Quotes4study

"Spy," said the handsome Enjolras, "we are judges and not assassins."

Victor Hugo     Les Miserables

Among these terrors, and the brood belonging to them, the Doctor walked with a steady head: confident in his power, cautiously persistent in his end, never doubting that he would save Lucie's husband at last. Yet the current of the time swept by, so strong and deep, and carried the time away so fiercely, that Charles had lain in prison one year and three months when the Doctor was thus steady and confident. So much more wicked and distracted had the Revolution grown in that December month, that the rivers of the South were encumbered with the bodies of the violently drowned by night, and prisoners were shot in lines and squares under the southern wintry sun. Still, the Doctor walked among the terrors with a steady head. No man better known than he, in Paris at that day; no man in a stranger situation. Silent, humane, indispensable in hospital and prison, using his art equally among assassins and victims, he was a man apart. In the exercise of his skill, the appearance and the story of the Bastille Captive removed him from all other men. He was not suspected or brought in question, any more than if he had indeed been recalled to life some eighteen years before, or were a Spirit moving among mortals.

Charles Dickens     A Tale of Two Cities

"They do not want my papers," said Monte Cristo, "they want to kill me; they are no robbers, but assassins. I will not allow the prefect of police to interfere with my private affairs. I am rich enough, forsooth, to distribute his authority on this occasion." The count recalled Baptistin, who had left the room after delivering the letter. "Return to Paris," said he; "assemble the servants who remain there. I want all my household at Auteuil."

Alexandre Dumas, Pere     The Count of Monte Cristo

Still, in spite of his mournful preoccupation, he could not refrain from saying to himself that this prowler of the barriers with whom Jondrette was talking resembled a certain Panchaud, alias Printanier, alias Bigrenaille, whom Courfeyrac had once pointed out to him as a very dangerous nocturnal roamer. This man's name the reader has learned in the preceding book. This Panchaud, alias Printanier, alias Bigrenaille, figured later on in many criminal trials, and became a notorious rascal. He was at that time only a famous rascal. To-day he exists in the state of tradition among ruffians and assassins. He was at the head of a school towards the end of the last reign. And in the evening, at nightfall, at the hour when groups form and talk in whispers, he was discussed at La Force in the Fosse-aux-Lions. One might even, in that prison, precisely at the spot where the sewer which served the unprecedented escape, in broad daylight, of thirty prisoners, in 1843, passes under the culvert, read his name, PANCHAUD, audaciously carved by his own hand on the wall of the sewer, during one of his attempts at flight. In 1832, the police already had their eye on him, but he had not as yet made a serious beginning.

Victor Hugo     Les Miserables

"Continue to seek for this man, sir," said the king to the minister of police; "for if, as I am all but convinced, General Quesnel, who would have been so useful to us at this moment, has been murdered, his assassins, Bonapartists or not, shall be cruelly punished." It required all Villefort's coolness not to betray the terror with which this declaration of the king inspired him.

Alexandre Dumas, Pere     The Count of Monte Cristo

"It is like their Sieyes! A regicide ending in a senator; for that is the way they always end. They give themselves a scar with the address of thou as citizens, in order to get themselves called, eventually, Monsieur le Comte. Monsieur le Comte as big as my arm, assassins of September. The philosopher Sieyes! I will do myself the justice to say, that I have never had any better opinion of the philosophies of all those philosophers, than of the spectacles of the grimacer of Tivoli! One day I saw the Senators cross the Quai Malplaquet in mantles of violet velvet sown with bees, with hats a la Henri IV. They were hideous. One would have pronounced them monkeys from the tiger's court. Citizens, I declare to you, that your progress is madness, that your humanity is a dream, that your revolution is a crime, that your republic is a monster, that your young and virgin France comes from the brothel, and I maintain it against all, whoever you may be, whether journalists, economists, legists, or even were you better judges of liberty, of equality, and fraternity than the knife of the guillotine! And that I announce to you, my fine fellows!"

