text:
Page:Biographies of Scientific Men.djvu/41

Rh l'Académie des Sciences. M. Berthelot, Secrétaire perpétuel pour les sciences physiques.

Eleven years after the death of Lavoisier, his widow was married to Count Rumford—the founder of the Royal Institution, London. Two years after the death of Lavoisier, his wife published his Mémoires de Chimie (1796-99), in four volumes; and between the years 1857 and 1896, Lavoisier's Œuvres Completes, in six volumes, edited by Dumas and Grimaux, were published at the expense of the French Government.

We conclude our study of Lavoisier in the words of Galileo: "Ricordiamoci in grazia, che il cercar la constituzione del mondo è de' maggiori e de' più nobili problemi, che sieno in natura." 2


text: Biographies of Scientific Men/Lavoisier

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

title: Biographies of Scientific Men/Lavoisier


text:
Page:English as She is Spoke.djvu/47

Rh

title: Page:English as She is Spoke.djvu/47


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/519

 before setting out for Troy. In the period of Dorian supremacy, in spite of the new cults which were introduced by these people, the Heraeum maintained its supreme importance: it was here that the tablets recording the succession of priestesses were kept which served as a chronological standard for the Argive people, and even far beyond their borders; and it was here that Pheidon deposited the  when he introduced coinage into Greece.

We learn from Strabo that the Heraeum was the joint sanctuary for Mycenae and Argos. But in the 5th century the city of Argos vanquished the Mycenaeans, and from that time onwards the city of Argos becomes the political centre of the district, while the Heraeum remains the religious centre. And when in the year 423, through the negligence of the priestess Chryseis, the old temple was burnt down, the Argives erected a splendid new temple, built by Eupolemos, in which was placed the great gold and ivory statue of Hera, by the sculptor Polyclitus, the contemporary and rival of Pheidias, which was one of the most perfect works of sculpture in antiquity. Pausanias describes the temple and its contents (ii. 17), and in his time he still saw the ruins of the older burnt temple above the temple of Eupolemos.

All these facts have been verified and illustrated by the excavations of the American Archaeological Institute and School of Athens, which were carried on from 1892 to 1895. In 1854 A. R. Rhangabé made tentative excavations on this site, digging a trench along the north and east sides of the second temple. Of these excavations no trace was to be seen when those of 1892 were begun. The excavations have shown that the sanctuary, instead of consisting of but one temple with the ruins of the older one above it, contained at least eleven separate buildings, occupying an area of about 975 ft. by 325.

On the uppermost terrace, defined by the great Cyclopean supporting wall, exactly as described by Pausanias, the excavations revealed a layer of ashes and charred wood, below which were found numerous objects of earliest date, together with some remains of the walls resting on a polygonal platform—all forming part of the earliest temple. Immediately adjoining the Cyclopean wall and below it were found traces of small houses of the rudest, earliest masonry which are pre-Mycenaean, if not pre-Cyclopean.

We then descend to the second terrace, in the centre of which the substructure of the great second temple was revealed, together with so much of the walls, as well as the several architectural members forming the superstructure, that it has been possible for E. L. Tilton to design a complete restoration of the temple. On the northern side of this terrace, between the second temple and the Cyclopean supporting wall, a long stoa or colonnade runs from east to west abutting at the west end in structures which evidently contained a well-house and waterworks; while at the eastern end of this stoa a number of chambers were erected against the hill, in front of which were placed statues and inscriptions, the bases for which are still extant. At the eastern-most end of this second terrace a large hall with three rows of columns in the interior, with a porch and entrance at the west end facing the temple, is built upon elaborate supporting walls of good masonry.

Below the second terrace at the south-west end a large and complicated building, with an open courtyard surrounded on three sides by a colonnade and with chambers opening out towards the north, may have served as a gymnasium or a sanatorium. It is of good early Greek architecture, earlier than the second temple. A curious, ruder building to the north of this and to the west of the second terrace is probably of much earlier date, perhaps of the Mycenaean period, and may have served as propylaea.

Immediately below the second temple at the foot of the elevation on which this temple stands, towards the south, and thus facing the city of Argos, a splendid stoa or colonnade, to which large flights of steps lead, was erected about the time of the building of the second temple. It is a part of the great plan to give worthy access to the temple from the city of Argos. To the east of this large flights of steps lead up to the temple proper.

At the western extremity of the whole site, immediately beside the river-bed, we again have a huge stoa running round two sides of a square, which was no doubt connected with the functions of this sanctuary as a health resort, especially for women, the goddess

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/519


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/520

 Hera presiding over and protecting married life and child-birth. Finally, immediately to the north of this western stoa there is an extensive house of Roman times also connected with baths.

While the buildings give archaeological evidence for every period of Greek life and history from the pre-Mycenaean period down to Roman times, the topography itself shows that the Heraeum must have been constructed before Mycenae and without any regard to it. The foothills which it occupies form the western boundary to the Argive plain as it stretches down towards the sea in the Gulf of Nauplia. While it was thus probably chosen as the earliest site for a citadel facing the sea, its second period points towards Tiryns and Midea. It could not have been built as the sanctuary of Mycenae, which was placed farther up towards the north-west in the hills, and could not be seen from the Heraeum, its inhabitants again not being able to see their sanctuary. The west building, the traces of bridges and roads, show that at one time it did hold some relation to Mycenae; but this was long after its foundation or the building of the huge Cyclopean supporting wall which is coeval with the walls of Tiryns, these again being earlier than those of Mycenae. There are, moreover, traces of still more primitive walls, built of rude small stones placed one upon the other without mortar, which are in character earlier than those of Tiryns, and have their parallel in the lowest layers of Hissarlik.

Bearing out the evidence of tradition as well as architecture, the numerous finds of individual objects in terra-cotta figurines, vases, bronzes, engraved stones, &c., point to organized civilized life on this site many generations before Mycenae was built, a fortiori before the life as depicted by Homer flourished—nay, before, as tradition has it, under Proetus the walls of Tiryns were erected. We are aided in forming some estimate of the chronological sequence preceding the Mycenaean age, as suggested by the finds of the Heraeum, in the new distribution which Dörpfeld has been led to make of the chronological stratification of Hissarlik. For the layer, which he now assigns to the Mycenaean period, is the sixth stratum from below. Now, as some of the remains at the Heraeum correspond to the two lowest layers of Hissarlik, the evidence of the Argive temple leads us far beyond the date assigned to the Mycenaean age, and at least into the second millennium (see also ). As to its chronological relation to the Cretan sites—Cnossus, Phaestus, &c., and the “Minoan” civilization as determined by Dr A. Evans, see the discussion under.

This sanctuary still holds a position of central importance as illustrating the art of the highest period in Greek history, namely, the art of the 5th century under the great sculptor Polyclitus. Though the excavations in the second temple have clearly revealed the outlines of the base upon which the great gold and ivory statue of Hera stood, it is needless to say that no trace of the statue itself has been found. From Pausanias we learn that “the image of Hera is seated and is of colossal size: it is made of gold and ivory, and is the work of Polyclitus.” Based on the computations made by the architect of the American excavations, E. L. Tilton, on the ground of the height of the nave, the total height of the image, including the base and the top of the throne, would be about 26 ft., the seated figure of the goddess herself about 18 ft. It is probable that the face, neck, arms and feet were of ivory, while the rest of the figure was draped in gold. Like the Olympian Zeus of Pheidias, Hera was seated on an elaborately decorated throne, holding in her left hand the sceptre, surmounted in her case by the cuckoo (as that of Zeus had an eagle), and in her right, instead of an elaborate figure of Victory (such as the Athena Parthenos and the Olympian Zeus held), simply a pomegranate. The crown was adorned with figures of Graces and the Seasons. A Roman imperial coin of Antoninus Pius shows us on a reduced scale the general composition of the figure; while contemporary Argive coins of the 5th century give a fairly adequate rendering of the head. A further attempt has been made to identify the head in a beautiful marble bust in the British Museum hitherto known as Bacchus (Waldstein, Journal of Hellenic Studies, vol. xxi., 1901, pp. 30 seq.)

We also learn from Pausanias that the temple was decorated with “sculptures over the columns, representing some the birth of Zeus and the battle of the gods and giants, others the Trojan War and the taking of Ilium.” It was formerly supposed that the phrase “over the columns” pointed to the existence of sculptured metopes, but no pedimental groups. Finds made in the excavations, however, have shown that the temple also had pedimental groups. Besides numerous fragments of nude and draped figures belonging to pedimental statues, a well-preserved and very beautiful head of a female divinity, probably Hera, as well as a draped female torso of excellent workmanship, both belonging to the pediments, have been discovered. Of the metopes also a great number of fragments have been found, together with two almost complete metopes, the one containing the torso of a nude warrior in perfect preservation, as well as ten well-preserved heads. These statues bear the same relation to the sculptor Polyclitus which the Parthenon marbles hold to Pheidias; and the excavations have thus yielded most important material for the illustration of the Argive art of Polyclitus in the 5th century

See Waldstein, The Argive Heraeum (vol. i., Boston and New York, 1902; vol. ii., the Vases by J. C. Hoppin, the Bronzes by H. F. de Cosa, 1905); Excavations of the American School of Athens at the Heraion of Argos (1892); and numerous reports and articles in the American Archaeological Journal since 1892.

ARGOSTOLI (anc. Cephallenia), the capital of Cephalonia (one of the Ionian islands), and the seat of a bishop of the Greek church. Pop. about 10,000. It possesses an excellent harbour, a quay a mile in length, and a fine bridge. Shipbuilding and silk-spinning are carried on. Near at hand are the ruins of Cranii, which afford fine examples of Greek military architecture; and at the west side of the harbour there is a curious stream, flowing from the sea, and employed to drive mills before losing itself in caverns inland.

See Sir C. Fellows’s Journal of an Excursion in Asia Minor in 1838, and Wiebel’s Die Insel Kephalonia und die Meermühlen von Argostoli (Hamburg, 1873).

