv. Viradha's Death. v. Sarabhanga. vi. Rama's Promise, vii. Sutikshna. viii. The Hermitage, ix, Sita's Speech. x. Rama's Reply, xi. Agastya. xii. The Heavenly Bow. xiii. Agastya's Counsel, xiv. Jatayus. xv. Pane hav ati. xvi. Winter, x vii. Surpanakha. xviii. The Mutilation. xix, The Rousing of Khara. xx. The Giants' Death, xxi. The Rousing of Khara. xxii. Khara's Wrath, xxiii. The Omens, xxiv. The Host in Sight, xxv. The Battle, xxvi. Dushan's Death, xxvii. The Death of Trisiras. xxviii. Khara Dismounted, xxix. Khara's Defeat, xxx. Khara's Death. Page Page , 211 CANTO xxxi. Ravan. ... 265 xxxii. Ravan Roused. ... 267 xxxiii. Surpanakha's Speech. 268 xxxiv. Surpanakha's Speech. 269 xxxv. Ravan's Journey. ... 270 xxxvi. Ravan's Speech. ... 271 xxxvii. Marie ha's Speech. 272 xxxviii. Marieha's Speech. 273 xxxix. Marioha's Speech. 274 xl. Ravan's Speech. ... 275 xli.Mancha's Reply. ' ... 276 xlii. Maricha Transformed. 277 xliii. The Wondrous Deer. 278 xliv. Maricha's Death. ... 280 i. 225 xlv. Lakshman's Departure. 281 xlvi. The Guest. ... 282 xlvii. Ravan's Wooing. 284 xlviii. Ravan's Speech. ... 285 xlix. The Rape of Sita. ... 286 . Jatayus. ... 288, 229 . The Combat. ... 289 . 230 Iii. Ravan's Flight. ... 290 . 231 liii. Sita's Threats. ... 292 . 232 liv. Lanka. ... 293 . 233 Iv. Sita in Prison. ... 294 Ivi. Sita's Disdain. ... 295 . 236 Ivii. Sita Comforted. ... 293 . 237 Iviii. The Brothers' Meeting. 297 . 237 lix. Rama's Return. .. 298 . 239 Ix. Lakshman Reproved. 299 . 239 ]xi. .Rama's Lament. ... 300 . 243 Ixii. Rama's Lament. ... 301 . 244 Ixiii. Rama's Lament. ... 302 . 245 Ixiv. Rama's Lament. ... 303 . 247 Ixv. Rama's Wrath. ... 304 . 248 Ixvi. Lakshman's Speech. 306 Ixvii. Rama Appeased. ... 307 Ix viii. Jatayus. ... 308 i. 251 Ixix. The Death of Jatayus. 309 Ixx. Kabandha. ... 310 i. 253 Ixxi. Kabandha's Speech. 312 Ixxii. Kabandha's Tale. ... 312 Ixxiii. Kabandha's Counsel. 314 Ixxiv. Kabandha's Death. 315 Ixxv. avari. 316 Ixxvi. Pampa 317 ts. 260 . 261 BOOK IV. , 262 CANTO i. Rama's Lament. ... 319, 263 ii.Sugriva's Alarm. ... 324


text:
Page:Valmiki - Ramayana, Griffith, 1895.djvu/14

 Page CANTO Ixxv.The Night Attack. . . 434 xciii. Ravan's Lament. ... 485 xcvi. Ravan's Sally. ... 486 c. Ravan in the Field. ... 487 ci. Lakshman's Fall. ... 487 cii. Lakshman Healed. ... 4S8 ciii. Indra's Car. ... 488 cvi. Glory to the Sun. ... 489 cviii The Battle. ... 490 cix. The Battle ... 491 ex. llavan's Death. ... 491 cxi. Vibhishan's Lament ... 491 cxii. The Rakshas Dames. 492 cxiii. Mandodari's Lament. 492 cxiv. Vibhishan Conse- crated. ' ... 493 cxv. Sita's Joy. ... 494 cxvi. The Meeting. ... 495 cxvii. Sita's Disgrace. ... 495 CANTO cxviii. Sita's Keply. cxix. Glory to Vishnu. ... cxx. Sita Restored.' cxxi. Dasaratha cxxii. Indra's Boon, cxxiii. The Magic Car. ... cxxiv. The Departure. cxxv. The Return. cxxvi. Bharat Consoled. ... cxxvii Rama's Message cxxviii. Hanuiuan's Story, cxxix. The Meeting with Bharat. cxxx. The Consecration. APPENDIX Uttarakanda. Additional Notes. Index of Principal Names.

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


text:
User:Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1

 —Clarke's three laws
 * 1) When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right.  When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
 * 2) The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
 * 3) Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

title: User:Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1


text: The Statutes at Large (Ruffhead)/Volume 1/Dies Communes de Dote (51 Hen3. Stat 3) (1266)


text:
Page:Dictionary of spoken Russian (1945).djvu/231

 кузнец, (-а) "smith" (no inserted vowel: gs кузнеца, np кузнецы, and so on); перец (-рца) (the е is an inserted vowel: gs перца, ds перцу, and so on); отец (-тца) (the е is an inserted vowel: gs отца, np отцы, and so on).

Two accent marks mean that the stress is in either place: броня means that in all the forms the word is spoken with either stress: ns броня or броня, np брони or брони, and so on.

Shifting Accent. Quite a few nouns are irregular in their stress, which is in different places in different forms.

1. Some nouns shift their stress in the P forms; we indicate this by showing the np with the sign P before it:

сад, P -ы: the S forms stress the stem, gs сада, and so on; the P forms stress the endings, np сады, gp садов, dp садам, and so on; жена, P жёны: the S forms stress the endings, as жену, gs жены, and so on; the P forms stress the stem, np жёны, gp жён, dp жёнам, and so on.

2. Some nouns stress the stem in the S forms and in the np, but the endings in the other P forms; for these, we show the np and gp with the sign P before them:

вещь (P -щи, -щёй: gs вещи, is вещью, np вещи, but gp вещей, dp вещам, and so on).

3. Sometimes the gp has an irregular stress; then we give the np, gp, and dp, with the sign P before them:

сестра (P сёстры, сестёр, сёстрам): the S forms stress the endings, as сестру, gs сестры, and so on; the P forms stress the stem, except for the gp, which stresses the inserted vowel.

4. Other, less common shifts of stress are indicated by citation. For instance, some nouns in declension 1 which stress the endings in the S forms stress the stem in the as: голова, a голову, P головы, голов, головам.

An irregular accentuation given in parentheses is optional:

приз (P -ы): the S forms stress the stem, gs приза, and so on; the P forms are stressed either way, np призы or призы, gp призов or призов, and so on.

рукопись (P -си, -сёй) F: the S forms and the np stress the stem, gs and np рукописи, but the remaining P forms stress either way, gp рукописей or рукописей, dp рукописям or рукописям, and so on.

Irregular Forms. The dictionary indicates all irregular forms.

1. Some nouns have a different stem in the P forms from that of the S forms; we indicate this by showing the np, gp, and dp with the sign P before them:

брат, P братья, -тьев, -тьям: the S forms are regular, gs брата, ds брату, and so on; the P forms are made from a stem [bratjy-] and the np has the irregular ending [-а]; the gp is братьев, dp братьям, ip братьями, lp братьях.

2. Special irregular forms are shown separately;

лошадь, P -ди, -дёй, ip лошадьми F: the S forms are regular, gs лошади; the P has shifting stress, np лошади, but gp лошадей, dp лошадям, lp лошадях, and the ip has the entirely irregular form, as given.

Irregular forms between slanted lines are optional:

адрес (/P -a., -ob/): the P forms are either regular, np адресы ("speeches"), gp адресов, and so on, or else they stress the endings and have the irregular np ending [-а], np адреса ("designations of places"), gp адресов, dp адресам, and so on.

When nouns are compounded with пол- "half" they have the endings of the gs in the ns and as form; in all other case forms they have the usual endings, but пол- then optionally appears as полу-. Thus beside дюжина "dozen," as дюжину, gs дюжины, is дюжиной, there is полдюжины "half dozen," as полдюжины, gs полдюжины or полудюжины, is полдюжиной or полудюжиной, and so on.

In the nouns полдень "noon" and полночь "midnight," пол- has another meaning, and the inflection, though irregular, is different.

Nouns with the prefix in the form полу- do not have the above peculiarity; thus, полуостров "peninsula" inflects just like остров "island."

Abbreviations, such as СССР (for Союз Советских Социалистических Республик "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics") are pronounced by the names of the letters, with stress on the last: [es-es-es-er], and are indeclinable nouns. They are M when the name of the last letter ends in a consonant; when the name of the last letter ends in a vowel they have the gender of the noun in the full expression: for instance, ВКП [ve-ka-pe], for Всесоюзная Коммунистическая Партя "All-Russian Communist Party," feminine because партя is feminine.

Throughout the declension of nouns the habits of §3 and §4 will apply; we do not mention them specially for each noun.

сад [sat], but gs сада [sada] кубок [kub'k], but gs кубка [kupka] сад, np сады, but ключ, np ключи [-kji]; is with ending [-om]: столом, отцом, стулом, but рулём, музеем, автомобилем, перцем

Note especially the insertion of vowels when there is no ending.

трубка [-pk-], gp трубок [-b'k]


text:
Page:Beowulf (Wyatt).djvu/180

156

title: Page:Beowulf (Wyatt).djvu/180


text:
Jefferson Davis' Farewell Address to the Senate

I rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of announcing to the Senate that I have satisfactory evidence that the State of Mississippi, by a solemn ordinance of her people in convention assembled, has declared her separation from the United States. Under these circumstances, of course my functions are terminated here. It has seemed to me proper, however, that I should appear in the Senate to announce that fact to my associates, and I will say but very little more. The occasion does not invite me to go into argument; and my physical condition would not permit me to do so if it were otherwise; and yet it seems to become me to say something on the part of the State I here represent, on an occasion so solemn as this.

It is known to Senators who have served with me here, that I have for many years advocated, as an essential attribute of State sovereignty, the right of a State to secede from the Union. Therefore, if I had not believed there was justifiable cause; if I had thought that Mississippi was acting without sufficient provocation, or without an existing necessity, I should still, under my theory of the Government, because of my allegiance to the State of which I am a citizen, have been bound by her action. I, however, may be permitted to say that I do think she has justifiable cause, and I approve of her act. I conferred with her people before that act was taken, counseled them then that if the state of things which they apprehended should exist when the convention met, they should take the action which they have now adopted.

I hope none who hear me will confound this expression of mine with the advocacy of the right of a State to remain in the Union, and to disregard its constitutional obligations by the nullification of the law. Such is not my theory. Nullification and secession, so often confounded, are indeed antagonistic principles. Nullification is a remedy which it is sought to apply within the Union, and against the agent of the States. It is only to be justified when the agent has violated his constitutional obligation, and a State, assuming to judge for itself, denies the right of the agent thus to act, and appeals to the other States of the Union for a decision; but when the States themselves, and when the people of the States, have so acted as to convince us that they will not regard our constitutional rights, then, and then for the first time, arises the doctrine of secession in its practical application.