Victor Hugo     Les Miserables

To be present at executions constitutes a duty. He shows himself at the guillotine, and he laughs. He calls it by all sorts of pet names: The End of the Soup, The Growler, The Mother in the Blue (the sky), The Last Mouthful, etc., etc. In order not to lose anything of the affair, he scales the walls, he hoists himself to balconies, he ascends trees, he suspends himself to gratings, he clings fast to chimneys. The gamin is born a tiler as he is born a mariner. A roof inspires him with no more fear than a mast. There is no festival which comes up to an execution on the Place de Greve. Samson and the Abbe Montes are the truly popular names. They hoot at the victim in order to encourage him. They sometimes admire him. Lacenaire, when a gamin, on seeing the hideous Dautin die bravely, uttered these words which contain a future: "I was jealous of him." In the brotherhood of gamins Voltaire is not known, but Papavoine is. "Politicians" are confused with assassins in the same legend. They have a tradition as to everybody's last garment. It is known that Tolleron had a fireman's cap, Avril an otter cap, Losvel a round hat, that old Delaporte was bald and bare-headed, that Castaing was all ruddy and very handsome, that Bories had a romantic small beard, that Jean Martin kept on his suspenders, that Lecouffe and his mother quarrelled. "Don't reproach each other for your basket," shouted a gamin to them. Another, in order to get a look at Debacker as he passed, and being too small in the crowd, caught sight of the lantern on the quay and climbed it. A gendarme stationed opposite frowned. "Let me climb up, m'sieu le gendarme," said the gamin. And, to soften the heart of the authorities he added: "I will not fall." "I don't care if you do," retorted the gendarme.

Victor Hugo     Les Miserables

All scoundrelism is summed up in the phrase "Que Messieurs les Assassins commencent!"

George Bernard Shaw     Maxims for Revolutionists

"Marius!" he cried. "Abominable child! I do not know what your father was! I do not wish to know! I know nothing about that, and I do not know him! But what I do know is, that there never was anything but scoundrels among those men! They were all rascals, assassins, red-caps, thieves! I say all! I say all! I know not one! I say all! Do you hear me, Marius! See here, you are no more a baron than my slipper is! They were all bandits in the service of Robespierre! All who served B-u-o-naparte were brigands! They were all traitors who betrayed, betrayed, betrayed their legitimate king! All cowards who fled before the Prussians and the English at Waterloo! That is what I do know! Whether Monsieur your father comes in that category, I do not know! I am sorry for it, so much the worse, your humble servant!"

Victor Hugo     Les Miserables

"'The same deadly silence succeeded these words. Then the general advanced, and making a violent effort to control his feelings,--"I have a son," said he, "and I ought to think of him, finding myself among assassins."

Alexandre Dumas, Pere     The Count of Monte Cristo

"Stand not by me, but stand under me, whoever you are that will now help Stubb; for Stubb, too, sticks here. I grin at thee, thou grinning whale! Who ever helped Stubb, or kept Stubb awake, but Stubb's own unwinking eye? And now poor Stubb goes to bed upon a mattrass that is all too soft; would it were stuffed with brushwood! I grin at thee, thou grinning whale! Look ye, sun, moon, and stars! I call ye assassins of as good a fellow as ever spouted up his ghost. For all that, I would yet ring glasses with ye, would ye but hand the cup! Oh, oh! oh, oh! thou grinning whale, but there'll be plenty of gulping soon! Why fly ye not, O Ahab! For me, off shoes and jacket to it; let Stubb die in his drawers! A most mouldy and over salted death, though;--cherries! cherries! cherries! Oh, Flask, for one red cherry ere we die!"

Herman Melville     Moby Dick; or The Whale

Ottakar's son, Wenceslas II., was only seven years of age at the death of his father, and Otto of Brandenburg, a nephew of Ottakar, for a time governed Bohemia as guardian of the young sovereign. Otto's rule was very unpopular, an insurrection broke out against him, and Bohemia was for a time in a state of complete anarchy. The country was at last pacified through the intervention of Rudolph of Habsburg, and at the age of twelve Wenceslas became nominal ruler of the country. All power was, however, in the hands of Zavis of Falkenstein, one of the great Bohemian nobles, who had married the king's mother, Kunegunda. The power of Zavis at last became invidious to the king, by whose order he was beheaded in 1290. Wenceslas, though only nineteen years of age, henceforth governed Bohemia himself, and his short reign was a period of great happiness for the country. Poland also accepted the rule of Wenceslas and the Hungarian crown was offered to him. Towards the end of his reign Wenceslas became involved in war with Albert, archduke of Austria, afterwards king of the Romans. While preparing to invade Austria Wenceslas died suddenly (1305). His son and successor, Wenceslas III., was then only sixteen years of age, and he only ruled over Bohemia for one year. While planning a warlike expedition against Poland, on which country the Bohemian sovereigns now again maintained their claim, he was murdered by unknown assassins (1306). With him ended the rule of the Premyslide dynasty over Bohemia. Entry: HISTORY