ARGOSY (a corruption, by transposition of letters, of the name of the seaport Ragusa), the term originally for a carrack or merchant ship from Ragusa and other Adriatic ports, now used poetically of any vessel carrying rich merchandise. In English writings of the 16th century the seaport named is variously spelt Ragusa, Aragouse or Aragosa, and ships coming thence were named Ragusyes, Arguzes and Argosies; the last form surviving and passing into literature. The incorrect derivation from Jason’s ship, the “Argo,” is of modern origin. ARGUIN, an island (identified by some writers with Hanno’s Cerne), off the west coast of Africa, a little south of Cape Blanco, in 20° 25′ N., 16° 37′ W. It is some 4 m. long by 2½ broad, produces gum-arabic, and is the seat of a lucrative turtle-fishery. Off the island, which was discovered by the Portuguese in the 15th century, are extensive and very dangerous reefs. Arguin was occupied in turn by Portuguese, Dutch, English and French; and to France it now belongs. The aridity of the soil and the bad anchorage prevent a permanent settlement. The fishery is mostly carried on by inhabitants of the Canary Isles. In July 1816 the French frigate “Medusa,” which carried officers on their way to Senegal to take possession of that country for France, was wrecked off Arguin, 350 lives being lost. ARGUMENT, a word meaning “proof,” “evidence,” corresponding in English to the Latin word argumentum, from which it is derived; the originating Latin verb arguere, to make clear, from which comes the English “argue,” is from a root meaning bright, appearing in Greek , white. From its primary sense are derived such applications of the word as a chain of reasoning, a fact or reason given to support a proposition, a discussion of the evidence or reasons for or against some theory or proposition and the like. More particularly “argument” means a synopsis of the contents of a book, the outline of a novel, play, &c. In logic it is used for the middle term in a syllogism, and for many species of fallacies, such as the argumentum ad hominem, ad baculum, &c. (see ). In mathematics the term has received special meanings; in mathematical tables

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/520


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Argos

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Argos


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Argostoli

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Argostoli


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Argosy

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Argosy


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Arguin

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Arguin


text:
Author:Mihai Eminescu

Poetry collections

 * Poems, transl. by Petre Grimm (1938)

Individual poems

 * Luceafărul (1883)
 * What I wish for you, sweet Romania
 * Forest, O my forest
 * Solitude
 * The Tale of the Forest
 * Murmur of the Forest
 * So fresh thou art...
 * A Dacian’s Prayer
 * The midnight hour of sorrow...
 * O Mother...

title: Author:Mihai Eminescu


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 36.djvu/182

Markland  to twenty-four members, in 1816 became F.R.S., and on 21 June 1849 was created D.C.L. of the university of Oxford. Markland was a strong and constant supporter of all church societies; he was entrusted by Mrs. Ramsden with the foundation of mission sermons at Cambridge and Oxford, and while resident in Bath three ladies, the Misses Mitford of Somerset Place in that city, selected him for the distribution of 14,000l. in charitable works in England and the colonies. He died at his house, Lansdown Crescent, Bath, on 28 Dec. 1864, and was buried in the new Walcot cemetery on 3 Jan. 1866, the first window in Bath Abbey west of the transept being filled with glass to his memory. On 24 Sept. 1821 he married at Marylebone Church, Charlotte, eldest daughter of Sir Francis Freeling [q. v.], who died on 9 Oct. 1867. Their issue was one daughter, Elizabeth Jane, who married in 1853 the Rev. Charles R. Conybeare, vicar of Itchen Stoke, Hampshire. Markland wrote: 1. 'A Few Plain Reasons for Adhering to the Church' (anon.), 1807. 2. 'A Letter to Lord Aberdeen, President of the Society of Antiquaries, on the expediency of Establishing a Museum of Antiquities,' 1828. It was reprinted in the 'Gentleman's Magazine,' 1828, pt. i. pp. 61-64. 3. 'A Few Words on the Sin of Lying' (anon.), 1834. 4. 'Sketch of the Life and Character of George Hibbert' (anon.), printed for private distribution, 1837. 5. 'Remarks on Sepulchral Memorials, with Suggestions for Improving the Condition of our Churches,' 1840; an enlarged edition of this appeared as 6. 'Remarks on English Churches and on the expediency of rendering Sepulchral Memorials subservient to Pious and Christian Uses,' 1842; 3rd edit. 1843. 7. 'On the Reverence due to Holy Places. By the Author of "Remarks on English Churches"' 1845; 3rd edit, much enlarged and preface signed J. H. M., 1846. An abridgment was published in 1862 by the Rev. S. Fox of Morley Rectory, Derbyshire. 8. 'Prayers for Persons coming to the Baths of Bath. By Bishop Ken. With a Life of the Author,' 1848. Preface signed M.; 2nd edit., with a brief life of the author by J. H. Markland, 1849; another issue, 1863. 9. 'Diligence and Sloth. By a Layman,' 1858. Advertisement signed J. H. M. 10. 'The Offertory the best way of Contributing Money for Christian Purposes;' 2nd edit. 1862. Markland edited for the Roxburghe Club in 1818 a volume of 'Chester Mysteries, de deluvio Noe, de occisione innocentium;' furnished 'many valuable communications and much friendly assistance' to Ormerod's 'Cheshire' (vol. i. Preface, p. xx); aided Britton in his 'Beauties of England;' and contributed numerous articles to the 'Censura Literaria,' the chief of them being a notice of William Mason (1725-1797) [q. v.], v. 299-308, and to 'Notes and Queries,' His assistance is acknowledged in Nichols's 'Literary Anecdotes,' vol. i. p. xiv, vol. viii. p. iv; his paper on Abraham and Jeremiah Markland, with whom he claimed relationship, was inserted in that work, iv. 657-61, and he supplied Chalmers with some particulars of Jeremiah Markland's life (Biog. Dict. xxi. 329). His communication ' On the Rent-roll of Humphrey, Duke of Buckingham,' appeared in the 'Archæological Journal,' viii. 259-81, and at the Somerset congress in 1856 of the British Archaeological Association Markland read the opening address 'On the History and Antiquities of Bath,' which is printed in the 'Journal,' xiii. 81-97. For the 'Archæologia' he compiled the following papers: ' The Antiquity and Introduction of Surnames in England, xviii. 105-11, 'Early Use of Carriages in England,' xx. 443-76, 'On an Inscription in the Tower,' xxiii. 405-10, and 'Instructions to his son by Henry Percy, ninth Duke of Northumberland,' xxvii. 306-58. Letters by him are in T. F. Dibdin's 'Reminiscences, ii. 728, 857, and in 'Notes and Queries,' 4th ser. iii. 539. He had gradually formed a good library, but it was dispersed at his death.

 MARKLAND, JEREMIAH (1693–1776), classical scholar, son of Ralph Markland, vicar of Childwall, Lancashire, where he was born on 29 Oct. 1693 (or 18 Oct., according to the Christ's Hospital register), was admitted on the foundation of Christ's Hospital, London, in 1704, and proceeded to St. Peter's College, Cambridge, in 1710, with the usual exhibition of 30l. a year for seven years. He graduated B.A. in 1713, and M.A. in 1717, when he was elected fellow and tutor of his college. In 1714 he appears among the poetical contributors to the 'Cambridge Gratulations,' and in 1717 he wrote some verses in vindication of Addison against Pope's satire. He was also author of a modernisation of Chaucer's 'Friar's Tale.'


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 36.djvu/183

Markland He was prevented by the weakness of his lungs, and probably by conscientious objections to certain doctrines of the church, from becoming a clergyman. He left Cambridge in 1728 to act as private tutor to the son of W. Strode of Punsbourn, Hertfordshire, returning to the university in 1733. At a later date he lived at Twyford, and in 1744 went to Uckfield, Sussex, in 1 order to superintend the education of the son of his former pupil, Mr. Strode. In 1752 he fixed his abode at Milton Court, near Dorking, Surrey, and remained there, living in great privacy, to the end of his days. He twice declined to offer himself as a candidate for the Greek professorship at Cambridge, and often repulsed the advances of those who would have been glad to befriend him or to profit by intercourse with him. Yet he was warmly attached to a few congenial friends, one of the closest of whom was William Bowyer [q. v.] the learned printer. Despite his narrow means he was very charitable to the poor, and his benevolent disposition led him, a few years before his death, to espouse, against her worthless and unfeeling son, the cause of the widow with whom he lodged, and thus entail upon himself the burden of an expensive lawsuit, which reduced him almost to indigence.

He died at Milton Court on 7 July 1776, aged 82, and was buried in Dorking Church, where there is a brass plate to his memory. lie left his books and papers to Dr. Heberden, and several of them are preserved in the British Museum. His portrait, in which he is shown in very gay apparel, is prefixed to vol. iv. of Nichols's 'Literary Anecdotes.'

His works are : 1. 'Epistola Critica ad ... Franciscum Hare in qua Horatii loca aliquot et aliorum veterum emendantur,' Cambridge, 1723, 8vo. 2. An edition of the 'Sylvæ' of Statius, 1728, 4to, printed by Bowyer. 3. 'Conjecturæ' to Taylor's edition of 'Lysiæ Orationes et Fragmenta,' 1738. 4. Annotations contributed to Davies's 'Maximus Tyrius,' 1740. 6. 'Remarks on the Epistles of Cicero to Brutus, and of Brutus to Cicero,' 1745, 8vo. His object was to prove that all the epistles were spurious, and the book involved him in a tedious controversy. 6. 'De Græcorum quinta declinatione imparisyllabicâ et inde formatâ, Latinorum tertia, quaestio grammatica,' 1760, 4to; forty copies only, printed at the expense of W. Hall, of the Temple. 7. 'Euripidis Drama Supplices Mulieres,' 1763, 4to. 8. 'Euripidis Dramata Iphigenia in Aulide et Iphigenia in Tauride,' published in 1771, but printed in 1768 at the expense of Dr. Heberden. The last three books were brought out together by Dr. Gaisford in 1811 (Oxford, 4to and 8vo), and were reviewed at length in the 'Quarterly Review,' June 1812. Markland also contributed to Arnold's 'Commentary on the Book of Wisdom,' 1748; Kuster's 'De Verbo Medio,' 1750; an edition of 'Sophocles,' 1758; Foster's 'On Accent and Quantity,' 1763; and 'Demosthenis Oratio de Corona,' 1769. His notes on the New Testament were rescued from many other manuscripts which he destroyed in his later years, and were printed in Bowyer's 'Critical Conjectures on the New Testament,' 1782. In Musgrave's 'Euripidis Hippolytus,' 1756, there are notes by Markland, but they were printed without his knowledge or consent.  MARKWICK or MARKWICKE, NATHANIEL (1664–1735), divine, son of James Markwick of Croydon, was born in April 1664. He was admitted to Merchant Taylors' School in 1677, and matriculated as a commoner at St. John's College, Oxford, on 14 July 1682. He graduated B.A. in 1686, and proceeded M.A. in 1690, and B.D. (under the name of Markwith) on 1 Feb. 1696. He held the vicarage of Westbury, Buckinghamshire, from 1692 to 1694, and of St. Mary Magdalen, Taunton, from 1696 till 1703. On 4 Oct. 1699 he also became prebendary of Bath and Wells. From 1703 till his death, 20 March 1736, he was vicar of East Brent, Somerset.