A great man who now reposes with his fathers, and who has been often arraigned for a want of fealty to the Union, advocated the doctrine of nullification, because it preserved the Union. It was because of his deep-seated attachment to the Union, his determination to find some remedy for existing ills short of a severance of the ties which bound South Carolina to the other States, that Mr. Calhoun advocated the doctrine of nullification, which he proclaimed to be peaceful, to be within the limits of State power, not to disturb the Union, but only to be a means of bringing the agent before the tribunal of the States for their judgment.

Secession belongs to a different class of remedies. It is to be justified upon the basis that the States are sovereign. There was a time when none denied it. I hope the time may come again, when a better comprehension of the theory of our Government, and the inalienable rights of the people of the States, will prevent any one from denying that each State is a sovereign, and thus may reclaim the grants which it has made to any agent whomsoever.

I therefore say I concur in the action of the people of Mississippi, believing it to be necessary and proper, and should have been bound by their action if my belief had been otherwise; and this brings me to the important point which I wish on this last occasion to present to the Senate. It is by this confounding of nullification and secession that the name of a great man, whose ashes now mingle with his mother earth, has been invoked to justify coercion against a seceded State. The phrase "to execute the laws," was an expression which General Jackson applied to the case of a State refusing to obey the laws while yet a member of the Union. That is not the case which is now presented. The laws are to be executed over the United States, and upon the people of the United States. They have no relation to any foreign country. It is a perversion of terms, at least it is a great misapprehension of the case, which cites that expression for application to a State which has withdrawn from the Union. You may make war on a foreign State. If it be the purpose of gentlemen, they may make war against a State which has withdrawn from the Union; but there are no laws of the United States to be executed within the limits of a seceded State. A State finding herself in the condition in which Mississippi has judged she is, in which her safety requires that she should provide for the maintenance of her rights out of the Union, surrenders all the benefits, (and they are known to be many,) deprives herself of the advantages, (they are known to be great,) severs all the ties of affection, (and they are close and enduring,) which have bound her to the Union; and thus divesting herself of every benefit, taking upon herself every burden, she claims to be exempt from any power to execute the laws of the United States within her limits.

I well remember an occasion when Massachusetts was arraigned before the bar of the Senate, and when then the doctrine of coercion was rife and to be applied against her because of the rescue of a fugitive slave in Boston. My opinion then was the same that it is now. Not in a spirit of egotism, but to show that I am not influenced in my opinion because the case is my own, I refer to that time and that occasion as containing the opinion which I then entertained, and on which my present conduct is based. I then said, if Massachusetts, following her through a stated line of conduct, chooses to take the last step which separates her from the Union, it is her right to go, and I will neither vote one dollar nor one man to coerce her back; but will say to her, God speed, in memory of the kind associations which once existed between her and the other States.

It has been a conviction of pressing necessity, it has been a belief that we are to be deprived in the Union of the rights which our fathers bequeathed to us, which has brought Mississippi into her present decision. She has heard proclaimed the theory that all men are created free and equal, and this made the basis of an attack upon her social institutions; and the sacred Declaration of Independence has been invoked to maintain the position of the equality of the races. That Declaration of Independence is to be construed by the circumstances and purposes for which it was made. The communities were declaring their independence; the people of those communities were asserting that no man was born--to use the language of Mr. Jefferson--booted and spurred to ride over the rest of mankind; that men were created equal--meaning the men of the political community; that there was no divine right to rule; that no man inherited the right to govern; that there were no classes by which power and place descended to families, but that all stations were equally within the grasp of each member of the body-politic. These were the great principles they announced; these were the purposes for which they made their declaration; these were the ends to which their enunciation was directed. They have no reference to the slave; else, how happened it that among the items of arraignment made against George III was that he endeavored to do just what the North has been endeavoring of late to do--to stir up insurrection among our slaves? Had the Declaration announced that the negroes were free and equal, how was the Prince to be arraigned for stirring up insurrection among them? And how was this to be enumerated among the high crimes which caused the colonies to sever their connection with the mother country? When our Constitution was formed, the same idea was rendered more palpable, for there we find provision made for that very class of persons as property; they were not put upon the footing of equality with white men--not even upon that of paupers and convicts; but, so far as representation was concerned, were discriminated against as a lower caste, only to be represented in the numerical proportion of three fifths.

Then, Senators, we recur to the compact which binds us together; we recur to the principles upon which our Government was founded; and when you deny them, and when you deny to us the right to withdraw from a Government which thus perverted threatens to be destructive of our rights, we but tread in the path of our fathers when we proclaim our independence, and take the hazard. This is done not in hostility to others, not to injure any section of the country, not even for our own pecuniary benefit; but from the high and solemn motive of defending and protecting the rights we inherited, and which it is our sacred duty to transmit unshorn to our children.

I find in myself, perhaps, a type of the general feeling of my constituents towards yours. I am sure I feel no hostility to you, Senators from the North. I am sure there is not one of you, whatever sharp discussion there may have been between us, to whom I cannot now say, in the presence of my God, I wish you well; and such, I am sure, is the feeling of the people whom I represent towards those whom you represent. I therefore feel that I but express their desire when I say I hope, and they hope, for peaceful relations with you, though we must part. They may be mutually beneficial to us in the future, as they have been in the past, if you so will it. The reverse may bring disaster on every portion of the country; and if you will have it thus, we will invoke the God of our fathers, who delivered them from the power of the lion, to protect us from the ravages of the bear; and thus, putting our trust in God and in our own firm hearts and strong arms, we will vindicate the right as best we may.

In the course of my service here, associated at different times with a great variety of Senators, I see now around me some with whom I have served long; there have been points of collision; but whatever of offense there has been to me, I leave here; I carry with me no hostile remembrance. Whatever offense I have given which has not been redressed, or for which satisfaction has not been demanded, I have, Senators, in this hour of our parting, to offer you my apology for any pain which, in heat of discussion, I have inflicted. I go hence unencumbered of the remembrance of any injury received, and having discharged the duty of making the only reparation in my power for any injury offered.

Mr. President, and Senators, having made the announcement which the occasion seemed to me to require, it only remains to me to bid you a final adieu.

Jefferson Davise hüvastijätukõne USA Senatis


text:
Page:O. F. Owen's Organon of Aristotle Vol. 2 (1853).djvu/155

 justly with courageously. So also with opposites, for if these be the same, the opposites to these also are the same, according to any of the modes of opposition stated, since it makes no difference whether we take an opposite to this or that, as they are the same. Again, from efficients and corruptives, also from generations, corruptions, and in short, from things which subsist similarly with reference to either, for whatever are simply the same, the generations and corruptions also of these are the same, and besides, the efficients and corruptives.

Examine also, whether of those things of which one is especially said to be a certain thing, another also is especially predicated according to the same; as Xenocrates shows that a happy and a worthy life are the same, because a worthy and a happy, are the most eligible of all lives, for the most eligible, and the greatest, are one thing. Likewise, in other things of the same kind; yet it is necessary that each of those which are said to be the greatest, or the most eligible, should be one in number, otherwise it will not be demonstrated that it is the same, since it is not necessary, if the Peloponnesians and the Lacedæmonians are the bravest of the Greeks, that the Peloponnesians should be the same with the Lacedæmonians, as a Peloponnesian and a Lacedaemonian are not one in number. Still it is requisite that one should be contained under the other, as Lacedæmonians under Peloponnesians, otherwise it will happen that they are better than each other, if the one be not comprehended under the other, for it is necessary that the Peloponnesians should be better than the Lacedæmonians, if the one be not contained under the other, for they are better than all the rest (of the Greeks). So also it is necessary that the Lacedæmonians should be better than the Peloponnesians, for these also are better than all the rest, so that they are better than each other. It is clear then, that what is said to be best, and greatest, ought to be one in number, if we would show that it is the same, for which reason


text: The Statutes at Large (Ruffhead)/Volume 1/Statutum Hibernie de Coheredibus


text:
Page:O. F. Owen's Organon of Aristotle Vol. 2 (1853).djvu/164

 above-named are inherent, and that what is assigned is genus, and that the sentence is appropriate,) and besides these, that the sentence denotes the very nature of a thing, and it is necessary to do this well.

Among other things, property is especially a thing of this sort, for it is easier to subvert it, from its consisting, for the most part, of many things, and it is most difficult of confirmation, because we must combine many things, and besides, show that it is inherent in this alone, and reciprocates with a thing.

Of all however, the easiest is to confirm accident, for in others, not only inherency, but inherency thus, must be shown; but as to accident it suffices to show its inherency only. On the other hand, accident is the hardest to subvert, because the fewest things are given in it, for it is not signified in accident, over and above other things, how it is inherent, so that subversion is possible in two ways; as to the rest, either by showing non-inherency, or non-inherency in this way; but in accident, it is impossible to subvert, except by showing that it is not inherent.

The places then, through which we shall be well provided with arguments against the several problems, have almost sufficiently been enumerated.

Chapter 1
must next speak about order, and in what manner it is necessary to interrogate. In the first place then, he who is about to interrogate, should discover a place whence he may argue; secondly, he should interrogate and arrange the several particulars to himself; thirdly and lastly, he should advance them against another person. Now as to the discovery of the place, its consideration pertains alike to the philosopher and to the dialectician; but how to arrange these, and to interrogate, is the peculiar province of the dialectician, since the whole of this refers to another


text:
Translation:Arukh ha-Shulchan/Orach Chaim/684

This chapter contains five sections: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Section 1
The Torah reading for every day of Chanukka are the offerings of the princes in the Naso portion [Bamidbar, 7.1]. The reason given in the Pesikta is that the work on the Mishkan (Tabernacle) was completed on the twenty fifth day of the month of Kislev, as I have previously mentioned in chapter 670.

The reading begins at the words "ויהי ביום כלות משה" - "It was on the day Moshe finished...", which is the beginning of the account. There are locales where the custom was to begin at the priestly blessings [6.22] beacuse the miracle of Chanukkua occurred through the agency of Kohanim [members of the priestly class], and the Tur describes it as a 'beautiful custom'. Even so, we do not accustom ourselves so since these verses are not part of the subject matter of the princes' offerings.

Section 2
The order of the readings is as follows:

One the first day one begins at "ויהי ביום כלות משה" - "And it was on the day that Moshe completed...". This sections has many verses and is apportioned between the Kohen and Levi. The third reading is the portion of the price of Judah's offering. Some say instead that the Kohen is given the entire portion of "ויהי ביום כלות משה" - "And it was on the day that Moshe completed...", while the Levi and Yisrael divide the verses regarding the prince of Judah's offering. Their reason is that the purpose of this reading is to recount the offerings of the tribal princes, and therefore the majority of the readings should be split among a prince's offering. This is our custom.