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 4, Slice 2 "Bohemia" to "Borgia, Francis"     1910-1911

Within four weeks of the adoption of this bill the bombardment of Alexandria by the British fleet (11th July 1882) opened an era destined profoundly to affect the colonial position of Italy. The revolt of Arabi Pasha (September 1881) had led to the meeting of an ambassadorial conference at Constantinople, promoted by Mancini, Italian minister for foreign affairs, in the hope of preventing European intervention in Egypt and the permanent establishment of an Anglo-French condominium to the detriment of Italian influence. At the opening of the conference (23rd June 1882) Italy secured the signature of a self-denying protocol whereby all the great powers undertook to avoid isolated action; but the rapid development of the crisis in Egypt, and the refusal of France to co-operate with Great Britain in the restoration of order, necessitated vigorous action by the latter alone. In view of the French refusal, Lord Granville on the 27th of July invited Italy to join in restoring order in Egypt; but Mancini and Depretis, in spite of the efforts of Crispi, then in London, declined the offer. Financial considerations, lack of proper transports for an expeditionary corps, fear of displeasing France, dislike of a "policy of adventure," misplaced deference towards the ambassadorial conference in Constantinople, and unwillingness to thwart the current of Italian sentiment in favour of the Egyptian "nationalists," were the chief motives of the Italian refusal, which had the effect of somewhat estranging Great Britain and Italy. Anglo-Italian relations, however, regained their normal cordiality two years later, and found expression in the support lent by Italy to the British proposal at the London conference on the Egyptian question (July 1884). About the same time Mancini was informed by the Italian agent in Cairo that Great Britain would be well disposed towards an extension of Italian influence on the Red Sea coast. Having sounded Lord Granville, Mancini received encouragement to seize Beilul and Massawa, in view of the projected restriction of the Egyptian zone of military occupation consequent on the Mahdist rising in the Sudan. Lord Granville further inquired whether Italy would co-operate in pacifying the Sudan, and received an affirmative reply. Italian action was hastened by news that, in December 1884, an exploring party under Signor Bianchi, royal commissioner for Assab, had been massacred in the Aussa (Danakil) country, an event which aroused in Italy a desire to punish the assassins and to obtain satisfaction for the still unpunished massacre of Signor Giulietti and his companions. Partly to satisfy public opinion, partly in order to profit by the favourable disposition of the British government, and partly in the hope of remedying the error committed in 1882 by refusal to co-operate with Great Britain in Egypt, the Italian government in January 1885 despatched an expedition under Admiral Caimi and Colonel Saletta to occupy Massawa and Beilul. The occupation, effected on the 5th of February, was accelerated by fear lest Italy might be forestalled by France or Russia, both of which powers were suspected of desiring to establish themselves firmly on the Red Sea and to exercise a protectorate over Abyssinia. News of the occupation reached Europe simultaneously with the tidings of the fall of Khartum, an event which disappointed Italian hopes of military co-operation with Great Britain in the Sudan. The resignation of the Gladstone-Granville cabinet further precluded the projected Italian occupation of Suakin, and the Italians, wisely refraining from an independent attempt to succour Kassala, then besieged by the Mahdists, bent their efforts to the increase of their zone of occupation around Massawa. The extension of the Italian zone excited the suspicions of John, negus of Abyssinia, whose apprehensions were assiduously fomented by Alula, ras of Tigré, and by French and Greek adventurers. Measures, apparently successful, were taken to reassure the negus, but shortly afterwards protection inopportunely accorded by Italy to enemies of Ras Alula, induced the Abyssinians to enter upon hostilities. In January 1886 Ras Alula raided the village of Wa, to the west of Zula, but towards the end of the year (23rd November) Wa was occupied by the irregular troops of General Gené, who had superseded Colonel Saletta at Massawa. Angered by this step, Ras Alula took prisoners the members of an Italian exploring party commanded by Count Salimbeni, and held them as hostages for the evacuation of Wa. General Gené nevertheless reinforced Wa and pushed forward a detachment to Saati. On the 25th of January 1887 Ras Alula attacked Saati, but was repulsed with loss. On the following day, however, the Abyssinians succeeded in surprising, near the village of Dogali, an Italian force of 524 officers and men under Colonel De Cristoforis, who were convoying provisions to the garrison of Saati. The Abyssinians, 20,000 strong, speedily overwhelmed the small Italian force, which, after exhausting its ammunition, was destroyed where it stood. One man only escaped. Four hundred and seven men and twenty-three officers were killed outright, and one officer and eighty-one men wounded. Dead and wounded alike were horribly mutilated by order of Alula. Fearing a new attack, General Gené withdrew his forces from Saati, Wa and Arafali; but the losses of the Abyssinians at Saati and Dogali had been so heavy as to dissuade Alula from further hostilities. Entry: F