Markwick was author of the following: 1. 'A Calculation of the LXX Weeks of Daniel, Chapter ix. Verse 12, as they are supposed and shown to be different from the Seven and Sixty-two in the following Verse; and also from the One Week, Verse 27, etc.,' 1728, 8vo. The alternative title, 'Stricturæ Lucis,' is given in the dedication. 2. 'Last Additions to "Stricturæ Lucis,"' 1730, 8vo. 3. 'Supplement to "Stricturæ Lucis," or Second Thoughts,' 1730, 8vo. 4. 'The Prerogative of the Jews asserted, without Diminution or Derogation to the Churches of the Gentiles. Being some further Thoughts upon the Subject of the matter of "Stricturæ Lucis," occasioned by the Objections of Two Friends, the Rev. J. N. (or U ?) and Rev. J. W. Whereunto are added a few more Remarks tending to illustrate the Calculation of Daniel's Weeks,' 1731, 8vo. 5. 'Six Small Tracts' (one of the two Brit. Mus. copies has manuscript notes), 1733, 8vo. 6. 'Some


text:
Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/86

Mr. Punch's Book of Sports

1. Always take your own mallet to a garden party. This will impress everyone with the idea that you are a fine player. Or an alternative plan is to play with one provided by your host, and then throughout the game to attribute every bad stroke to the fact that you have not your own implement with you.

2. Use as many technical terms as you can, eking them out with a few borrowed from golf. Thus it will always impress your partner if you say that you are "stimied," especially as she won't know what it means. But a carefully-nurtured reputation may be

title: Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/86


text: Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/87

title: Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/87


text:
Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/88

Mr. Punch's Book of Sports destroyed at once if you confuse "roquet" with "croquet," so be very careful that you get these words right.

3. Aim for at least three minutes before striking the ball, and appear overcome with amazement when you miss. If you have done so many times in succession, it may be well to remark on the unevenness of the ground. If you hit a ball by mistake always pretend that you aimed at it.

4. It is a great point to give your partner advice in a loud and authoritative tone—it doesn't matter in the least whether it is feasible or not. Something like the following, said very quickly, always sounds well:—"Hit one red, take two off him and make your hoop; send two red towards me and get into position." In a game of croquet there is always one on each side who gives advice, and one who receives (and disregards) it. All the lookers-on naturally regard the former as the finer player, therefore begin giving advice on your partner's first stroke. If she happens to be a good player this may annoy her, but that is no consequence.

5. Remember that "a mallet's length from the

title: Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/88


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 36.djvu/184

Marlborough Additional Notes towards a further Elucidation of the Apocalyptick Visions, by way of Appendix to Six Small Tracts,' 1734, 8vo.

 MARLBOROUGH, Dukes of. [See, first , 1660-1722; , third , 1708-1758; , fourth , 1739-1817; , seventh , 1822-1883.]  MARLBOROUGH, SARAH, (1660-1744). [See under, first .]  MARLBOROUGH,. [See Ley, James, first Earl, 1550-1629; Let, James, third Earl, 1018-1665.]  MARLBOROUGH, HENRY (fl. 1420), annalist. [See .]  MARLEBERGE, THOMAS (d. 1236), abbot of Evesham, was probably, as his name suggests, a native of Marlborough. He had a uterine brother (Chronicon Abbatiæ de Evesham, ed. Macray, p. 232), and appears to have been educated at Paris. Richard Poore, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, was, he tells us, his fellow-pupil under Stephen Langton (ib. p. 232), who lectured in that university (ib. p. xxi). He also speaks of three clerks of Archbishop Hubert, J. de Tynemouth, S. de Suuelle (sic), and Honorius, as 'magistri mei in scholis' (ib. p. 126). He was learned in canon and civil law, taught at Oxford, and his biographer adds at Exeter also, but the likeness between the words 'Oxoniam' and ' Exoniam ' may have led to a confusion (ib. p. xxi, note). Marleberge did not become a monk of Evesham till 1199 or 1200 (ib. p. 264), but as he says that he had personal knowledge of Adam, abbot of Evesnam, who died in 1 191, he probably underwent a long novitiate. When he entered the monastery he brought with him a considerable number of books on canon and civil law and medicine, a book of Democritus, three works of Cicero, a Lucan and a Juvenal, with many volumes of theological and grammatical notes. Hostility to the abbot, Roger Norreys, who succeeded Abbot Adam, and was according to Marleberge notoriously profligate, seems to have-delayed his promotion. But when in 1202 Maugere or Malgere [q. v.], bishop of Worcester, on the plea that the abbot s conduct needed examination, formally visited the abbey, which claimed to be an exempt monastery (i.e. subject to the pope, and free from diocesan control), Marleberge acted as spokesman of a committee of twelve monks who were appointed to explain to the bishop the grounds of their resistance to the visitation. The bishop replied by suspending all the monks for contumacy, and excommunicated them. There upon Archbishop Hubert, at Marleberge's request, hM an inquiry respecting the bishop's claim at London, but the result was indecisive, and the matter was referred to the papal delegates, the abbots of Malmesbury, Abingdon, and Eynsham. As they were not impartial judges of episcopal rights, this step forced the bishop to appeal to Rome.

Meanwhile the monks continued to suffer at the hands of their abbot, who farmed out lands without the consent of the convent. In 1203 Marleberge went to conciliate the king and archbishop, whose interests had suffered by the abbot's treatment of the property. He was refused an interview with John, and met with contumely in the king's court, but after he had explained to the archbishop the real state of affairs, Hubert, as papal legate and legitimate visitor of the abbey, held a visitation, but refused to give sentence on the evidence before him, and ordered the abbot and convent to elect arbitrators. The archbishop's death rendered the visitation abortive, but it was decided that the monk? had gone beyond their rights in trying to recover lands alienated by the abbot, and Marleberge, with three others, was banished for a fortnight from the house. He was recalled to carry on the case against the Bishop of Worcester. Marleberge pleaded the case in the presence of the papal commissioners, 1204-5. Their judgment gave the bishop temporary possession of the right to visit the monastery, but no right to visit the churches of the vale of Evesham, which the monastery protested were included in its papal privileges. Before formal judgment was delivered Marleberge hastened to Rome to get an early interview with the pope, Innocent III, but the pope evinced little interest.

The abbot arrived at Rome in March 1205, and Marleberge, who had spent the interval at Piacenzaand Pavia, met him there, although they were still personally very hostile to one another. On 19 April 1205 Marleberge retired to Bologna, where he spent six months attending daily lectures on canon and civil law, on the advice of Cardinal Hugulini, afterwards bishop of Ostia. In October 1205, when the abbot had returned to England, Marleberge pleaded the abbey's cause at


text:
Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/89

boundary" varies considerably. If you play next, it means three yards, if your opponent does so, it means three inches. So, too, with the other "rules," which no one really knows. When in an awkward position, the best course is to invent a new rule on the spur of the moment, and to allege (which will be perfectly true) that "it has just been introduced."

6. Much may be done by giving your ball a

title: Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/89


text:
Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/90

Mr. Punch's Book of Sports

gentle kick when the backs of the other players happen to be turned. Many an apparently hopeless game has been saved by this method. Leave your conscience behind when you come to a croquet-party.

—Hammerdryads.

—Mallet.

title: Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/90


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 36.djvu/185

Marleberge Rome. The bishop had secured the best possible advocates, but after the abbey's records of privileges were found to be genuine the monastery was declared exempt. Marleberge fainted in court when he heard the favourable verdict, 24 Dec. 1205. The question of the bishop's jurisdiction over the churches of the vale of Evesham was, however, referred, on the ground that neither party produced sufficient evidence, to the bishops of Ely and Rochester, who gave sentence for the bishop. The decisions are extant in the decretals of Gregory IX (ib. p. xxviii), but all the letters and bulls of Innocent III are wanting during the period of the trial (ib. p. xxix). Marleberge had borrowed money to pay for legal advice during the litigation, and a bond for one of his loans from Peter Malialard, a Roman merchant, is extant (ib. p. xxvi). The Bishop of Worcester had meanwhile inquired into Abbot Norreys's conduct, and forwarded to Rome an adverse report ; but Marleberge, who was undesirous of the abbot's deposition, hushed the matter up, and succeeded in leaving Rome secretly in order to avoid making the usual presents to the pope and cardinals, and perhaps also to escape his creditors, in whose hands he was obliged to leave the much valued privileges of the abbey. The abbey, careful to preserve what rights still remained, decided to appoint a secular dean to superintend the churches of the vale, and Marleberge was appointed to the office. He held it till he became abbot.

In 1206 Marleberge was again at Eves- ham. The papal legate soon afterwards began a visitation, but left its completion to two abbots who ordered no reforms. The abbot had provided himself with papal indulgences at Rome, and claimed new powers under them. By their authority he expelled Marleberge and his friend Thomas de Northwich, but thirty monks accompanied them into banishment as a protest. The abbot pursued them with an armed company, but they successfully beat off the attack and compelled the abbot to withdraw his claim to expel brethren on his own authority. In 1213, when the Roman creditors arrived to claim the sums owed to them by the abbey, Marleberge was sent as a proctor to York, Northampton, and London, to extricate the convent from its financial embarrassments. At Wallingford it was proposed to liquidate the debt on payment of five hundred marks, but the abbot refused to agree, as he held that Marleberge alone was responsible. Marleberge thereupon urged Pandu If, the legate, to depose the abbot. An inquiry followed in which Marleberge gave important testimony, and on 22 Nov. Norreys was deposed. The monks neglected to choose a new abbot, and the legate appointed Randulf prior of Worcester. Marleberge worked with him harmoniously, the creditors were paid, and in 1215 he accompanied him to Rome to get the book of the abbey's customs confirmed. Marleberge was made sacrist in 1217 and prior in 1218.