One the second day the Kohen reads the from the words "ביום השני" - "On the second day" until "פר אחד בן בקר" - "a cow from among the cattle". The Levi then reads from "פר אחד" - "one cow" until "ביום השלישי" - "On the third day". A Yisrael then repeats the portion of "ביום השני" - "On the second day". Others say that the Yisrael reads the portion "ביום השלישי" - "One the third day", since it preferable to read the following day's portion rather than repeat the previous readings, if possible. A similar approach is followed on every one of the days.

On the eighth day the Kohen and Levi are apportioned the section "ביום השמיני" - "On the eighth day", since that is the day's obligatory offering. The Yisrael then reads from "ביום התשיעי" - "On the ninth day" until the conclusion of the princes' offerings, as well as the section "זאת חנוכת המזבח" - "This was the inauguration of the Altar", and finally the section of "בהעלתך" - "When you kindle the lamps...[of the Menorah in the Temple]" until "כן עשה את המנורה" - "so did he construct the Menorah", as this is all of one subject and bears reading until its completion.

Section 3
When Chanukkah falls out on Shabbos two Torah scrolls are used for the readings. From one the Torah portion of the week is read, which generally will be the portion of Miketz. From the other the Chanukkah portion for that day is read as the Maftir. The Haftorah read is the vision of the candelabra in Zecharia [Zechariah 2.14-4.7], starting from "רני ושמחי" - "Sing and rejoice". If the first day of Chanukkah falls out on Shabbos, so that Chanukkah will fall on Shabbos twice, the Haftorah read on the second Shabbos is that of the Menorah of King Solomon, starting with "ויעש חירום" - "And Chiram constructed..." [Melachim I, 7.40-50].

Our teacher the Rema writes that "if a wedding fell on this Shabbos one should still read that of Chanukkah." Until here is the quote. He means to say that the Haftorah of "שוש אשיש" - "Rejoice greatly..." [Yeshayahu 61.10-62.5], which would normally be recited by a groom, is not said. This ruling applied to the custom his community had. We, however, never read a special Haftorah for a groom at any time.

Section 4
When the first day of the month of Teves (Rosh Chodesh) occurs on Shabbos three Torah scolls are used. The first six readings of the Shabbos portion are read out of the first. In fact, it is prohibited to read more than six readings from the first Torah, as the seventh must be read from the second scroll in order to include one of required number of Shabbos readings. Though that be so, the actual portion read as the seventh reading is that of Rosh Chodesh, following the maxim that the more common occurrence has precedence. Even though Chanukkah has the relative advantage of having the status of a public commemoration of a miracle its commemoration will not be lost as the readings of the Maftir and the Haftorah are both related to Channukah. When reading the portion for Rosh Chodesh one begins from the words "וביום השבת" - "And on the day of Shabbos" since the day itself is Shabbos.

The Maftir is read from the third scroll and the Haftorah is that of Chanukkah, "רני ושמחי" - "Sing and rejoice".

If Rosh Chodesh occurs on a weekday two Torah scrolls are used. The first is used for the three readings of Rosh Chodesh and the second scroll is used for the Channukah portion, according to whatever its portion is that day. (See further in chapter 685, section 4)

Section 5
If the Torah reader mistakenly read part of the section of Rosh Chodesh for the fourth Aliyah there is no concern if a second Torah was not taken out, since Chanukka has no additional Musaf offering that would necessitate its own reading. This true even if the mistake was realized during the fourth reading, before it was completed - Chanukka's reading is considered lost. If, however, a second scroll was already removed from the ark, a fifth person must have a portion read on his behalf to avoid giving the appearance that the second scroll is somehow unfit to be used. This portion should be the Chanukka portion, and the Kadish is recited after this reading. If Kadish had already been recited after the fourth reading it need not be repeated (Magen Avraham).

Our teacher the Rema writes: "If one mistakenly began with the Chanukka reading he should stop at once and switch to the Rosh Chodesh reading." Until here is the quote. This would be comparable in its way to placing the head Tefillin before the arm Tefillin. (Magen Avraham)

Other dispute this ruling, directing the reader to complete the first reading, the Kohen portion, in the Chanukka section and only then switching to the Rosh Chodesh portion. (Taz and Rabbi N. Katz [WHO IS THIS?]). Either way, it should be clear that if three verses were already read from the Chanukka portion they count as one of the four Aliyot, even according to the Rema, so that only three more Aliyot are required to be read from the Rosh Chodesh section.

In terms of a practical ruling, one should follow the dissenting opinion since stopping in the middle of a reading would also create the false impression that there is defect (Pegam) in the first Torah scroll. The same practice would also be followed on a Shabbos Chanukka which fell on the day of Rosh Chodesh. (The fact that this law was stated in regard to the weekdays was simply to teach that even in this circumstance an additional 'Aliya' is required. The same would certainly apply to 'Shabbos' as well. (Rabbi Akiva Eiger))

ערוך השולחן אורח חיים תרפד


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/443

 of Bristol, signed the petition for the recall of the order. Proceeding to Whitehall with the five other bishops Lloyd presented the petition to the king, and took a leading part in the discussion which ensued (Correspondence of Henry Hyde, Earl of Clarendon, ii. 172, 478–80). On 8 June Sancroft and the six bishops appeared before the privy council to answer to a charge of publishing a seditious libel against the king, when they refused to give bail for their appearance before the king's bench, and were thereupon committed to the Tower by an order of the council (ib. ii. 175, 481–4). On the 15th they were brought by water to the court of king's bench at Westminster, where they pleaded not guilty to the charge, and were released on their own recognisances. Lloyd was unable to get through Palace Yard by reason of the crowds of people, who pressed round him in their enthusiasm and kissed his hands and garments, and was rescued by Lord Clarendon, who took him home in his carriage by a circuitous way (ib. ii. 177). On 29 June they were tried before the Lord-chief-justice Wright and Justices Alibone, Holloway, and Powell. The trial lasted over nine hours. Wright and Alibone were in favour of a conviction, but Holloway and Powell maintained that the defendants had not been guilty of libel. At seven in the evening the jury retired to consider their verdict, and at ten o'clock on the following morning returned one of not guilty, ‘upon which there was a most wonderful shout that one would have thought the hall had cracked, insomuch that the court took notice of it’ (ib. ii. 179).

Lloyd was a staunch supporter of the revolution, and by his ingenious arguments is said to have reconciled a number of the clergy to the change of government. He assisted at the coronation of William and Mary, and was shortly afterwards appointed lord high almoner. On the death of Thomas Wood, Lloyd was translated to the see of Lichfield and Coventry (20 Oct. 1692), and on 29 April 1695 was sworn in a commissioner for managing ecclesiastical affairs (, iii. 466). From Lichfield he was translated to Worcester, in succession to Edward Stillingfleet, on 20 Jan. 1700.

On 2 Nov. 1702 Sir John Pakington preferred in the House of Commons a complaint against Lloyd and his son for endeavouring to prevent his return to parliament for Worcestershire. After hearing some evidence on the 18th of the same month the house resolved that Lloyd's proceedings had been ‘malicious, unchristian, and arbitrary, in high violation of the liberties and privileges of the commons of England,’ that an address should be presented to the queen, requesting her to remove him from the office of almoner, and that his son should be prosecuted by the attorney-general ‘after his privilege as a member of the lower house of convocation is out’ (Journals of the House of Commons, xiv. 37). Though the House of Lords on the following day agreed to an address representing to the queen that it was ‘the undoubted right of every lord of parliament and of every other subject of England to have an opportunity of making his defence before he suffer any sort of punishment’ (Journals of the House of Lords, xvii. 168), Anne promptly removed him from the office of almoner.

Half crazed by an unremitting study of the apocalyptic visions Lloyd came to number himself among the prophets. Accordingly, on 30 June 1712, he ‘went to the queen by appointment, to prove to her majesty, out of Daniel and the Revelation, that four years hence there would be a war of religion; that the king of France would be a protestant and fight on their side; that the popedom would be destroyed, &c.; and declared that he would be content to give up his bishopric if it were not true’ (, Works, 1814, iii. 92). Harley, who was present at the interview, appears to have ‘confounded him sadly in his own learning’ by offering another interpretation to one of his texts, whereupon Lloyd excitedly exclaimed to the queen: ‘So says your treasurer; but God says otherwise, whether he like it or no’ (, Hist. of my own Time, i. 345–6 n.) On another occasion Lloyd expounded his prophecies to Evelyn and Pepys (Diary and Correspondence of John Evelyn, ii. 309). Whiston, who had the greatest respect for Lloyd as an interpreter, declares that he had heard him ‘thank God for being able to read the prophecies as he read history’ (Memoirs, pt. i. p. 33). Lloyd died at Hartlebury Castle, Worcestershire, on 30 Aug. 1717, in the ninety-first year of his age, and was buried on 10 Sept. following in Fladbury Church, near Evesham, where there is a monument with a long Latin inscription to his memory.

Lloyd was an excellent scholar and a hard-working man. Though his temper was irritable his piety and his learning commanded general respect. According to his friend Burnet, Lloyd ‘had read the most books, and with the best judgment, and had made the most copious abstracts out of them of any in this age; so that [Bishop] Wilkins used to say he had the most learning in ready cash of any he ever knew’ (Hist. of my own Time, i. 345). Lloyd was more scrupulous than many of his contemporaries in the matter of admission to holy orders, and was one of the


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/444

 five bishops who entered into a solemn compact to resist any laxity on that point. While bishop of St. Asaph he held a number of livings in commendam (, Alumni Oxon. 1500–1714, iii. 931). He continued to the end of his life to believe that the Prince of Wales (James II's son) was a supposititious child, and his reasons for this erroneous belief are preserved among the Addit. MSS. in the British Museum (Nos. 32096, 33286). There is no record of any of his speeches in the House of Lords, and only four protests appear to have been signed by him (, Protests of the House of Lords, 1875, Nos. lxxix. lxxx. cxvi. cxlii.). He is ridiculed under the name of ‘Mysterio’ in William Shippen's ‘Faction Display'd,’ 1704, pp. 5–6, a poem which is sometimes erroneously attributed to Defoe. A half-length portrait of Lloyd was lent by the Archbishop of Canterbury to the Exhibition of National Portraits at South Kensington in 1866 (Catalogue, No. 1006). There are engravings of Lloyd by Logan, Sturt, and Vertue. His portrait also appears on the eight different medals which were struck, and in the numerous prints which were engraved in commemoration of the acquittal of the seven bishops (see, Life of Thomas Ken, i. 9–10, 292).