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 15, Slice 1 "Italy" to "Jacobite Church"     1910-1911

During the fourteen years' reign of this second leader, the Assassins were frequently unfortunate in the open field, and their castles were taken and plundered; but they acquired a stronghold in Syria, while their numerous murders made them an object of dread to the neighbouring princes, and spread abroad their evil renown. A long series of distinguished men perished under the daggers of the _fedais_; even the most sacred dignity was not spared. The caliph Mostarshid was assassinated in his tent, and not long after, the caliph Rashid suffered a similar fate. Busurg-Omid was succeeded by his son Mahommed I., who, during the long period of twenty-five years, ruthlessly carried out his predecessor's principles. In his time Massiat became the chief seat of the Syrian branch of the society. Mahommed's abilities were not great, and the affections of the people were drawn towards his son Hassan, a youth of great learning, skilled in all the wisdom of the initiated, and popularly believed to be the promised Imam become visible on earth. The old sheik prevented any attempt at insurrection by slaying 250 of Hassan's adherents, and the son was glad to make submission. When, however, he attained the throne, he began to put his views into effect. On the 17th of the month Ramadan, 1164, he assembled the people and disclosed to them the secret doctrines of the initiated; he announced that the doctrines of Islam were now abolished, that the people might give themselves up to feasting and joy. Soon after, he announced that he was the promised Imam, the caliph of God upon earth. To substantiate these claims he gave out that he was not the son of Mahommed, but was descended from Nizar, son of the Egyptian caliph Mostansir, and a lineal descendant of Isma'il. After a short reign of four years Hassan was assassinated by his brother-in-law, and his son Mahommed II. succeeded. One of his first acts was to slay his father's murderer, with all his family and relatives; and his long rule, extending over a period of forty-six years, was marked by many similar deeds of cruelty. He had to contend with many powerful enemies, especially with the great Atabeg sultan Nureddin, and his more celebrated successor, Saladin, who had gained possession of Egypt after the death of the last Fatimite caliph, and against whom even secret assassination seemed powerless. During his reign, also, the Syrian branch of the society, under their _da'i_, Sinan, made themselves independent, and remained so ever afterwards. It was with this Syrian branch that the Crusaders made acquaintance; and it appears to have been their emissaries who slew Count Raymund of Tripoli and Conrad of Montferrat. Entry: ASSASSIN

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 2, Slice 7 "Arundel, Thomas" to "Athens"     1910-1911

Josephus set himself to make an army of the inhabitants of Galilee, many of whom had no wish to fight, and to strengthen the strongholds. His organization of local government and his efforts to maintain law and order brought him into collision with the Zealots and especially with John of Giscala, one of their leaders. The people, whom he had tried to conciliate, were roused against him; John sent assassins and finally procured an order from Jerusalem for his recall. In spite of all this Josephus held his ground and by force or craft put down those who resisted his authority. Entry: 39

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 15, Slice 4 "Jevons, Stanley" to "Joint"     1910-1911