On the death of Randulf in 1229 he was elected abbot. He was consecrated at Chester by the Bishop of Coventry 12 July 1230; temporalities were restored 10 Sept., and he was installed 20 Sept. He set to work to clear off the debt which still oppressed the abbey, and although mainly occupied with finance found time to carve monuments for himself and for his two predecessors, Norreys and Randulf. He represented himself and them in full pontifical robes, the right to wear which Norreys had basely surrendered as a bribe to the Bishop of Worcester. On 16 April 1233 Marleberge made a formal act of submission for himself and the abbey to the visitatorial authority of the Archbishop of Canterbury (Tanner MS. 223, Bodl. Libr. ; Chron. Abb. p. xxxii). He died in 1230.

Marleberge was an architect and a good mechanical workman. As sacrist he made a reading-desk, and this is possibly still in existence (Archæologia, xvii. 278 ; Mat, in his History of Evesham, p. 57, ed. 1845, inclines to ascribe it to an earlier date) ; he made the fireplace in the church, and a pedestal to the clock (? cum pede horologii) ; he repaired all the glass windows, broken by a fall of the tower, mended and made shrines, and added new slabs to the altar. He strengthened the five arches of the presbytery, and one at the entrance to the crypt. When he became prior lie collected money to rebuild the tower, repaired the walls of the presbytery in modum pinnaculorum, and the words of his biographer seem to imply that he made a triforium which did not exist in the monastery before. The throne for the shrine of St. Egwin was his work. He arranged that the shrines of the principal saints should be placed before the altar on their feast days. He improved the seating of the choir, and procured new stone tombs for two of his predecessors. He repaired the stained-glass window at the east end, and added two others at the west end. While abbot he made a new altar, adorned it with a marble slab, and erected above it a splendid cross with the images of St. Mary and St. John. He enlarged the abbot's dwelling, and improved the vaulted roofing in various parts of the house. His stables


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/521

 the “argument” is the quantity upon which the other quantities in the table are made to depend; in the theory of complex variables, e.g. such as $$a+ib$$ where $$i=\sqrt{-1}$$, the “argument” (or “amplitude”) is the angle $$\theta$$ given by $$\tan \theta = b/a$$. In astronomy, the term is used in connexion with the Ptolemaic theory to denote the angular distance on the epicycle of a planet from the true apogee of the epicycle; and the “equation to the argument” is the angle subtended at the earth by the distance of a planet from the centre of the epicycle. ARGUS, in ancient Greek mythology, the son of Inachus, Agenor or Arestor, or, according to others, an earth-born hero (autochthon). He was called Panoptes (all-seeing), from having eyes all over his body. After performing several feats of valour, he was appointed by Hera to watch the cow into which Io had been transformed. While doing this he was slain by Hermes, who stoned him to death, or put him to sleep by playing on the flute and then cut off his head. His eyes were transferred by Hera to the tail of the peacock. Argus with his countless eyes originally denoted the starry heavens (Apollodorus ii. 1; Aeschylus, P. V. 569; Ovid, Metam. i. 264).

Another, the old dog of Odysseus, who recognized his master on his return to Ithaca, figures in one of the best-known incidents in Homer’s Odyssey (xvii. 291-326). ARGYLL, EARLS AND DUKES OF. The rise of this family of Scottish peers, originally the Campbells of Lochow, and first ennobled as Barons Campbell, is referred to in the article.

, 5th earl of Argyll (1530–1573), was the elder son of Archibald, 4th earl of Argyll (d. 1558), and a grandson of Colin, the 3rd earl (d. 1530). His great-grandfather was the 2nd earl, Archibald, who was killed at Flodden in 1513, and this nobleman’s father was Colin, Lord Campbell (d. 1493), the founder of the greatness of the Campbell family, who was created earl of Argyll in 1457. With Lord James Stuart, afterwards the regent Murray, the 5th earl of Argyll became an adherent of John Knox about 1556, and like his father was one of the most influential members of the party of religious reform, signing what was probably the first “godly band” in December 1557. As one of the “lords of the congregation” he was one of James Stuart’s principal lieutenants during the warfare between the reformers and the regent, Mary of Lorraine; and later with Murray he advised and supported Mary queen of Scots, who regarded him with great favour. It was about this time that William Cecil, afterwards Lord Burghley, referred to Argyll as “a goodly gentleman universally honoured of all Scotland.” Owing to his friendship with Mary, Argyll was separated from the party of Knox, but he forsook the queen when she determined to marry Lord Darnley; he was, however, again on Mary’s side after Queen Elizabeth’s refusal to aid Murray in 1565. Argyll was probably an accomplice in the murder of Rizzio; he was certainly a consenting party to that of Darnley, and then separating himself from Murray he commanded Mary’s soldiers after her escape from Lochleven, and by his want of courage and resolution was partly responsible for her defeat at Langside in May 1568. Soon afterwards he made his peace with Murray, but it is possible that he was accessory to the regent’s murder in 1570. After this event Argyll became lord high chancellor of Scotland, and he died on the 12th of September 1573. His first wife was an illegitimate daughter of James V., and he was thus half-brother-in-law to Mary and to Murray. His relations with her were not harmonious; he was accused of adultery, and in 1568 he performed a public penance at Stirling.

He left no children, and on his death his half-brother Colin (d. 1584) became 6th earl of Argyll. This nobleman, whose life was partly spent in feuds with the regent Morton, died in October 1584. He was succeeded as 7th earl by his young son Archibald (1576–1638), who became a Roman Catholic, fought for Philip III. of Spain in Flanders, whither he had gone to avoid his creditors, and, having entrusted the care of his estates to his son, died in London.

, 1st marquess and 8th earl of Argyll (1607–1661), eldest son of Archibald, 7th earl, by his first wife, Lady Anne Douglas, daughter of William, 1st earl of Morton, was born in 1607 and educated at St Andrews University, where he matriculated on the 15th of January 1622. He had early in life, as Lord Lorne, been entrusted with the possession of the Argyll estates when his father renounced Protestantism and took service with Philip of Spain; and he exercised over his clan an authority almost absolute, disposing of a force of 20,000 retainers, and being, according to Baillie, “by far the most powerful subject in the kingdom.” On the outbreak of the religious dispute between the king and Scotland in 1637 his support was eagerly desired by Charles I. He had been made a privy councillor in 1628, and in 1638 the king summoned him, together with Traquair and Roxburgh, to London; but he refused to be won over, openly and courageously warned Charles against his despotic ecclesiastical policy, and showed great hostility towards Laud. In consequence a secret commission was given to the earl of Antrim to invade Argyllshire and stir up the Macdonalds against the Campbells, a wild and foolish project which completely miscarried. Argyll, who inherited the title by the death of his father in 1638, had originally no preference for Presbyterianism, but now definitely took the side of the Covenanters in defence of the national religion and liberties. He continued to attend the meetings of the Assembly after its dissolution by the marquess of Hamilton, when Episcopacy was abolished. In 1639 he sent a statement to Laud, and subsequently to the king, defending the Assembly’s action; and raising a body of troops he seized Hamilton’s castle of Brodick in Arran. After the pacification of Berwick he carried a motion, in opposition to Montrose, by which the estates secured to themselves the election of the lords of the articles, who had formerly been nominated by the king, a fundamental change in the Scottish constitution, whereby the management of public affairs was entrusted to a representative body and withdrawn from the control of the crown. An attempt by the king to deprive him of his office as justiciary of Argyll and Tarbet failed, and on the prorogation of the parliament by Charles, in May 1640, Argyll moved that it should continue its sittings and that the government and safety of the kingdom should be secured by a committee of the estates, of which, though not a member, he was himself the guiding spirit. In June he was entrusted with a “commission of fire and sword” against the royalists in Atholl and Angus, which, after succeeding in entrapping the earl of Atholl, he carried out with completeness and some cruelty. It was on this occasion that took place the burning of “the bonnie house of Airlie.” By this time the personal rivalry and difference in opinion between Montrose and Argyll had led to an open breach. The former arranged that on the occasion of Charles’s approaching visit to Scotland, Argyll should be accused of high treason in the parliament. The plot, however, was disclosed, and Montrose with others was imprisoned. Accordingly when the king arrived he found himself deprived of every remnant of influence and authority. It only remained for Charles to make a series of concessions. He transferred the control over judicial and political appointments to the parliament, created Argyll a marquess (1641) with a pension of £1000 a year, and returned home, having in Clarendon’s words “made a perfect deed of gift of that kingdom.” Meanwhile the king’s policy of peace and concession had, as usual, been rudely and treacherously interrupted by a resort to force, an unsuccessful attempt, known as the “incident,” being made to kidnap Argyll, Hamilton and Lanark. Argyll was mainly instrumental at this crisis in keeping the national party faithful to what was to him evidently the common cause, and in accomplishing the alliance with the Long Parliament in 1643. In January 1644 he accompanied the Scottish army into England as a member of the committee of both kingdoms and in command of a troop of horse, but was soon in March compelled to return to suppress royalist movements in the north and to defend his own territories. He compelled Huntly to retreat in April, and in July advanced to meet the Irish troops now landed in Argyllshire, which were acting in conjunction with Montrose, who had put himself at the

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/521


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 36.djvu/203

Marriott Michaelmas term 1832 he took a first class in classics and a second in mathematics, his friends were disappointed because he missed a double first. At Easter 1833 he was elected fellow of Oriel, took holy orders, and was at once appointed mathematical lecturer, and afterwards tutor of the college. At Oriel he fell under the influence of Newman, and became his devoted disciple. In February 1839, after wintering in the south of Europe, he assumed the office, at the invitation of Bishop Otter, of principal of the Diocesan Theological College at Chichester. After two years' conscientious work his health obliged him to resign, and returning to Oriel he was appointed sub-dean of the college in October 1841. By Newman's advice he declined in the same year Bishop Selwyn's invitation to accompany him to New Zealand.

Marriott watched with the utmost concern Newman's gradual alienation from the church of England, and when the catastrophe came in 1845 he, to a great extent, took Newman's place in Oxford. Newman had described him in 1841 as ‘a grave, sober, and deeply religious person, a great reader of ecclesiastical antiquity; and having more influence with younger men than any one perhaps of his standing.’ Marriott joined himself heartily to Dr. Pusey, and his high reputation rendered him an invaluable ally. There was, moreover, no doubt about Marriott's unshaken loyalty to the university. ‘For my own part,’ he said in 1845, ‘though I may be suspected, hampered, worried, and perhaps actually persecuted, I will fight every inch of ground before I will be compelled to forsake the service of that mother to whom I owe my new birth in Christ, and the milk of His word. I will not forsake her at any man's bidding till she herself rejects me.’ He became the correspondent and spiritual adviser of many, especially young men, and probably did as much as any one to stem the current that was setting towards Rome. In 1850 he was appointed vicar of St. Mary the Virgin, which was in the gift of his college, and was the university church. He threw himself with his wonted thoroughness into his parochial work. When the cholera and the small-pox both broke out at Oxford in 1854, he fearlessly visited the sufferers and caught the latter disease himself. Though he was no orator, his sermons were always effective.