Lloyd married at Westminster Abbey, on 3 Dec. 1668, Anne, the eldest daughter of the Rev. Walter Jones, D.D., prebendary of Westminster, by his wife Philippa, daughter of Dr. Samuel Fell, dean of Christ Church, Oxford. His widow survived him only two years, and died on 18 Sept. 1719, aged 72. Their son William became rector of Fladbury on 15 Aug. 1713, and was appointed chancellor of the diocese of Worcester. The proceedings against him in accordance with the resolution of the House of Commons of 18 Nov. 1702 appear to have dropped. His ‘Series Chronologica Olympiadum, Pythiadum, Isthmiadum, Nemeadum,’ &c. (Oxford, 1700, fol.), is supposed to have been principally written by his father. Whiston says that he married a daughter of ‘the Lady Caverly’ (Memoirs, pt. i. p. 182). He died in September 1719, aged 45.

Lloyd engaged Burnet to undertake ‘The History of the Reformation of the Church of England,’ furnishing him ‘with a curious collection of his own observations,’ and correcting it ‘with a most critical exactness; so that the first materials and the last finishing of it are from him’ (, Hist. of the Reformation, &c., 1829, i. ix.). He assisted John Wilkins [q. v.], bishop of Chester, in writing ‘An Essay towards a Real Character and a Philosophical Language,’ &c. (London, 1688, fol.), and compiled ‘The Alphabetical Dictionary’ appended thereto. He is said to have suggested to Matthew Poole the execution of his ‘Synopsis Criticorum aliorumque S. Scripturæ Interpretum’ (London, 1669–76, fol. 4 vols.), and under his advice Moses Pitt published ‘The English Atlas’ (Oxford, 1680–2, fol. 5 vols.). He translated into English ‘The Life, Martyrdom, and Miracles of St. George, written in Greek at Ashmole's request by Jeremy Priest and Dr. of the Eastern Church’ (Ashmolean MS. No. 1134), and left an unfinished manuscript, entitled ‘A Discourse of the three Orders in the Ministry of the Christian Church, now called Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, shewing out of the Holy Scriptures that they are of Divine Institution.’ Many of his manuscripts have been destroyed (, Miscell. of Literature, 1840, p. 88), but several of his letters are preserved among the Sloane and Addit. MSS. in the British Museum. Among the Cole MSS. in the museum is a curious letter, dated 21 Nov. 1702, from a clergyman of the diocese of Lichfield and Coventry to Bishop Watson of St. Davids, in which the character of ‘the late prophet Malachi,’ i.e. Lloyd, is sketched in the most uncomplimentary terms (xxxv. 103 a, 104 a). His large folio Bible, ‘interleaved and interlaced’ with ‘an immense treasure of remarks,’ but ‘all in shorthand known only to himself and to his chaplain,’ cannot now be traced (, Lit. Anecdotes, 1812, iv. 731; see also, Memoirs, pt. i. pp. 34–5). A Welsh edition of the Bible, sometimes known as Bishop Lloyd's Bible, was published in 1690 (Rhydychain, fol.). The chronology is Lloyd's. He also superintended an edition of the ‘English Bible’ (Oxford, 1701, fol.), to which he added the chronological dates and an index.

Besides a number of single sermons preached on various public occasions Lloyd published: 1. ‘The Late Apology [by Roger Palmer, earl of Castlemaine, and Robert Pugh] in behalf of the Papists, reprinted and answered in behalf of the Royallists,’ London, 1667, 4to (anon.); another edition, London, 1667, 4to; fourth edition corrected, London, 1675, 4to. This pamphlet has been also attributed to Charles, earl of Derby. 2. ‘A Seasonable Discourse, shewing the Necessity of Maintaining the Established Religion in opposition to Popery,’ London, 1673, 4to (anon.); the second, third, and fourth editions, London, 1673, 4to; the fifth edition, corrected according to the mind of the author, London, 1673, 4to. This pamphlet has also been ascribed to Dr. Fell. 3. ‘A Reasonable Defence of the Seasonable Discourse, shewing the Necessity of Maintaining the Established Religion in opposition to Popery. Or, a Reply to a Treatise [by


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/445

 Roger Palmer, earl of Castlemaine, printed at Antwerp, 1673], called A Full Answer and Confutation of a Scandalous Pamphlet,’ &c., London, 1674, 4to (anon.) 4. ‘The Difference between the Church and Court of Rome considered; in some Reflections on a Dialogue entituled A Conference between two Protestants and a Papist. By the author of the late “Seasonable Discourse,”’ London, 1674, 4to; second edition, corrected and augmented, London, 1674, 4to. 5. ‘Papists no Catholicks: and Popery no Christianity,’ London, 1677 (anon.); the second edition, much enlarged, London, 1679, 4to. 6. ‘Considerations touching the True Way to suppress Popery in this Kingdom; by making a Distinction between men of loyal and disloyal Principles in that Communion. On occasion whereof is inserted an Historical Account of the Reformation here in England,’ London, 1677, 4to (anon.). Lloyd's object in writing this was to distinguish between the ‘church catholicks’ and the jesuitical party, and to urge that toleration should be granted to the former. 7. ‘An Alarme for Sinners,’ &c., London, 1679, 4to. This was published by Lloyd from the original copy of the confession of Robert Foulkes [q.v.]. 8. ‘An Historical Account of Church Government, as it was in Great Britain and Ireland, when they first received the Christian Religion,’ London, 1684, 8vo; the second edition, London, 1684, 8vo. Reprinted in vol. i. of Pantin's edition of Stillingfleet's ‘Origines Britannicæ, or the Antiquities of the British Churches,’ 1842, where an account of the controversy which Lloyd's book aroused will be found. 9. ‘An Answer to the Bishop of Oxford's Reasons for abrogating the Test impos'd on all Members of Parliament anno 1678, Octob. 30 … By a Person of Quality,’ London, 1688, 4to. 10. ‘A Letter to Dr. Sherlock, in vindication of that part of Josephus's History which gives an account of Iaddus the high-priest's submitting to Alexander the Great while Darius was living. Against the Answer to the piece intituled Obedience and Submission to the Present Government,’ London, 1691, 4to (anon.); the second edition, 1691, 4to. 11. ‘A Discourse of God's ways of disposing of Kingdoms [on Psalm lxxv. 6, 7],’ part i. London, 1691, 4to. No further part appears to have been published. The proposal that this book should be burnt was negatived in the House of Lords by eleven votes on 2 Jan. 1693 (Life of Anthony à Wood, 1772, p. 368). 12. ‘The Pretences of the French Invasion examined, for the information of the People of England,’ London, 1692, 4to. (anon.). This pamphlet has been also ascribed to the Earl of Nottingham; it was translated in 1693 into French and German. 13. ‘A Chronological Account of the Life of Pythagoras, and of other Famous Men his Contemporaries. With an Epistle to … Dr. Bentley about Porphyry's and Iamblichus's Lives of Pythagoras,’ London, 1699, 8vo. This is reprinted in vol. xii. of Lord Somers's ‘Collection of Scarce and Valuable Tracts,’ 1814, 2nd edit. pp. 74–101. He printed, but did not publish, the three following unfinished works: 1. ‘An Exposition of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks which God sent to Daniel by the Angel Gabriel. Dan. ix. 24–7,’ 4to. 2. ‘A System of Chronology,’ fol., whence Lloyd's chaplain, Benjamin Marshall, compiled his ‘Chronological Tables’ (Oxford, 1712, fol.), in which was inserted Lloyd's ‘Exposition of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks,’ &c. 3. ‘A Harmony of the Gospels,’ 4to.

[Burnet's Hist. of my own Time, 1833; Correspondence of Henry Hyde, Earl of Clarendon, 1828; Luttrell's Brief Historical Relation of State Affairs, 1857; Wood's Athenæ Oxon. 1820; Diary and Correspondence of John Evelyn, 1857; Diary and Correspondence of Samuel Pepys, 1858, iii. 22, 329, iv. 248, 260; Memoirs and Travels of Sir John Reresby, 1875, pp. 394–398; Lake's Diary, Camden Miscell. 1847, i. 17–18, 23–4; Calamy's Historical Account of his own Life, 1830, i. 195, ii. 68–71, 185, 382–4; Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Mr. William Whiston, 1749, pt. i. pp. 31–5, 106–9, 124, 148, 182, 248, 427–9; Salmon's Lives of the English Bishops, 1733, pp. 147–56; the Evidence given at the Bar of the House of Commons upon the Complaint of Sir John Pakington, &c. 1702; Mackintosh's Hist. of the Revolution in England in 1688, 1834, pp. 239–78, 623–4; Macaulay's Hist. of England, 1889, i. 496–505, 508–9, 511–21, 544–5, 560, 713, ii. 112, 715; Hearne's Collections, ed. Doble; Howell's State Trials, 1812, xii. 183–524, xiv. 545–60; Plumptre's Life of Ken, 1889, i. 66, 140, 145, 293–316, ii. 1–10, 302; Abbey's English Church and its Bishops, 1700–1800, 1887, i. 125–8, ii. 25; Biog. Brit. 1760, v. 2986–92; Chalmers's Biographical Dictionary; Nash's Hist. of Worcestershire, 1781, pp. 449–51, 454 (with three portraits); Coates's Hist. of Reading, 1802, pp. 102, 110–15; Memorials of the Church of SS Peter and Wilfrid, Ripon, 1886 (Surtees Soc.), ii. 298–9; Chester's Westminster Abbey Registers, 1876 (Harl. Soc.), p. 5; Granger's Biog. Hist. of England, 1775, iv. 287–9, Continuation by Noble, 1806, ii. 81–83; Le Neve's Fasti Eccl. Anglic. 1854; Cole MSS. (Brit. Mus.) xxv. 102 b, 103 b, 103 a, 104 a; Cat. of Oxford Graduates, 1851, p. 418; Notes and Queries, 7th ser. xi. 27, 88; Watt's Bibl. Brit. 1824; Halkett and Laing's Dict. of Anon. and Pseudon. Lit. 1882–8; Brit. Mus. Cat.]


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Lloyd, William (1627-1717)


text:
Bought and Paid For

(She.) Love used to be such a perfect dream of romance, Now its a bus'ness deal, (He.) Right upto date is Romeo, (She.) And Juliet is not so slow.

(He.) For our modern marriages leave nothing to chance, Lovers no longer kneel, (She.) Love is not a sentimental song impassioned (He.) Moonlight, music, Poetry and flow'rs all

(She.) That's old fashioned now (He.) That's old fashioned.

Girls never say they will honor and obey, They're much too wise, (She.) That is quite passé, (He.) But leave that to me and in time well

Refrain. (She.) You're the prize I played for, that's what men are made for, Now your liberty you resign, You are mine Bought and paid for.

Cupid's ship entices, All must pay his prices, If a bargain you seem to be, you're sent home C. O. D.