Meanwhile he made great efforts to establish a hall for poor students. He acquired possession of Newman's buildings at Littlemore in order to prevent them from being turned into a Roman catholic establishment, and used them for a printing-press for religious works, a scheme which caused him endless worry and expenditure. He also threw himself into a commercial scheme at Oxford, termed ‘The Universal Purveyor,’ a sort of anticipation of the co-operative principle of the present day. It was started for the most benevolent purposes, but was quite out of Marriott's experience, and was a fruitful source of anxiety. He was at the same time a member of the hebdomadal council, and ‘took a considerable part in working the new constitution of the university’. The variety and pressure of his work shattered his health. On 30 June 1855 he had a stroke of paralysis. On 23 Aug. he was removed to Bradfield, Berkshire, where his devoted brother John was curate, and there he lingered for three years. He died 15 Sept. 1858, and was buried in a vault belonging to the rector under the south transept of Bradfield parish church.

Marriott's reputation was out of all proportion to his acknowledged literary work, but he did a vast amount of really valuable literary work, in connection with which his name did not appear. In 1849 he published ‘Reflections in a Lent reading of the Epistle to the Romans;’ in 1843 ‘Sermons preached before the University and in other Places;’ and in 1850, ‘Sermons preached in Bradfield Church, Oriel College Chapel, and other Places.’

Besides numerous single sermons, letters, and pamphlets (1841 to 1855), he also published ‘Two Lectures delivered at the Theological College, Chichester,’ 1841, and ‘Hints to Devotion,’ 1848. After his death his brother John edited his ‘Lectures on the Epistle to the Romans,’ 1859. They were delivered at St. Mary's during the last two years of his incumbency, and were the only results of what he intended to be the great work of his life, ‘a commentary on the Epistle to the Romans,’ which was to be his contribution to a commentary on the Bible projected by Dr. Pusey but never completed. From 1841 to the time of his seizure he edited, in conjunction with Pusey and Keble, ‘The Library of the Fathers.’ The lion's share of this vast undertaking fell upon Marriott. Dr. Pusey, in the advertisement to vol. xxxix., while paying a graceful tribute to his departed friend, frankly owned that ‘upon Charles Marriott's editorial labours “The Library of the Fathers” had, for some years, wholly depended.’ In 1852 he also edited, as part of a series of the original texts of the fathers, Theodoret's ‘Interpretatio in omnes B. Pauli Epistolas,’ and in May 1855 he became the first editor of ‘The Literary Churchman,’ in the first seven numbers of which he wrote at least sixteen articles.


text:
Author:John Charles Olmsted

Works

 * Olmsted report on Portland, Oregon parks, 1903.

title: Author:John Charles Olmsted


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Argus

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Argus


text:
Page:The Religion of Ancient Egypt.djvu/192

 difficulty is not in literally translating the text, but in understanding the meaning which lies concealed beneath familiar words. Dr. Birch's translation, though made about thirty years ago, before some of the most important discoveries of the full meanings of words, may still be considered extremely exact as a rendering of the corrupt Turin text, and to an Englishman gives nearly as correct an impression of the original as the text itself would do to an Egyptian who had not been carefully taught the mysteries of his religion. Many parts of this translation, however, when most faithful to the original, must, in consequence of that very fidelity, be utterly unintelligible to an English reader.

The Book of the Dead, I repeat, is essentially mythological, and, like all other Egyptian books of the kind, it assumes the reader's thorough knowledge of the myths and legends. It is perhaps hopeless to expect that the legends will be recovered; the allusions to them will no doubt always remain obscure. But the mythical personages who are constantly mentioned are the very gods about whom I spoke in the last Lecture: Rā and his family and the dragon Apap, Seb and his family, Nut, Osiris, Isis, Horus, Set and Nephthys. Thoth is one of the most important names which occur. If the explanation which I gave of these personages is


text:
Author:Frederick Law Olmsted (1870-1957)

Works

 * Olmsted report on Portland, Oregon parks (1903)


text:
Page:The Religion of Ancient Egypt.djvu/193

 borne in mind, one great difficulty in the interpretation of the Book of the Dead will be overcome. The subject always is the contest between Darkness and light. Ptah, "the Opener," or "the Artist," and Chnemu, "the Builder," are only names of the Sun. Tmu, "the Closer," whose name occurs more frequently, is also one of the principal designations of the Sun. The fifteenth chapter gives an instance of the very different mythological treatment which the same physical phenomenon may receive, according as it is looked at from different points of view. Osiris, Horus and even Rā, suffer death or dismemberment; but Tmu is daily received into the arms of his mother Nut as he sinks into the west, and the arms of his father Tanen close


text:
Author:Frederick Law Olmsted

 * Frederick Law Olmsted (1822-1903), American journalist, social critic, public administrator
 * Frederick Law Olmsted (1870-1957), American landscape architect

title: Author:Frederick Law Olmsted


text:
Page:The Religion of Ancient Egypt.djvu/194

 over him. Neith, the great goddess of Sais, is rarely mentioned. She was the mother of the sun-god Rā, and is commonly supposed to represent Heaven; but some expressions which are hardly applicable to Heaven render it more probable that she is one of the many names of the Dawn. The goddess Sechet is the raging heat of the Sun.

The gods of Thebes are conspicuous by their absence from the Book of the Dead, or at least from almost every chapter. Amon, the great god of Thebes, is named once only, and that in a chapter where the text is extremely doubtful. Chonsu, the moon-god, is only once named. But even the frequent occurrence of these gods would not introduce a different series of conceptions.

Beatification of the Dead.

The Beatification of the Dead is, however, the main subject of every chapter. The everlasting life promised to the faithful may be considered in three of its aspects.


text:
Page:The Religion of Ancient Egypt.djvu/195

 The renewed Existence "as upon Earth."

1. The blessed is represented as enjoying an existence similar to that which he had led upon earth. He has the use of all his limbs, he eats and drinks, and satisfies every one of his physical wants, exactly as in his former life. His bread is made of the corn of Pe, a famous town of Egypt, and the beer he drinks is made from the red corn of the Nile. The flesh of cattle and fowl is given to him, and refreshing waters are poured out to him under the boughs of sycamores which shade him from the heat. The cool breezes of the north wind breathe upon him. The gods themselves provide him with food: he eats from the table of Osiris at Ristat, and from the tables of the sun-god Rā. He is given to drink out of vessels of milk or wine; cakes and flesh are provided for him from the divine abode of Anubis. The gods of Heliopolis themselves bring the divine offerings. He eats the bread which the goddess Taït herself has cooked, and he breathes the sweet odour of flowers. He washes his feet in silver basins which the god Ptah of Memphis, the inventor of all arts, has himself sculptured. Fields also are allotted to him in the lands of Aarru and Hotep, and he cultivates them. It is characteristic of an industrious and agricultural population that part of the bliss of a future state should consist in such operations


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/447

1538.] 'Through comfort of him' O'Neil again levied black rent in Meath, Mac Morrough in Wexford and Kilkenny, O'Carroll in Tipperary. Finally, Lord Butler declared that he would never again 'take harness' under Lord Leonard, unless with special orders from the King; and the old Earl of Ormond, who four years before had saved Ireland, was with difficulty prevented from crossing the Channel, sick and dying though he was, and being carried to London in a horse-litter to lay his complaints before the throne. Ormond was true as steel; wilful falsehood never crossed his lips, and charges which he guaranteed by his own knowledge may be assumed to have been certainly true. His evidence furnishes, with Sir John Allen's, the single firm spots of ground on which we can place our feet in the quaking morass of Irish State papers.

Desmond was at this moment contriving the scheme, which he had laid before the Pope, of another insurrection, to be supported by the Spaniards, and was busy consulting the Irish chiefs, and reconciling their feuds with one another. The O'Neils in the north had been checked hitherto by their hereditary rivals the O'Donnells. Religion was rapidly obliterating this and similar


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/448

428 dissensions, and weaving a Catholic confederacy. The union promised well throughout the island; and Desmond's exertions were ably seconded by a sister of the late Earl of Kildare. Lady Eleanor Fitzgerald had been the wife of McCarty Reagh, of Minister. In the fastnesses of the Cork mountains she had given a shelter to her nephew Gerald, Lord Thomas's brother, and now titular earl. Her husband dying, she resolved to gain over another powerful clan to the common cause, by giving her hand to the chief of the O'Donnells. The marriage was regarded as the sacrament of the general reconciliation. It was arranged at a conference which her son the McCarty, the Earl of Desmond, and Lord Gerald held with ambassadors from O'Neil. When the meeting was over, Lady Eleanor began, without delay, her progress to the north to her future husband, and, taking her nephew with her, she paid a visit first to O'Brien in Thomond. Thence she went into Galway to the Bourkes, and so through Sligo to O'Donnell's own country. O'Neil, who had married her sister, joined her there; and thus the interests of the young Gerald were adopted by a coalition of all the great Irish leaders. A body-guard of four-and-twenty men was assigned to him, as a security against attempts at assassination; and the chiefs took an oath never to rest till they had restored him to his rank and estates. This was the opportunity which Lord Leonard Grey had chosen to play into the hands of the Geraldines of the Pale, to put


text: Page:Science (journal) Volume 1 1883.djvu/360


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/449

1538.] fortresses into the hands of his Irish neighbours, to strengthen Desmond at the expense of the Butlers. The follies of the council may have been great; but if the deputy was to be acquitted of treason, his own were incomparably greater.

His other proceedings were not calculated to restore the confidence of the loyalists. He could not have been ignorant of the confederacy. But he imagined that he might gain the hearts of the Irish by placing himself in their power. The chiefs, who could not desire to see the Government at Dublin in more convenient hands, were delighted to encourage him with hospitality. He accepted a safe-conduct from them—an action of itself dangerously culpable—and crossed with a small retinue, under an escort from O'Connor, into Connaught. Here he was met by Desmond, whose usurpation of authority in Cork and Kerry he recognized and sanctioned. With the rebel Earl for a companion, he then paid a visit into Thomond, where, with his servants in the King's uniform, he accompanied O'Brien in an attack upon a bordering clan. Following the steps of Lady Eleanor, he went next to Galway, to the Bourkes, where he received the rival Bishop, whom he had allowed to supersede Dr Nangle in the See of Clontarf. In the expedition to Limerick, two years before, he had left his heavy guns under the care of the mayor. The guns


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/450

430 were shipped at Limerick by his order, brought round, and left among the Irish. Wherever he went, so far as his ability or knowledge extended, Lord Leonard deposed and deprived every person well affected to the English, of whatever power or authority they possessed, and replaced them with adherents of Kildare.