(He.) But we'll be happy you and I In spite of any marriage tie. Let us pretend we don't care what the world discovers

(She.) Let us imagine we are free Like turtle doves we will agree, (Both.) And all the world will say we're a pair of foolish lovers

(She.) Because dear, Girls in the olden days were clinging young vines Men the oaks they say (He.) That clinging vine is now a joke, (She.) Unless it's who is the oak.

(He.) That sort of theory is folly you'll find, Battles the man must fight (She.) So must she, she has to be her own defender

(He.) He's the strong one and his motto must be: (She.) Don't offend her please. (He.) No surrender.

If we are one, we will soon decide which one, If you or I. (She.) Either you or I. (He.) When we disagree leave it all to me.

Refrain. (She.) You're the prize I played for that's what men are make [sic] for Now your liberty you resign You are mine Bought and paid for.

Cupid's shop entices, All must pay his prices, If a bargain you seem to be, You're sent home C. O. D.

title: Bought and Paid For


text: Talk:Bought and Paid For

title: Talk:Bought and Paid For


text:
Page:Dictionary of spoken Russian (1945).djvu/232

 ложка [-šk-], gp ложек [-ž'k] кухня, gp кухонь овца, gp овец сестра, gp сестёр

but, for instance, звезда, gp звёзд; битва, gp витв, because [d] and [v] are not among the consonants before which a vowel is inserted.

First Declension. Nouns of the First Declension have the following endings. Our example shows the stem [yam-] "pit."

The is has also a longer form in [-oyu]: ямою, рукою or рукой.

Most nouns of this declension are F. A few, denoting persons, are M: судья "judge." All those that denote only male persons are M: дядя "uncle." A few that denote persons are M or F, according to the sex: сирота "orphan": этот сирота "this (male) orphan," эта сирота "this (female) orphan." Adjectives that modify a M noun of this declension in as form have the gs form (as though the noun belonged to declension 2): ns мой дядя "my uncle," gs моего дяди, as он встретил моего дядю "he met my uncle."

Special Features of Spelling. On stems that end in [iy] the ds and ls ending is written -и: армия, stem [armjiy-], dls армии. When the inserted vowel in the gp comes before й and is unstressed, it is written и: гостья "female guest," stem [gostjy-], gp гостий.

Irregularities. Some nouns of this declension which stress the endings in the S forms, nevertheless shift the stress to the stem in the as form; in the dictionary we indicate this by giving the as: голова a голову: this means that the gs is головы, dls голове, is головой.

Quite a few nouns of this declension have irregularities of stress in the np or the gp or both; in all such cases we give the np, gp, and dp; the ip and lp go like the dp: голова, a голову, P головы, голов, головам.

Irregular forms occur especially in the gp; the dictionary cites them: война, gp войн (no vowel insertion); басня, gp -сен (hard [n] instead of soft [nj] at the end of the gp form).

Second Declension. Nouns of the Second Declension have the following endings. As an example we take the stem [fakt-] "fact."

The as of inanimates is like the ns; the as of animates is like the gs: я знаю этот факт "I know this fact," but, with человек "person, man," я знаю этого человека "I know this person, this man."

All nouns in this declension are M.

Special Features. On stems that end in [iy] the ls ending is written with -и: гений "genius," ls гении.

Stems ending in a soft consonant other than й, and stems ending in ж, ш have the ending [-ey] in the gp: руль, gp рулей; автомобиль, gp автомобилей; нож, gp ножей; карандаш, gp карандашей; but музей, gp музеев; край, gp краёв.

Irregular Forms. Some nouns fail to insert a vowel in the ns form: блеск, рубль. Some insert a vowel other than the usual one: сон, gs сна, np сны, and so on. This appears sufficiently in the ns form given in the dictionary.

Most nouns that denote divisible substances have a second gs form with the ending [-u], used when a part or quantity of the substance is involved: чай "tea," gs чая (as, цвет чая "the color of tea"), but стакан чаю "a glass of tea," дайте мне чаю "give me some tea." Some other nouns have this second gs form in special phrases: берег "shore, bank," gs берега, but с берегу "down from the bank." This is indicated in the dictionary thus: чай /g -ю/.

Some nouns have a second ls form with the ending [-u], always stressed. This form is used after one or both of the prepositions в and на, either always or optionally or in special phrases: лес "wood, forest," ls лесе (о лесе "about the woods"), but в лесу "in the woods." This is indicated by the phrase between slanted lines: лес, P -а, -ов /в лесу/.

Some nouns have the np ending [-а] and stress the P endings; for these we give the np and gp: город, P -а, -ов; адрес (P -а, -ов), optionally regular.

Third Declension. Nouns of the Third Declension have the following endings; all except ns, np, and gp are the same as in the Second Declension. As an example we take the stem [bljud-] "dish."

Note that the ns ending when unstressed sounds like the gs and np: [bljuda]; the difference appears under stress: окно "window," gs окна. Similarly after soft consonants: ns поле "field" [polja] sounds just like gs поля, but ns ружьё [ružyo] "gun" differs from gsружья [-žya]. After soft consonants and ж, ц, ш, the ns ending [-o], being written е, looks like the ls, though the two differ in sound: ns поле, сердце


text:
Page:Beowulf (Wyatt).djvu/178

The order of words is strictly alphabetical, except in the case of compound verbs, which will be found under their simple verbs.

Past participles compounded with ge- are usually glossed under the simple verb (Sievers § 366), but there are some marked exceptions; e.g. gegongen is the pp. of gongan in 822, 3036, hut of gegongan in 893, 3085.

æ comes between ad and af.

ð and þ are treated as identical, and come after t.

Numerous cross references are given, especially for unusual forms, but not as a rule for mere flexional forms which a knowledge of grammar should suffice to trace, such as parts of verbs.

All words are glossed under forms which actually occur in the poem, not under normalised forms. When divergent forms of the same word occur and cross references are not given,

Dative and Instrumental are not distinguished, except when they have different forms, as in the singular of adjectives and of some pronouns.

Small capitals are used for modern renderings which are directly or almost directly descended from the Old English words.

The following abbreviations alone require explanation :

title: Page:Beowulf (Wyatt).djvu/178


text:
Page:Beowulf (Wyatt).djvu/34

10

Fyrst forð gewāt;flota wæs on ȳðum, bāt under beorge.Beornas gearwe on stefn stigon;strēamas wundon sund wið sande;secgas bǣron on bearm nacanbeorhte frætwe, gūð-searo geatolīc;guman ūt scufon, weras on wil-sīð,wudu bundenne. Gewât þā ofer wǣg-holmwinde gefȳsed flota fāmi-heals fugle gelīcost, oð þæt ymb an-tīd ōþres dōgores wunden-stefnagewaden hæfde, þæt ðā līðendeland gesāwon, brim-clifu blīcan,beorgas stēape, sīde sǣ-næssas;þā wæs sund liden eoletes æt ende.Þanon up hraðe Wedera lēodeon wang stigon, sǣ-wudu sǣldon;syrcan hrysedon, gūð-gewǣdo;Gode þancedon, þæs þe him ȳþ-lādeēaðe wurdon. *Þā of wealle geseahweard Scildinga, sē þe holm-clifuhealdan scolde, beran ofer bolcanbeorhte randas, fyrd-searu fūslicu;hine fyrwyt bræc mōd-gehygdum,hwæt þā men wǣron. Gewāt him þā tō waroðewicge rīdan

title: Page:Beowulf (Wyatt).djvu/34


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/106

 History of the Stage; lives are also given in Rose, the two Biographies Générales, the Georgian Era, Galt's Lives of the Players, and many other compilations. See also Genest's Account of the English Stage; Horace Walpole's Letters, ed. Cunningham, passim; Wheatley and Cunningham's London Past and Present; Clark Russell's Representative Actors; Stanley's Historic Memorials of Westminster Abbey; Cibber's Apology, ed. Lowe; Davies's Dramatic Miscellanies and Life of Garrick; Doran's Annals of the Stage, ed. Lowe, &c.; Notes and Queries, 2nd ser. ix. 420, xi. 123, 144, 3rd ser. vi. 148, 216, 318.]

 OLDFIELD, HENRY GEORGE (d. 1791?), antiquary collaborated with Richard Randall Dyson in the compilation of 'History and Antiquities of the Parish of Tottenham High Cross,' London, 1790 (2nd ed. 1792, 12mo); and was the author of 'Anecdotes of Archery, Ancient and Modern', London, 1791, Svo. To him also is ascribed a brief description of the church of St. Giles, Camberwell, printed without other title than 'Camberwell Church,' and without place or date of publication. In 1790 he was resident at Great Scotland Yard, Whitehall. As his name is omitted from the title-page of the second edition of the 'History and Antiquities of Tottenham High Cross,' it is probable that he was dead in 1792.

 OLDFIELD or OTEFIELD, JOHN (1627?–1682), ejected minister, was born near Chesterfield, Derbyshire, about 1627. He was educated at the grammar school of Bromfield, Cumberland. Though of no university, he was a good scholar and mathematician. He held the rectory of Carsington, Derbyshire, having been appointed in or before 1649. His parishioners, according to Calamy, were 'very ticklish and capricious, very hard to be pleased in ministers,' but he suited them; and, though the living was worth but 70l., he refused a better offer of the perpetual curacy of Tamworth, Warwickshire. He was present, as a member, at the first known meeting (16 Dec. 1651) of the Wirksworth classis, of which he was a most regular attendant (fifteen times moderator) till its last recorded meeting (17 Nov. 1658). His sermon before the classis on 17 July 1655 was 'well approved' as 'orthodox and seasonable.' On 15 Jan. 1656, by appointment of the classis, he delivered the fifth of a series of doctrinal arguments directed against the errors of Socinians, his thesis being 'that the name Jehovah is incommunicable.' In the minutes, as in the Carsington parish register, his name is always written Otefield or Oateield (twice). By the Uniformity Act (1662) he was ejected from Carrington. After this he moved from place to place, sometimes attending the established church, and often preaching in conventicles. Latterly he settled at Alfreton, Derbyshire. Once a fortnight he preached at Road Nook, Derbyshire, in a house belonging to John Spateman, and was informed against for so doing. It was proved that he was ten miles off on the specified day; the informers were prosecuted, and one of them pilloried at Derby.

For some time before his death he was disabled. He died on 6 June 1662, 'ætat. 55,' and was buried in Alfreton Church, where there is a brass plate to his memory. He married Ann, sister of Robert Porter (d. 1690) [q. v.], vicar of Pentrich, Derbyshire. Four of his sons entered the ministry: (1) John (b. 1 Nov. 1654), who received presbyterian ordination in September 1681, and afterwards conformed; (2) Joshua (separately noticed); (3) Nathaniel, Presbyterian minister (1689-96) at Globe Alley, Maid Lane, Southwark (d. 31 Dec. 1696, aged 32); (4) Samuel, who received presbyterian ordination on 14 April 1698, and was minister at Woolwich, Kent, and from 1719 at Ramsbury, Wiltshire (living in 1729).

He published ‘The First Last and the Last First. . . substance of. . . Lecture in the Country,' &c., 1666, 12mo (addressed by ‘J. O.’ to the 'parishioners of 'C. and W. in the county of D.') Calamy mentions that he published 'a larger piece about prayer.' His last sermon at Carsington is in 'Farewell Sermons,' 1663, 8vo (country collection). His ‘soliloquy’ after the passing of the Uniformity Act is abridged in Calamy; some striking sentences from it are noted in 'North and South,' 1855, vol. i. ch. iv., by Mrs, Gaskell.

 OLDFIELD, JOHN (1789–1863), general, colonel-commandant royal engineers, only son of John Nicholls Oldfield, lieutenant in the royal marines, who served with distinction on the staff of the army and with the 63rd regiment in the American war, and of Elizabeth, only daughter of Lieutenant Hammond of the royal navy,


text:
Page:Smith - The game of go.djvu/174

148

9. C 18. This stone may be lost, but it aids Black in attacking from the outside.

10. B 18. White must play here to save his stones.

11. C15.

12. B 16.

13. F 17.

14. D 18.

15. E 18.

16. C 19. Takes two.

17. G 16.

This is an old "Joseki" which used to be popular; it fell into disuse and was revived by Murase Shuho. It is good enough for White if he has an outlying stone or two in the neighborhood, otherwise it is bad play for White.

The following stones are supposed to be on the board: Black, Q 13, R 13, R 15; White, Q 14, P 16, Q 17.

1. Q 5. Black plays "Takamoku," thinking to connect with stones on line 13.

2. R 3. White plans to prevent Black's connection and reduce the Black territory.

3. P 3. This is an error; if Black wishes to frustrate White's plan, R 4 is the correct play.

4. Q 4.

5. P 4.

6. R 5.

7. R 6.

8. S 6.

9. R 7.

10. S 7.

11. R 8.

12. S 8. White has now made a formidable attack on the Black territory.

13. R 9.

14. P 5. If Black gets this point, his line would be too strong.

15. Q 6.

16. Q 2. Important; not merely to attack Black on line P, but it prevents Black from coming to R 2, which would mean 10 "Me"; it also prepares for O 2.

title: Page:Smith - The game of go.djvu/174


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/107

 was born at Portsmouth on 29 May 1789. He was descended from Sir Anthony Oldfield, created a baronet in 1660, and he claimed to be fifth baronet, but the proof was incomplete. A re-creation was deemed to be necessary, the cost of which Oldfield declined to incur, and the matter dropped. His father retired from the service about the date of Oldfield's birth, and purchased a small estate at Westbourne, Sussex, which still remains in possession of the family. He died in 1793.

In 1799 Oldfield's uncle, Major Thomas Oldfield [q. v.], of the royal marines, was killed at St. Jean d'Acre. The distinguished conduct of this officer led to offers from Lord St. Vincent, Lord Nelson, and Sir Sidney Smith to provide for John Oldfield in the navy, while Earl Spencer offered a commission in the royal marines, and the Marquis Cornwallis a nomination for the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich. The latter was accepted. When Oldfield was old enough to go to Woolwich, he was only four feet six inches high, and a dispensing order had to be obtained from the master-general of the ordnance to allow of his admission to the Royal Military Academy, the minimum standard being then four feet nine inches. The junior cadets at that time went first to Great Marlow, Buckinghamshire, where he joined, on 23 Aug. 1803, and was afterwards transferred to Woolwich. When George III inspected the cadets on 29 May 1805, Oldfield was one of the seniors. The king was struck with his diminutive stature, asked his name and age, and spoke to the lad of his uncle's services at St. Jean d'Acre.

Oldfield joined the Trigonometrical Survey at Bodmin in Cornwall in September 1805. He was commissioned as second lieutenant in the royal engineers on 2 April 1806, and quartered at Portsmouth. He was promoted to be lieutenant on 1 July. The following summer he was sent to Halifax, Nova Scotia, and after two years' service in North America he returned to England, and in September 1809 was stationed at Dorchester. He was promoted second captain on 1 May 1811.

From Dorchester he went to Fort George in Scotland, and remained there until he embarked for Holland in 1814. He landed at Hellevoetsluis on 28 March, and entered Antwerp with Sir Thomas Graham on 5 May. He was promoted captain on 26 Jan. 1815. He was at Brussels on 7 April 1815, when he heard of Napoleon's escape from Elba, and at once packed his family off to England, to Westbourne. Oldfield was sent to Ypres to construct new works of defence, and was entrusted with the inundation of the country round, a troublesome and thankless operation. He shortly after joined the army of the Duke of Wellington as brigade-major of royal engineers. He made a sketch-plan of the plains of Waterloo for the use of the duke, and took part in the battle of Waterloo and the occupation of Paris. In April 1819, in consequence of a reduction in the corps of royal engineers, he was placed on half-pay, and passed his time chiefly at Westbourne.

In October 1823 he was sent on a special commission to the West Indies. He returned in 1824, and was quartered for some years in Ireland. On 23 July 1830 he was promoted brevet-major and made a K.H. for his services in 1815. In September he was appointed commanding royal engineer in Newfoundland. On 19 Nov. 1831 he was promoted lieutenant-colonel. In October 1835 he returned to England, and was appointed to the command of the royal engineers at Jersey. In March 1839 he was sent to Canada as commanding royal engineer and colonel on the staff. He was there during the rebellion and rendered good service. On 9 Nov. 1841 he was promoted colonel in the army, and appointed aide-de-camp to the queen. He returned from Canada in the spring of 1843, and was appointed commanding royal engineer in the western district. He was promoted regimental colonel on 9 Nov. 1846, and was appointed to command the royal engineers in Ireland in 1848. On 20 June 1854 he was promoted major-general, and went to live at Westbourne. He became lieutenant-general on 10 May 1859. He was made a colonel-commandant of the corps of royal engineers on 25 Oct. 1859, and was promoted general on 3 April 1862. He died at Emsworth on 2 Aug. 1863, and was buried at Westbourne.

Oldfield was thrice married: first, on 12 March 1810, at Dorchester, to Mary, daughter of Christopher Ardens, esq., of Dorchester, Dorset, by whom he had seven children (she died at Le Mans, France, on 6 July 1820); secondly, on 8 July 1822, at Cheltenham, to Alicia, daughter of the Rev. T. Hume, rector of Arden, by whom he had eight children (she died at Plymouth on 5 Feb. 1840); and, thirdly, on 12 March 1849, at Plymouth, to Cordelia Anne, daughter of the Rev. D. Yonge (she survived him). Oldfield's eldest son, John Rawdon, was a colonel in the Bengal engineers; Anthony, a captain in the royal artillery, was killed at Sebastopol; Rudolphus, a captain in the royal navy, C.B., and aide-de-camp to the queen, died on 6 Feb. 1877; Richard was in the royal artillery, and is now a general


text:
Page:Smith - The game of go.djvu/175

Rh

to attack Black on line P, but it prevents Black from coming to R 2, which would mean 10 “Me”; it also prepares for O 2. White has the better of it.

Variation commencing at White's sixteenth move:

16. O 5. Not so good as No. 16, Q 2.

17. R 2.

18. S 2.

19. Q 2.

20. S 4. White secures the necessary two "Me."

21. M 3.

Black now has secured territory at the bottom of the board and confined White to the corner with the better game.

1. Q 5.

2. Q 3.

3. O 4.

4. R 5.

5. R 6.

6. R 4.

7. S 6.

8. O 2.

9. "Tenuki" at Q 15.

White has the corner; Black can afford "Tenuki" at move nine because if White cuts at Q 6 Black can still get a good game. In fact Q 15 indirectly defends the connection at Q 6.

title: Page:Smith - The game of go.djvu/175


text:
Page:Dictionary of spoken Russian (1945).djvu/233

 [polja, sjerca], but ls в поле, в сердце [f polji, f sjerci]: compare ns лицо, ls на лице.

The nouns of this declension are N, except for some few special types: домище, M "huge house," домишко M "mean little house," серко M "gray horse," подмастерье "apprentice," and some family names, which are optionally indeclinable: Шевченко. The a forms are like the n: Он встретил Шевченко "he met Shevchenko."

Special Features. On stems ending in [-iy] the ls ending is written with и: знание "knowledge," ls знании.

Stems ending in consonant plus [y] optionally have ls [-i]. In the gp these have the inserted vowel spelled и when it is unstressed: предместье, ls предместьи or предместье, gp предместий.

Stems ending in a soft consonant other than [y] or [šč] have the ending [-ey] in the gp: поле, gp полей. Note especially that in this declension stems in [šč] do not take the ending [-ey] in the gp: кладбище, gp кладбйщ.

Irregular Forms. Irregularities are indicated as in the other declensions. In many nouns the P forms have different stress from the S: слово, P словa; письмо, P письма. When, in addition, there is some irregularity in the gp, we give also the dp form: окно, P окна, окон, окнам.

Fourth Declension. Nouns of the Fourth Declension have the following endings. Our example is the stem [kravatj-] "bedstead, bed."

The ns is written with the sign ь even after ж, ч, ш, щ, where it is superfluous: вещь "thing"; this distinguishes these nouns in spelling from those of the second declension. All the stems end in a soft consonant or in [š, ž].

The nouns of this declension have the as like the ns. All are F, except for a few irregular N words with ns in -я: имя "name"; also, there is one M, путь "way, road"; it has is [-om]: путём.

Irregular Forms. Some of the ns forms lack an inserted vowel: жизнь; these also insert no vowel in the is: жизнью [žiznjyu]. Only a few insert [o] in the ns and is: рожь, gdls ржи, is рожью.

Some nouns which do not stress the S endings have a second locative form with stress on the ending [-i], used like the second locative forms of the second declension: грязь "dirt," gdls грязи, but в грязи "in the dirt, all covered with dirt." The dictionary indicates this by giving the phrase between slant lines: грязь /в грязи/.

Two nouns, [matj'rj-] "mother" and [doč'rj-] "daughter," drop the last syllable in the ns: мать, gdls матери, is матерью.

The few N nouns drop the last syllable and take the ending [-a] in the ns: [imjonj-] "name," ns имя, gdls имени; they have is [-om]: именем, and a P stem with hard [n] and stress on the endings: np имена, gp имён, dp именам; similarly the old-fashioned word дитя "child," gdls дитяти, is дитятею, no P forms.

Long Forms. The ordinary or long form of adjectives has the following endings. Our example is the stem [prjam-] "straight."

The a forms of the M and of the P are like the n when the adjective is applied to an inanimate noun, and like the g when it is applied to an animate noun: я нашёл тупой нож "I found a dull knife," я нашёл тупые ножи "I found dull knives," but я встретил молодого человека "I met a young man," я встретил молодых людей "I met the young people."

The N has the a like the n. The remaining N forms are like the M.

The Fi has also a longer form with [-oyu]: прямою.