After these achievements, represented as I have described them by those who wished well to England, he returned to Dublin, and sent a report of his expedition to the King, relating it as a brilliant success—a triumphal progress—in which the Irish chieftains, being reasonably dealt with, had conducted themselves like reasonable men, and had promised and had given pledges that ever after they would be loyal subjects to the Crown. Lord Grey's story was supported by his confidential servant Ap Parry, who attended the progress, and furnished the Government with an account of it. Viscount Gormanstone, on the other hand, who was also one of the party, and was a disinterested witness, confirmed the story of Aylmer and Allen, and shook the credit of


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/522

 head of the royalist forces in Scotland. A campaign followed in the north in which neither general succeeded in obtaining any advantage over the other, or even in engaging battle. Argyll then returned to Edinburgh, threw up his commission, and retired to Inveraray Castle. Thither Montrose unexpectedly followed him in December, compelled him to flee to Roseneath, and devastated his territories. On the 2nd of February 1645, when following Montrose northwards, Argyll was surprised by him at Inverlochy and witnessed from his barge on the lake, to which he had retired owing to a dislocated arm, a fearful slaughter of his troops, which included 1500 of the Campbells. He arrived at Edinburgh on the 12th of February and was again present at Montrose’s further great victory on the 15th of August at Kilsyth, whence he escaped to Newcastle. Argyll was at last delivered from his formidable antagonist by Montrose’s final defeat at Philiphaugh on the 12th of September. In 1646 he was sent to negotiate with the king at Newcastle after his surrender to the Scottish army, when he endeavoured to moderate the demands of the parliament and at the same time to persuaade the king to accept them. On the 7th of July 1646 he was appointed a member of the Assembly of Divines.

Up to this point the statesmanship of Argyll had been highly successful. The national liberties and religion of Scotland had been defended and guaranteed, and the power of the king in Scotland reduced to a mere shadow. In addition, these privileges had been still further secured by the alliance with the English opposition, and by the subsequent triumph of the parliament and Presbyterianism in the neighbouring kingdom. The sovereign himself, after vainly contending in arms, was a prisoner in their midst. But Argyll’s influence could not survive the rupture of the alliance between the two nations on which his whole policy was constructed. He opposed in vain the secret treaty now concluded between the king and the Scots against the parliament, and while Hamilton marched into England and was defeated by Cromwell at Preston, Argyll, after a narrow escape from a surprise at Stirling, joined the Whiggamores, a body of Covenanters at Edinburgh; and, supported by Loudon, Leven and Leslie, he established a new government, which welcomed Cromwell on his arrival there on the 4th of October. This alliance, however, was at once destroyed by the execution of Charles I., which excited universal horror in Scotland. In the series of tangled incidents which followed, Argyll lost control of the national policy. He describes himself at this period as “a distracted man ... in a distracted time” whose “remedies ... had the quite contrary operation.” He supported the invitation from the Covenanters to Charles II. to land in Scotland, gazed upon the captured Montrose, bound on a cart on his way to execution at Edinburgh, and subsequently, when Charles II. came to Scotland, having signed the Covenant and repudiated Montrose, Argyll remained at the head of the administration. After the defeat of Dunbar, Charles retained his support by the promise of a dukedom and the Garter, and an attempt was made by Argyll to marry the king to his daughter. On the 1st of January 1651 he placed the crown on Charles’s head at Scone. But his power had now passed to the Hamilton party. He strongly opposed, but was unable to prevent, the expedition into England, and in the subsequent reduction of Scotland, after having held out in Inveraray Castle for nearly a year, was at last surprised in August 1652 and submitted to the Commonwealth. His ruin was then complete. His policy had failed, his power had vanished. In his estate he was hopelessly in debt, and on terms of such violent hostility with his eldest son as to be obliged to demand a garrison in his house for his protection. During his visit to Monk at Dalkeith in 1654 to complain of this, he was subjected to much personal insult from his creditors, and on visiting London in September 1655 to obtain money due to him from the Scottish parliament, he was arrested for debt, though soon liberated. In Richard Cromwell’s parliament of 1659 Argyll sat as member for Aberdeenshire. At the Restoration he presented himself at Whitehall, but was at once arrested by order of Charles and placed in the Tower (1660), being sent to Edinburgh to stand his trial for high treason. He was acquitted of complicity in the death of Charles I., and his escape from the whole charge seemed imminent, but the arrival of a packet of letters written by Argyll to Monk showed conclusively his collaboration with Cromwell’s government, particularly in the suppression of Glencairn’s royalist rising in 1652. He was immediately sentenced to death, his execution by beheading taking place on the 27th of May 1661, before even the death warrant had been signed by the king. His head was placed on the same spike upon the west end of the Tolbooth on which that of Montrose had previously been exposed, and his body was buried at the Holy Loch, where the head was also deposited in 1664. A monument was erected to his memory in St Giles’s church in Edinburgh in 1895.

While imprisoned in the Tower he wrote Instructions to a Son (1661; reprinted in 1689 and 1743). Some of his speeches, including the one delivered on the scaffold, were published and are printed in the Harleian Miscellany. He married Lady Margaret Douglas, daughter of William, 2nd earl of Morton, and had two sons and four daughters.

, 9th earl of Argyll (1629–1685), eldest son of the 8th earl, studied abroad, and at the age of thirteen was appointed captain in the Scottish regiment serving in France under his uncle the earl of Irvine. He returned home at the close of 1649, and was made captain of Charles II.’s life guards on the king’s arrival in Scotland in 1650. He declared himself a royalist in opposition to his father, with the view, as some said, of securing the family estates in any event. He fought at Dunbar on the 3rd of September 1650, and after the battle of Worcester joined Glencairn in the Highlands. Bitter disputes arose, and on the 2nd of January 1654 Lorne, quitting his troops, fled to avoid arrest. In 1655 he submitted to Monk. He appears, however, to have maintained communications with Charles, and on his refusal to take the oath renouncing allegiance to the Stuarts in 1657 he was imprisoned, remaining in confinement probably till a short time before the Restoration. He was then well received at court by Charles II. After the execution of his father, he endeavoured to obtain the restitution of his forfeited estates and title, but having incautiously attacked certain members of the government in letters which were made public, he was indicted at Edinburgh on the capital charge of “leasing-making” and was sentenced to death on the 26th of August. He remained a prisoner in Edinburgh Castle till the 4th of June 1663, when the sentence was cancelled and he was re-created earl and restored to his estates. He disapproved of the severities practised upon the Covenanters in the west, and in 1671 pleaded for milder methods. His staunch Protestantism rendered him exceedingly obnoxious to James, duke of York, who in 1680 arrived as high commissioner in Scotland and at once expressed his jealousy of Argyll’s immense territorial influence. Argyll moved the re-enactment of “all the acts against popery” omitted on James’s account, and opposed the exemption of the royal family from the test, though allowing it in the case of James. In signing the test himself, in its final form both ambiguous and self-contradictory, he made the reservation “so far as consistent with itself and the Protestant faith,” and declined to engage himself not to promote any alteration of advantage in church or state. On his refusal to record his oath in writing and to sign it, he was dismissed from the Scottish privy council, and on the 9th of November 1681 was accused of treason, a charge which Halifax declared openly in England “they would not hang a dog upon.” A trial followed, a scandalous exhibition of illegality and injustice, at the close of which Argyll was sentenced to death and to the forfeiture of his estates. Shortly afterwards, through the instrumentality of his step-daughter, Sophia Lindsay, he succeeded in making his escape, and after some adventures retired to Holland. His subsequent movements are uncertain, but he appears to have

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/522


text:
Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/19

DRAMATIS PERSONÆ


text:
Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/55

 {{center|{{x-larger block|ACT II * * *}}


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/59


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/111


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/129


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/153


text: Page:Short History of Paper Money and Banking.djvu/1


text: Page:Sing A Song for Sixpence.djvu/18

title: Page:Sing A Song for Sixpence.djvu/18


text: Page:Sir William Herschel, his life and works (1881).djvu/256


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 36.djvu/204

Marriott He edited, for the use of Chichester students, ‘Canons of the Apostles’ in Greek, with the English version and notes of Johnson of Cranbrook, taken from the latter's ‘Clergyman's Vade Mecum,’ 1841; ‘Analecta Christiana,’ pt. i. 1844, pt. ii. 1848, selected from the early fathers, and intended for the use of Bishop Selwyn's candidates for the ministry; four of St. Augustine's shorter treatises, 1848.

 MARRIOTT, JAMES (1730?–1803), lawyer and politician, was the son of an attorney in Hatton Garden, London, whose widow married a Mr. Sayer, a name well known in the law. He was admitted pensioner at Trinity Hall, Cambridge, 17 June 1746, elected scholar 27 Oct. 1747, graduated LL.B. 17 June 1751, LL.D. 25 March 1757, and was elected fellow 26 July 1756. His rise in life was secured when he arranged the library of the Duke of Newcastle, then chancellor of the university, and had the good fortune to present him with some poems on his visiting Cambridge in 1755. On 3 Nov. 1757 he was admitted to the College of Advocates, and in June 1764 was appointed, through 'interest rather than superior merit,' says Coote, to the post of advocate-general, but Lord Sandwich, writing to George Grenville, remarked : 'I believe Marriott is the fittest person in point of ability exclusive of other considerations' (Grenville Papers, ii. 346). In the same month (13 June 1764) he was elected master of his college, and in 1767 he became vice-chancellor of the university, when he attempted, without success, to obtain the erection, after his own designs, of an amphitheatre for public lectures and musical performances by means of a fund of 500l. which Walter Titley, envoy extraordinary at Denmark, had left at his disposal as vice-chancellor. In 176S Marriott was a candidate for the professorship of modern history, but it was given to Gray, and he remained without advancement until October 1778, when he was created judge of the admiralty court and knighted. At the general election of 1780 he contested the borough of Sudbury in Suffolk, and though not returned at the poll was seated on petition, 26 April 1781. He retained his seat until the dissolution in 1784, and held it again from 1796 until 1802. In March 1782 he caused great merriment in the House of Commons by his 'pedantic folly,' for in his desire to produce some proof of the justice of the war with the American colonies he observed that if representation were held necessary to give the rights of taxation, America was 'represented by the members for Kent, since in the charters of the thirteen provinces they are declared to be "part and parcel of the manor of Greenwich" ' (, Hist. of England, vii. 205). He was again elected vice-chancellor of the university in November 1786, when he claimed exemption as one of his majesty's judges, and the senate by thirty-one votes to nineteen acquiesced in his view. He had some difference with the fellows at a college meeting, and for many years came to Cambridge as little as he could. In 1799 he resigned his judgeship, an annuity of 2,000l. a year being settled on him by parliament, and he died at Twinstead Hall, near Sudbury, on 21 March 1803, aged 72.