The unstressed final [o] in the N and Pn endings is written е, since [y] precedes.

The M and Ng ending is written with г instead of в.

When regular adjectives stress the endings, the two-syllable endings have the stress on the first syllable, as in the example above.

Special Spelling. When the Mn ending [-oy] is unstressed it is spelled with ы instead of о: старый [star'y] "old"; after г, к, х, after ж, ш, and after soft consonants it is then spelled with и: дикий [djik'y] "wild," свежий [svjež'y] "fresh," синий [sjinj'y] "blue."

In the other endings where ы (и) is written the sound is actually [i]: прямым, прямые,: плохой "bad": плохим, плохие [plaxjim, plaxjiyi]; старым, старые [star'm, star'yi]; диким, дикие [djikj'm, -kj'yi]; свежим, свежие [svjež'm, -ž'уа]; синим, синие [sjinj'm, -nj'yi].

The accent stays in the same place throughout all the long forms.

Some adjectives are habitually used, in one or another gender or in the plural, without any noun, in noun-like constructions and meanings; these are entered in the dictionary in their n form and marked as follows: нищий AM "beggar"; столовая AF "dining room"; животное AN "animal"; лёгкие AP "lungs."

Short Forms. Many adjectives have also a set of short (sh) forms, nominative only, with noun-like endings: красивый "beautiful": M красив, F красива, N красиво, P красивы.


text:
Page:Richard Nixon's presidential daily calendar - 1969.djvu/1806

 * }


text:
Page:Richard Nixon's presidential daily calendar - 1969.djvu/1807

 * }


text: United States Statutes at Large/Volume 6/7th Congress


text: The New International Encyclopædia/Apostle


text:
The New International Encyclopædia/Cæsar, Gaius Julius

CÆSAR, (B.C.100-B.C.44). A famous Roman general, statesman, and writer; one of the most remarkable men of all time. He was the son of a Roman prætor of the same name, and was born July 12, B.C. 100. Two circumstances conspired to determine his sympathies in favor of democracy, and against a republican oligarchy. The first was the marriage of his aunt Julia with Gaius Marius; the second, the marriage of Cæsar himself, in B.C. 83, with Cornelia, daughter of L. Cinna, one of the principal enemies of Sulla. The anger of the dictator at this cost Cæsar his rank, property, and almost his life itself. Feeling that he would be safer abroad for a time, he went to Asia (B.C. 81); but on learning of the death of Sulla (B.C. 78), he hurried back to Rome, where he found the popular party in a state of great ferment, and anxious to regain what it had lost under the vigorous despotism of the aristocratic dictator. Cæsar, however, took no part in the attempts of Lepidus to overthrow the oligarchy; but he showed his political leanings by prosecuting (B.C. 77) Cn. Dolabella — a great partisan of Sulla — for extortion in his Province of Macedonia. To improve his eloquence, he went to Rhodes to study under the rhetor Apollonius Molo. In B.C. 74 he returned to Rome, where he had been elected pontifex, and now for the first time threw himself earnestly into public life. In the year B.C. 70 he attached himself to Pompeius, whose political

actions at this time were of a decidedly democratic character. In B.C. 68 Cæsar obtained a quæstorship in Spain. On his return to Rome (B.C. 67) he married Pompeia, a relative of Pompeius, with whom he was daily becoming more intimate. In B.C. 65 he was elected to the curule ædileship, and lavished vast sums of money on games and public buildings, by which he increased his already great popularity. For the next few years Cæsar is found steadily skirmishing on the popular side. In B.C. 63 he was elected Pontifex Maximus, and shortly after prætor. During the same year occurred the famous debate on the Catiline conspiracy, in which the aristocratic party vainly endeavored to persuade the consul, Cicero, to include Cæsar in the list of conspirators. In B.C. 62 Pompeius returned from the East, and disbanded his army. Next year Cæsar obtained, as proprætor, the Province of Hispania Ulterior. His career in Spain was brilliant and decisive. On his return he was elected consul, along with M. Calpurnius Bibulus (B.C. 60). Cæsar, with rare tact and sagacity, reconciled the two most powerful men in Rome, who were then at variance — Pompeius and Crassus — and formed an alliance with them, known in history as the First Triumvirate (B.C. 60). Both of these distinguished men aided Cæsar in carrying his Agrarian Law (B.C. 59); and to strengthen still further the union which had been formed, Cæsar gave Pompeius his daughter, Julia, in marriage, though she had been promised to M. Brutus; while he himself married Calpurnia, daughter of L. Piso, his successor in the consulship. On the expiration of his term of office, he obtained for himself, by the popular vote, the Province of Gallia Cisalpina and Illyricum for five years, to which the Senate added — to prevent the popular assembly from doing so — the Province of Gallia Transalpina. Nothing could have been more favorable to Cæsar's aims. He had now an opportunity of developing his extraordinary military genius, and of gathering round him an army of veterans, whom perpetual victory should inspire with thorough soldierly fidelity and devotion to his person. This was the very thing he wanted to give him a reputation equal to that of his coadjutors, Pompeius and Crassus, whom, in genius, he far surpassed. Leaving, therefore, the political factions at Rome to exhaust themselves in petty strifes, Csesar, in B.C. 58, after the banishment of Cicero, repaired to his provinces, and during the next nine years conducted those splendid campaigns in Gaul by which, had he done nothing else, he would have “built himself an everlasting name.” Cæsars first campaign was against the Helvetii, who were migrating from Switzerland into Gaul, and whom he totally defeated near Bibracte (Mont-Beuvray, near Autun). Out of 368,000 men, women, and children, only 110,000 remained. These were commanded by Cæsar to return home and cultivate their lands. The eyes of the Gauls were now turned upon the new conqueror, whose aid was solicited against an invader from beyond the Rhine, the German chief Ariovistus. Cæsar advanced against Ariovistus, who was utterly overthrown. And now Cæsar, having in the course of one campaign successfully concluded two important wars, led his troops into winter quarters.

Next year (B.C. 57) occurred the Belgic War, in which Cæsar successively routed the Suessiones,

Bellovaci, Ambiani, and Nervii, who, alarmed at the progress of the Roman arms, had entered into an alliance with each other against the invaders. When the Senate received Cæsar's official dispatches, it decreed a thanksgiving of fifteen days — an honor never previously granted to any other general. During the winter and the spring following, Cæsar stayed at Lucca; and, after spending large sums of money in hospitality and for other less praiseworthy purposes, he departed for Gaul, where the flames of war had burst out in the northwest. The Veneti, a maritime people of Brittany, who possessed fleets of large vessels, were the chief instigators of the insurrection. Cæsar's plans were laid with consummate skill, and were crowned with the most splendid success. The Veneti were totally defeated, and most of the other Gallic tribes were either checked or subdued. Cæsar wintered in the country of the Aulerci and Lexovii (Normandy), having, in the course of three campaigns, conquered Gaul. Next year (B.C. 55) Crassus went to the East (where he was slain by the Parthians in B.C. 53), and Pompeius to Spain, while Cæsar's provincial government was prolonged for five years. He now undertook a fourth campaign against two German tribes who were about to enter Gaul. He was again successful; and, pursuing the fleeing enemy across the Rhine, which he had bridged, spent eighteen days in plundering the district inhabited by the Sigambri. He next invaded Britain, about the autumn; but after a brief stay in the island returned to Gaul. The Roman Senate, astonished at his hardihood and his successes in regions where no Roman army had ever been before, accorded him a public thanksgiving of twenty days. In B.C. 54 Ciesar opened his fifth campaign by a second invasion of Britain. On his return to Gaul, he was compelled — on account of the scarcity of corn, arising from drought — to winter his army in divisions. This naturally aroused the hopes of the Gauls, who thought the time had come for recovering their independence. An insurrection broke out in the northeast of Gaul, which was at first partially successful, but was ultimately crushed. Cæsar resolved to winter at Saniarobriva (Amiens), in the vicinity of the malcontents. In B.C. 53 he commenced his sixth campaign. It was chiefly occupied in crushing a second insurrection of the Gauls.

Cæsar then returned to northern Italy, that he might be able to communicate more easily and securely with his friends in Rome. That city was gradually becoming more anarchic, the evils of weak government more apparent; the hour for decisive action seemed to be approaching, and doubtless Cæsar's heart beat with expectation of the mighty future reserved for his boundless ambition, when all at once the prospect was darkened by a tremendous rebellion extending over the whole of Gaul, headed by a young warrior named Vercingetorix. It was in the dead of winter when the news came to Cæsar, who instantly saw that, at all hazards, he must preserve his fame and his army. Leaving, therefore, his rival Pompeius to succeed at Rome, he hurried to meet the insurgent hordes. His great difficulty was to collect his scattered legions. First crossing, with some Cisalpine and provincial troops, the mountains of Auvergne, though they lay six feet deep in snow, he suddenly appeared among

the Arverni, who, terrified at his unexpected approach, sent for their chief, Vercingetorix, to come to their assistance. This was precisely what Cæsar wished. After some wonderful exhibitions of military skill and numerous successes by the Romans, Vercingetorix was shut up in Alesia (Alise in Burgundy), with all his infantry. Cæsar besieged him, and though harassed by nearly 300,000 Gauls without, who attempted, but in vain, to break through the well-defended Roman lines, he forced Vercingetorix to capitulate, many of the tribes now hastened to submit to Cæsar, who prudently determined to winter among the vanquished. The Senate voted him another public thanksgiving. In the next year (B.C. 51) Cæsar proceeded to quell the tribes who still held out. This he successfully accomplished, and having, in addition, reduced the whole of Aquitania, passed the winter of his eighth campaign at Nemetocenna, in Belgium, where he spent the time in a manner both politic and magnanimous. The Gallic princes were courteously and generously treated; the common people were spared the imposition of further taxes; and everything was done to render it possible for him to visit Italy with safety in the spring. This he did, and took up his residence at Ravenna, where he was informed of everything that was going on by the tribune C. Curio. There can be no doubt that at this moment he was the most popular man in the State, while his soldiery were devoted to him with a loyalty as enthusiastic as that which Bonaparte inspired when fresh from his Italian victories.

Meanwhile, Pompeius, whose vanity could not endure the greatness of Cæsar, had been gradually inclining again to the aristocracy, whose dread of the new conqueror was hourly increasing. After much futile diplomatic finesse on all sides, the Senate carried a motion “that Cæsar should disband his army by a certain day; and that if he did not do so he should be regarded as an enemy of the State.” The tribunes Marcus Antonius and Q. Cassius put their veto on this motion; but they were violently driven out of the Senate chamber, and, fearing for their lives, they fled to Cæsar's camp. The Senate, in the madness of their terror, now declared war, and intrusted the conduct of it to Pompeius, whose pride in the invincibility of his military prowess hindered him from taking the necessary measures for the defense of the State. He fancied that his name would bring thousands to his standard, and he was even led to believe that Cæsar's troops were willing to desert their general; the result of which delusion was that when hostilities formally commenced, he had hardly any soldiers except two legions which had recently been in the service of his rival. Cæsar, on the other hand, perceiving that the time for decisive action had at length come, harangued his victorious troops, who were willing to follow him anywhere; crossed the Rubicon (a small stream which separated his province from Italy proper), and moved swiftly, amid the acclamations of the people, toward Rome. Pompeius fled to Brundisium, pursued by Cæsar, but contrived to reach Greece in safety, March 17, B.C. 49. The Italian cities had everywhere gladly opened their gates to the conqueror as a deliverer. Within three months Cæsar was master of all Italy.