Marriott is described as 'less deficient in talent than in soundness of judgment.' In his youth he was 'gay and volatile,' and even in the admiralty court he displayed excessive jocularity. Gray wrote of him in 1766 that his follies should be pardoned 'because he has some feeling and means us well.' His writings were : 1. 'Two Poems presented to the Duke of Newcastle on his revisiting the University in order to lay the first Stone of the New 'Building,' 1765. 2. 'The Case of the Dutch ships considered,' 1758; 3rd edit. 1759; 4th edit, 1778. 3. 'A Letter to the Dutch Merchants in England' (anon.), 1759. 4. 'Poems written chiefly at the University of Cambridge. Together with a Latin Oration upon the History and Genius of the Roman and Canon Laws, spoken in the Chapel of Trinity Hall, Cambridge, 21 Dec. 1756,' Cambridge, 1760. Marriott contributed verses to the Cambridge university sets on the peace, 1748, on the death of Frederick, prince of Wales, 1751, and to that in 1761 to the new queen. His verses were in the collections of Dodsley, vols. iv. and vi., Pearch, vols. ii. and i, Bell, vols. vi. ix. xii. xv. and xviii., Mendez, pp. 296-305, and Southey, vol. iii. 5. 'Political Considerations, being a few Thoughts of a Candid Man at the Present Crisis (anon.), 1762. 6. 'Rights and Privileges of the Universities, in a Charge at Quarter Sessions, 10 Oct, 1768. Also an Argument on the Poor's Kate charged on the Colleges of Christ and Emmanuel,' 1769. Of this production Gray writes: ' It moved the town's people to tears and the university to laughter.' See also Wordsworth's 'Universitv Life in the Eighteenth Centurv,' pp. ; 427-8, 'Schohe Academics?,' pp. 138, 327. 7. 'Plan of a Code of Laws for the Province of Quebec,' 1774. 8. 'Mémoire justificatif de la Grande Bretagne, en arretant les na-


text:
Page:Sing A Song for Sixpence.djvu/20

 The King was in

16

title: Page:Sing A Song for Sixpence.djvu/20


text:
Page:Sing A Song for Sixpence.djvu/24

 The Queen was in

20

title: Page:Sing A Song for Sixpence.djvu/24


text:
Page:Sing A Song for Sixpence.djvu/25

the Parlour, 21

title: Page:Sing A Song for Sixpence.djvu/25


text:
Page:Sing A Song for Sixpence.djvu/28

The Maid was in 24

title: Page:Sing A Song for Sixpence.djvu/28


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/451

1538.] the follower as well as his master, by mentioning that he had shared in the bribes which had been largely offered to both of them, and had been as largely received. The deputy asserted that he had gone by the advice of the council; the council absolutely disclaimed the responsibility; while Gormanstone again gave the inconvenient opinion that his safety and seeming success were due solely and entirely to his connection with the Geraldines.

Among so many contradictions, the King knew not what to believe. Grey had powerful friends among the English noblemen; and the experience of the last few years had wearied the patience both of Henry and Cromwell. Their hands were already full, and they were without leisure for a minute investigation. It was more easy to distribute the fault among all parties; and instead of entering on the merits of the quarrel, they addressed a rebuke both to the deputy and the Earl of Ormond, who was his chief accuser, commanding them to be reconciled without delay, and to show in future better temper and better judgment. The points in which Ormond professed to have been injured should be settled by arbitration of the Chancellor, the Master of the Rolls, and the Lord Treasurer. The order was


text:
Page:The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha.djvu/1104

Rh entering in of Hamath unto the river of Egypt, before the Lord our God, seven days and seven days, even fourteen days. On the eighth day he sent the people away: and they blessed the king, and went unto their tents joyful and glad of heart for all the goodness that the Lord had done for David his servant, and for Israel his people.

it came to pass, when Solomon had finished the building of the house of the Lord, and the king's house, and all Solomon's desire which he was pleased to do, that the Lord appeared to Solomon the second time, as he had appeared unto him at Gibeon. And the Lord said unto him, I have heard thy prayer and thy supplication, that thou hast made before me: I have hallowed this house, which thou hast built, to put my name there for ever; and mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually. And if thou wilt walk before me, as David thy father walked, in integrity of heart, and in uprightness, to do according to all that I have commanded thee, and wilt keep my statutes and my judgments: then I will establish the throne of thy kingdom upon Israel for ever, as I promised to David thy father, saying, There shall not fail thee a man upon the throne of Israel. But if ye shall at all turn from following me, ye or your children, and will not keep my commandments and my


text:
Page:The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha.djvu/1105

IX] statutes which I have set before you, but go and serve other gods, and worship them: then will I cut off Israel out of the land which I have given them; and this house, which I have hallowed for my name, will I cast out of my sight; and Israel shall be a proverb and a byword among all people: and at this house, which is high, every one that passeth by it shall be astonished, and shall hiss; and they shall say, Why hath the Lord done thus unto this land, and to this house? And they shall answer, Because they forsook the Lord their God, who brought forth their fathers out of the land of Egypt, and have taken hold upon other gods, and have worshipped them, and served them: therefore hath the Lord brought upon them all this evil.

And it came to pass at the end of twenty years, when Solomon had built the two houses, the house of the Lord, and the king's house, (now Hiram the king of Tyre had furnished Solomon with cedar trees and fir trees, and with gold, according to all his desire,) that then king Solomon gave Hiram twenty cities in the land of Galilee. And Hiram came out from Tyre to see the cities which Solomon had given him: and they pleased him not. And he said. What cities are these which thou hast given me, my brother? And he called them the land of Cabul unto this day.


text:
Page:The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha.djvu/1106

Rh And Hiram sent to the king sixscore talents of gold.

And this is the reason of the levy which king Solomon raised; for to build the house of the Lord, and his own house, and Millo, and the wall of Jerusalem, and Hazor, and Megiddo, and Gezer. For Pharaoh king of Egypt had gone up, and taken Gezer, and burnt it with fire, and slain the Canaanites that dwelt in the city, and given it for a present unto his daughter, Solomon's wife. And Solomon built Gezer, and Beth-horon the nether, and Baalath, and Tadmor in the wilderness, in the land, and all the cities of store that Solomon had, and cities for his chariots, and cities for his horsemen, and that which Solomon desired to build in Jerusalem, and in Lebanon, and in all the land of his dominion. And all the people that were left of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, which were not of the children of Israel, their children that were left after them in the land, whom the children of Israel also were not able utterly to destroy, upon those did Solomon levy a tribute of bondservice unto this day. But of the children of Israel did Solomon make no bondmen: but they were men of war, and his servants, and his princes, and his captains, and rulers of his chariots, and his horsemen. These were the chief of the officers that were over Solomon's work, five hundred and fifty,


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/61


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/81


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/523

 again visited London, and was in correspondence with the Rye House plotters and proposing to head a rebellion in Scotland in 1683. In 1685 he joined the conspiracy in Holland to set Monmouth on the throne instead of James II., arriving in Orkney on the 6th of May and making his way to his own country. But his clansmen refused to join him, and whatever small chances of success remained were destroyed by constant and paralysing disputes. His ships and ammunition were captured, and after some aimless wanderings he found himself deserted, with but one companion, Major Fullerton. On the 18th of June he was taken prisoner at Inchinnan and arrived at Edinburgh on the 20th, where he was paraded through the streets and put in irons in the castle. James ordered his summary execution on the 29th, and it was carried out by beheading on the following day, on the old charge of 1681. His head was exposed on the west side of the Tollbooth, where his father’s and Montrose’s had also been exhibited, his body finding its final place of burial at Inveraray.

By his first wife, Lady Mary Stewart, daughter of the 4th earl of Moray (Murray), he had four sons and three daughters.

, 1st duke of Argyll (? 1651–1703), was the eldest son of the 9th earl. He tried to get his father’s attainder reversed by seeking the king’s favour, but being unsuccessful he went over to the Hague and joined William of Orange as an active promoter of the revolution of 1688. In spite of the attainder, he was admitted in 1689 to the convention of the Scottish estates as earl of Argyll, and he was deputed, with Sir James Montgomery and Sir John Dalrymple, to present the crown to William III. in its name, and to tender him the coronation oath. In 1690 an act was passed restoring his title and estates, and it was in connexion with the refusal of the Macdonalds of Glencoe to join in the submission to him that he organized the terrible massacre which has made his name notorious. In 1696 he was made a lord of the treasury, and his political services were rewarded in 1701 by his being created duke of Argyll. He had two sons by his wife Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Lionel Talmash, John (the 2nd duke) and Archibald (the 3rd duke.)

, 2nd duke of Argyll and duke of Greenwich (1678–1743), was born on the 10th of October 1678. He entered the army in 1694, and in 1701 was promoted to the command of a regiment. On the death of his father in 1703, he was appointed a member of the privy council, and at the same time colonel of the Scotch horse guards, and one of the extraordinary lords of session. In return for his services in promoting the Union, he was created (1705) a peer of England, by the titles of baron of Chatham and earl of Greenwich, and in 1710 was made a knight of the Garter. He first distinguished himself in a military capacity at the battle of Oudenarde (1708), where he served as a brigadier-general; and was afterwards present under the duke of Marlborough at the sieges of Lille, Ghent, Bruges and Tournay, and did remarkable service at the battle of Malplaquet in 1709. He was very popular with the troops, and his rivalry with Marlborough on this account is thought to have been the cause of the enmity shown by Argyll afterwards to his old commander. In 1711 he was sent to take command in Spain; but being seized with a violent fever at Barcelona, and disappointed of supplies from home, he returned to England. Having a seat in the House of Lords, and being gifted with an extraordinary power of oratory, he censured the measures of the ministry with such freedom that all his places were disposed of to other noblemen; but at the accession of George I. he recovered his influence. On the breaking out of the rebellion in 1715 he was appointed commander-in-chief of the forces in North Britain, and was principally instrumental in effecting the total extinction of the rebellion in Scotland without much bloodshed. He arrived in London early in March 1716, and at first stood high in the favour of the king, but in a few months was strippee of his offices. This disgrace, however, did not deter him from the discharge of his parliamentary duties; he supported the bill for the impeachment of Bishop Atterbury, and lent his aid to his countrymen by opposing the bill for punishing the city of Edinburgh for the Porteous riot. In the beginning of the year 1719 he was again admitted into favour, appointed lord steward of the household, and, in April following, created duke of Greenwich; he held various offices in succession, and in 1735 was made a field marshall. He continued in the administration till after the accession of George II., when, in April 1740, a violent speech against the government led again to his dismissal from office. He was soon restored on a change of the ministry, but disapproving the measures of the new administration, and apparently disappointed at not being given the command of the army, he shortly resigned all his posts, and spent the rest of his life in privacy and retirement. He died on the 4th of October 1743. A monument by Roubillac was erected to his memory in Westminster Abbey. He was twice married, and by his second wife, Jane Warburton, had five daughters; his Scottish titles passed to his brother, but his English titles became extinct, and though his eldest daughter was created baroness of Greenwich in 1767 this title also became extinct on her death in 1794.

, 3rd duke of Argyll (1682–1761), was born at Ham House in Surrey, in June 1682. On his father being created a duke, he joined the army, and served for a short time under the duke of Marlborough. In 1705 he was appointed treasurer of Scotland, and in the following year was one of the commissioners for treating of the Union; on the consummation of which, having been raised to the peerage of Scotland as earl of Islay, he was chosen one of the sixteen peers for Scotland in the first parliament of Great Britain. In 1711 he was called to the privy council, and commanded the royal army at the battle of Sheriffmuir in 1715. He was appointed keeper of the privy seal in 1721, and was afterwards entrusted with the principal management of Scottish affairs to an extent which caused him to be called “king of Scotland.” In 1733 he was made keeper of the great seal, an office which he held till his death. He succeeded to the dukedom in 1743. Both as earl of Islay and as duke of Argyll he was prominently connected (with Duncan Forbes of Culloden) with the movement for consolidating Scottish loyalty by the formation of locally recruited highland regiments. The duke was eminent not only for his political abilities, but also for his literary accomplishments, and he collected one of the most valuable private libraries in Great Britain. He died suddenly on the 15th of April 1761. He was married but had no legitimate issue, and his English property was left to a Mrs Williams, by whom he had a son, William Campbell.

The succession now passed to the descendants of the younger son of the 9th earl, the Campbells of Mamore; the 4th duke died in 1770, and was succeeded by his son, the 5th duke (1723–1806). He was a soldier who had fought at Dettingen and Culloden, and became colonel of the 42nd regiment (Black Watch), and eventually a field marshall. He sat in the House of Commons for Glasgow from 1744 to 1761, when on his father’s succession to the dukedom he became legally disqualified, as courtesy marquess of Lorne, for a Scottish constituency; he could sit, however, for an English one, and was returned for Dover, which he represented till 1766, when he was created an English peer as Baron Sundridge, the title by which till 1892 the dukes of Argyll sat in the House of Lords. The 5th duke was an active landlord, and was the first president of the Highland and Agricultural Society. In 1759 he had married the widowed duchess of Hamilton (the beautiful Elizabeth Gunning), by whom he had two sons and two daughters. The eldest of his sons, (d. 1841), became 6th duke, and on his death was succeeded as 7th duke by his brother  (1777–1847), who from 1799–1822 sat in parliament as member for Argyllshire. He was thrice married, and by his second wife, Joan Glassell (d. 1828), had two sons, the eldest of whom (b. 1821) died

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/523


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/452

432 peremptory, and was in form obeyed. The Earl, Lord Butler, the council, and the deputy met in Dublin. Lord Leonard had called the Butlers traitors he was required to prove his words; and he and Ormond brought forward their respective charges in writing. The arbitrators, under Cromwell's direction, decided that on both sides the accusations should be dropped. The Earl and his son should swear to serve in future loyally under the deputy; the deputy should accept the Butlers as faithful subjects. The proud noble men consented with haughty reluctance. They shook hands, and there was outward peace. But it was a peace which was ill founded and ill cemented. The Irish confederacy remained, though the personal quarrel was at an end. If on each side there had been faults of manner, the essence and reality of the fault had been confined to one. Ormond was a loyal nobleman and a sensible man. The conduct of Grey can be interpreted only as rising out of treachery, or from a folly which approached insanity. The Master of the Rolls, in reporting to Cromwell the result of the meeting, assured him, again and again, that the Earl had been entirely correct in his account of the expedition into the west that the reconciliation could not be of long endurance; and that if the King desired an effective administration of Ireland, he must recall Lord Leonard Grey.


text:
Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/14

Mr. Punch's Book of Sports Or, Keeping Up the Ball.

—"The Centurion."

title: Page:Mr. Punch's Book of Sports.djvu/14


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/453

1539.] It would have been well for the deputy had he been spared further opportunity of doing injury. But Henry determined to give him another chance. The discovery of Desmond's intrigues with Paul III. made further trifling in that quarter impossible; and, believing in Grey's loyalty, he trusted that, when his eyes were opened, his abilities as a soldier would be useful. The intentions of the Irish, indeed, no longer were open to any uncertainty. Messengers were found to be passing to and fro between O'Neil, James of Scotland, and the Pope. In the spring of 1539 they March. had drawn out a plan of an intended campaign, in combination with the movements which were then contemplated in Europe. When the Emperor and Francis landed in England, the King of Scots was to cross into Ulster, and would descend on Dublin with the force of the North. The Geraldine clan would rise in the Pale, and sweep the English into the sea; and O'Neil would proclaim himself King of Ireland on Tara Hill. If James was required on his own Border, as he might be, he could be dispensed with. The chiefs were resolute, and equal to the work of themselves. 'The friars and


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/454

434 priests of all the Irishry did preach daily that every man ought, for the salvation of his soul, to fight and make war against the King's Majesty and his true subjects; and if any of them did die in the quarrel, his soul that so should be dead should go to heaven, as the souls of St Peter and St Paul, which suffered death and martyrdom for God's sake.' The enterprise in Ireland, as elsewhere, terminated abortively, the Emperor, who was its central spring, declining to be set in motion. The Celtic chiefs, however, who, had the business become serious, would not perhaps have been the most effective of the confederates, were the last to relinquish the agitation. Their menaces continued loud till the summer; and in July Desmond 'began the dance' by attacking Kilkenny. Lord Leonard, who for the time had recovered his senses, now found O'Connor, whom the year before he had called 'his right hand,' to be the rankest of traitors. He thought there was more falsehood in the Irish 'than in all the devils in hell;' and he had so weakened the Earl of Ormond that it was doubtful whether any part of Munster could be protected.… He was roused at last, it seemed. The plan of the rebels was that O'Neil and O'Donnell should make their way with young Fitzgerald to Maynooth. Desmond was then to join them; and they calculated that the name of Kildare would set the


text:
Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 3.djvu/455

1539.] about Dublin in a flame. Lord Leonard, accompanied by Allen, who was now Lord Chancellor, anticipated the move by meeting O'Neil on the borders of Ulster. An action followed, attended with the usual results; the gallowglass could not stand before the English men-at-arms; they fled hopelessly, and the coronation of O'Neil at Tara was for a time deferred. The Butlers, with more difficulty, kept at bay the Earl of Desmond. The clans were prevented from joining; and at length, in the autumn, having accomplished nothing, they settled back into quiet.

Community of danger, and apparent community of desire to act rightly, for the moment reconciled the deputy and the council, and restored the former to the respect of Ormond. In the winter Lord Leonard made a progress in Munster, undoing, so far as he was able, his previous mistakes; and the Earl, on the 20th of December, wrote in better spirits to Cromwell, saying that the old differences were at last forgotten, and, 'God willing,' should neither be revived nor remembered. The deputy wrote with equal cordiality. The council united in a joint despatch, extolling Grey's gallantry in the insurrection, and entreating the King to confer upon him some mark of approbation; and Henry, eager to encourage the improvement which at last seemed real, replied with a New-year's gift. But the moral state of Ireland was as fickle as its climate,


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/97


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/69


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/159


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/187


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/191


text: Page:Shakespeare's comedy of A midsummer-night's dream (Robinson).djvu/209


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 13.djvu/4


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 13.djvu/6


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 13.djvu/14


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 13.djvu/46


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 13.djvu/116


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 13.djvu/118


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 13.djvu/407


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 13.djvu/408


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 18.djvu/564


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 21.djvu/1


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 29.djvu/3


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 4.djvu/340


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 4.djvu/342


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 41.djvu/31


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 46.djvu/3


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 46.djvu/4


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 46.djvu/10


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 46.djvu/16


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 46.djvu/512


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 46.djvu/525


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume 46.djvu/526


text:
Page:The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha.djvu/1107

X] which bare rule over the people that wrought in the work.

But Pharaoh's daughter came up out of the city of David unto her house which Solomon had built for her: then did he build Millo.

And three times in a year did Solomon offer burnt offerings and peace offerings upon the altar which he built unto the Lord, and he burnt incense upon the altar that was before the Lord, So he finished the house.

And king Solomon made a navy of ships in Ezion-geber, which is beside Eloth, on the shore of the Red sea, in the land of Edom. And Hiram sent in the navy his servants, shipmen that had knowledge of the sea, with the servants of Solomon. And they came to Ophir, and fetched from thence gold, four hundred and twenty talents, and brought it to king Solomon.

when the queen of Sheba heard of the fame of Solomon concerning the name of the Lord, she came to prove him with hard questions. And she came to Jerusalem with a very great train, with camels that bare spices, and very much gold, and precious stones: and when she was come to Solomon, she communed with him of all that was in her heart. And Solomon told her all her questions: there was not any thing hid from the king, which he told her not. And when


text: Page:Sacred Books of the East - Volume VIII.djvu/138


text: Page:Quatrains of Omar Khayyam (tr. Whinfield, 1883).djvu/394