Cæsar next subdued Pompeius's legates in Spain, who were at the head of considerable forces. On his return he took Massilia (Marseilles), where he learned that he had been appointed dictator of the Republic — a function which at this time he retained for only eleven days; but these were honorably distinguished by the passing of several humane enactments. Pompeius, now thoroughly alive to the magnitude of his danger, had gathered a powerful array in Egypt, Greece, and the East, while his fleet swept the sea. Cæsar, however, crossing the Adriatic at an unexpected season, hastened to Dyrrbachium, where Pompeius's stores were; but was nevertheless outstripped by his opponent. Pompeius intrenched his army upon some high ground near the city, where he was besieged by Cæsar. The first encounter was favorable to Pompeius, who drove back Cæsars legions with much loss. The latter now retreated to Thessaly, followed by his exulting enemies. A second battle ensued on the plains of Pharsalia, August 9, B.C. 48. Pompeius's army was utterly routed and Pompeius himself fled to Egypt, where he was treacherously murdered. See.

No sooner had the news reached Rome than Cæsar was again appointed dictator for one year, and consul for five years. He was invested with tribunitial power for life, and with the right of holding all the magisterial comitia except those for the election of the plebeian tribunes. He did not, however, return to Rome after the battle of Pharsalia, but went to Egypt, then in a distracted condition on account of the disputes regarding the succession. Out of love for Cleopatra (who subsequently bore him a son), he entered upon the ‘Alexandrine War,’ in which he was successful, and which he brought to a close in March, B.C. 47. He next overthrew Pharnaces, King of Bosporus, son of Mithridates, near Zela, in Pontus, August 2d of the same year, and arrived in Rome in September. He was once more appointed dictator, and the property of Pompeius was confiscated and sold. Before the close of the year he had set out for Africa, where his campaign against the Pompeian generals, Scipio and Cato, was crowned with victory at the battle of Thapsus, April 6, B.C. 46. Cato committed suicide at Utica; and with such irresistible celerity was the work of subjugation carried on, that by the end of the summer Cæsar was again in Rome. Now occurred that display of noble and wise generosity which proves Cæsar to have been possessed of a great, magnanimous nature. He was not a man that could stoop to the vulgar atrocities of Marius or Sulla, and so he majestically declared that henceforth he had no enemies, and that he would make no difference between Pompeians and Cæsesarians. His victories in Gaul, Egypt, Pontus, and Africa were celebrated by four great triumphs, during which the whole Roman populace was feasted and fêted by the magnificent liberality of the dictator.

He now proceeded to check, by wholesale enactments, as far as in him lay, the social evils which had long flourished in the city. During the year B.C. 46, also, he conferred a benefit on Rome and on the world by the reformation of the calendar, which had been greatly abused by the Pontifical College for political purposes.

In the meanwhile Pompeius's sons, Gneius and Sextus, were in arms in Spain. Cæsar overwhelmed their forces at Munda (B.C. 45). He now received the title of ‘Father of his Country,’ and also of imperator; was made dictator and præfectus morum for life, and consul for ten years; his person was declared sacred, and even divine; he obtained a bodyguard of knights and senators; his statue was placed in the temples; his portrait was struck on coins; the month Quintilis was called Julius in his honor; and on all public occasions he was permitted to wear the triumphal robe. He now proposed to make a digest of the whole Roman law for public use; to found libraries for the same purpose; to drain the Pontine marshes; to enlarge the harbor of Ostia; to dig a canal through the Isthmus of Corinth; and to quell the inroads of the barbarians on the eastern frontiers. But in the midst of these vast designs he was cut off by assassination, on the Ides (15th) of March, B.C. 44. The details of this crime — the greatest disaster that could have befallen the Roman world, as subsequent events made plain — are too familiar to require narration. It is sufficient to say that of the sixty aristocrats who were in the conspiracy, many had partaken of Cæsar's generosity, and all of his clemency. A few, like Brutus, out of a weak and formal conscientiousness, based on theory rather than insight, were probably shocked by Cæsar's desire to change the form of government into an hereditary monarchy; but most of them, like Cassius, were inspired by a jealous hatred of the dictator, and the base ambition of regaining power at all hazards.

Cæsar, who was 56 years of age when he was murdered, was of a noble and kingly presence, tall of stature, and possessing a countenance which, though pale and thin with thought, was always animated by the light of his black eyes. He was bald-headed (at least, in the latter part of his life), wore no beard; and though of a rather delicate constitution naturally, he ultimately attained to the most vigorous health. His besetting sin was sensuality; but without meaning to detract from the criminality of his conduct in this respect, it may be said that it was as much the sin of the times in which he lived as his own, and that the superlative grandeur of his position gave a prominence to his licentiousness which a more humble lot would have escaped. His intellect was marvelously versatile. In everything he excelled. He was not only the first general and statesman of his age, but he was — excepting Cicero — its greatest orator. As an historian he has never been surpassed, and rarely equaled in simplicity and vigor of style, and in the truthfulness with which he narrates events of which he was an eye-witness. He was, moreover, a mathematician, philologist, jurist, and architect, and always took great pleasure in literary society. Most of his writings have been lost, though their titles are preserved; yet we still possess his invaluable Commentarii (generally known as “Cæsar's Commentaries on the Gallic and Civil Wars”). The editio princeps was printed at Rome (1449). The best edition of his works is that of Dinter (Leipzig, 1890). Cæsar's life was formally written in ancient times by Suetonius and Plutarch. Consult, also: Delorme, César et ses Contemporains, etc. (Paris, 1868); Napoleon III., Histoire de Jules

César (Paris, 1865-66); Stoffel, id., La Guerre civile {Paris, 1888); Froude, Cæsar (London, 1879); Dodge, “Cæsar,” in Great Captains Series (Boston, 1892); and Fowler, Julius Cæsar and the Foundation of the Roman Imperial System (New York, 1892). On the Gallic campaigns, consult Holmes, Cæsar's Conquest of Gaul (London, 1899).


text:
Hoyle's Games Modernized/Bagatelle

BAGATELLE.

Bagatelle is played with nine ivory balls on a special table or board, oblong in shape, from 6 to 10 ft. long, and in width about one-fourth of its length, as shown in Fig. 2. At that end of the board which in use is farthest from the player are sunk nine hemispherical holes or cups, one as a centre, with the others in a circle round it. Each hole bears a number, as shown in Fig. 1.

Of the nine balls one is black, four are white, and four are red. Whatever the diameter of the balls, that of the cups must exactly correspond with it. The sides of the board are furnished with a continuous cushion, such cushion at the upper end forming a semi-circle, concentric with the circle made by the cups. The upper edge of each side of the board is pierced with a double row of small holes, sixty in each row, arranged in groups of five. The score is marked by inserting little ivory pegs in these holes, each player using one side of the board. To score the number obtained, the player removes his hinder peg for the time being, and places it the required number of holes in front of the foremost peg.

The balls are propelled, at the option of the player, either with a cue (Fig. 4) or with the mace (Fig. 5). The cue is a reproduction in miniature of that used at Billiards. The mace consists of an oblong "shoe," or block of wood, slightly curved, attached to a long thin tapering handle.

The cue is used as at Billiards. The mace is handled in a different manner. The shoe at its foot is placed in actual contact with the ball, the handle pointing over the right shoulder of the player, grasped, about one-third from the top, between the thumb and second and third fingers of the right hand. The ball is then pushed forward in the desired direction. At best the mace is but a clumsy implement, and would never be used by any one who had acquired even the most elementary skill in handling the cue.

At starting, the black ball is placed on the spot marked a (Fig. 2). The player, taking the remaining balls, places one of them on the spot marked b, and impels it in the direction of the black ball. If he hits this latter, the stroke is good, and he plays another ball, continuing till the whole eight have been played. If, however, the first ball played miss the black, it is removed from the table (whether it fall into a hole or not), and is lost to the player for that turn, as also any succeeding ball until the black ball is hit, after which the obligation to strike it ceases. If any ball is so struck as to be driven back towards the player more than half-way down the board, it is in like manner removed. After the black ball is once struck, the player is no longer obliged to place his own ball on the spot b, but may place it at any point behind such spot. He continues till the whole of the eight balls have been played.

The object of the player is to "hole" as many of his balls as possible, preferably in the cups bearing the higher numbers. The black ball counts double, and a good player will, therefore, endeavour to get this into the centre hole. This, however, is somewhat difficult, for, if struck directly towards the 9, it must pass over the 1, and is very likely to hole itself therein. It is, therefore, safer play to strike it lightly on the right side, and so drive it towards the 8, into which it may probably be coaxed by a subsequent ball. When the black ball has found a resting-place, the efforts of the player are directed to place his remaining balls to the best advantage. The approved methods of play for doing this, as to holes 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, are indicated by the dotted lines in Fig. 3, the ball being so struck as to go "off the cushion" into the desired hole. The best mode of playing a given ball will, however, be greatly governed by the positions occupied by preceding balls.

It frequently happens that a number of balls lie at distances less than their own diameter from the semicircular cushion at top. In such case, a ball sent slowly round the cushion will strike them all in succession, and, driving them towards the centre, may hole one or more of them. If, on the other hand, the balls in question are more than their own diameter from the cushion, the ball sent in pursuit of them will run harmlessly round, and very probably be lost by overpassing the half-way line. Or, again, the balls may be lying close under the cushion, and the impact of the ball in play may simply drive them further round.

It frequently happens that a ball lies just on the brink of a hole, and that a discreet touch in the right place will cause it to drop therein. For such strokes as these the instructions given for securing winning hazards at Billiards may be studied with advantage.

The game is usually 120 points—i.e., up and down the board. This number, is, however, not absolute, the player who first reaches it continuing to play until the whole of his eight balls are exhausted, and scoring the whole number obtained. If he be the second player, the game is then at an end, but if he was the first to play, the second player is entitled to play his eight balls also, and the player attaining the larger total is the winner.

If, when the game is won, the loser has not turned the corner—i.e., begun to score on the downward journey, the game is a "double," and if there was any stake, the loser pays double accordingly.

Where four persons take part, two play as partners against the two others, one of each side playing alternately the whole of the eight balls.

title: Hoyle's Games Modernized/Bagatelle