_History._--The city is not mentioned by any narrator of Alexander's expedition, nor by any ancient author so as to admit of positive recognition. But it is very possibly the _Gazaca_ which Ptolemy places among the _Paropamisadae_, and this may not be inconsistent with Sir H. Rawlinson's identification of it with _Gazos_, an Indian city spoken of by two obscure Greek poets as an impregnable place of war. The name is probably connected with the Persian and Sanskrit _ganj_ and _ganja_, a treasury (whence the Greek and Latin _Gaza_). We seem to have positive evidence of the existence of the city before the Mahommedan times (644) in the travels of the Chinese pilgrim, Hsuan Tsang, who speaks of _Ho-si-na_ (i.e. probably _Ghazni_) as one of the capitals of _Tsaukuta_ or Arachosia, a place of great strength. In early Mahommedan times the country adjoining Ghazni was called _Zabul_. When the Mahommedans first invaded that region Ghazni was a wealthy entrepot of the Indian trade. Of the extent of this trade some idea is given by Ibn Haukal, who states that at Kabul, then a mart of the same trade, there was sold yearly indigo to the value of two million dinars (£1,000,000). The enterprise of Islam underwent several ebbs and flows over this region. The provinces on the Helmund and about Ghazni were invaded as early as the caliphate of Moaiya (662-680). The arms of Yaqub b. Laith swept over Kabul and Arachosia (Al-Rukhaj) about 871, and the people of the latter country were forcibly converted. Though the Hindu dynasty of Kabul held a part of the valley of Kabul river till the time of Mahmud, it is probably to the period just mentioned that we must refer the permanent Mahommedan occupation of Ghazni. Indeed, the building of the fort and city is ascribed by a Mahommedan historian to Amr b. Laith, the brother and successor of Ya`kub (d. 901), though the facts already stated discredit this. In the latter part of the 9th century the family of the Samanid, sprung from Samarkand, reigned in splendour at Bokhara. Alptagin, originally a Turkish slave, and high in the service of the dynasty, about the middle of the 10th century, losing the favour of the court, wrested Ghazni from its chief (who is styled Abu Bakr Lawik, wali of Ghazni), and established himself there. His government was recognized from Bokhara, and held till his death. In 977 another Turk slave, Sabuktagin, who had married the daughter of his master Alptagin, obtained rule in Ghazni. He made himself lord of nearly all the present territory of Afghanistan and of the Punjab. In 997 Mahmud, son of Sabuktagin, succeeded to the government, and with his name Ghazni and the Ghaznevid dynasty have become perpetually associated. Issuing forth year after year from that capital, Mahmud (q.v.) carried fully seventeen expeditions of devastation through northern India and Gujarat, as well as others to the north and west. From the borders of Kurdistan to Samarkand, from the Caspian to the Ganges, his authority was acknowledged. The wealth brought back to Ghazni was enormous, and contemporary historians give glowing descriptions of the magnificence of the capital, as well as of the conqueror's munificent support of literature. Mahmud died in 1030, and some fourteen kings of his house came after him; but though there was some revival of importance under Ibrahim (1059-1099), the empire never reached anything like the same splendour and power. It was overshadowed by the Seljuks of Persia, and by the rising rivalry of Ghor (q.v.), the hostility of which it had repeatedly provoked. Bahram Shah (1118-1152) put to death Kutbuddin, one of the princes of Ghor, called king of the Jibal or Hill country, who had withdrawn to Ghazni. This prince's brother, Saifuddin Suri, came to take vengeance, and drove out Bahram. But the latter recapturing the place (1149) paraded Saifuddin and his vizier ignominiously about the city, and then hanged them on the bridge. Ala-uddin of Ghor, younger brother of the two slain princes, then gathered a great host, and came against Bahram, who met him on the Helmund. The Ghori prince, after repeated victories, stormed Ghazni, and gave it over to fire and sword. The dead kings of the house of Mahmud, except the conqueror himself and two others, were torn from their graves and burnt, whilst the bodies of the princes of Ghor were solemnly disinterred and carried to the distant tombs of their ancestors. It seems certain that Ghazni never recovered the splendour that perished then (1152). Ala-uddin, who from this deed became known in history as _Jah[=an]-soz_ (_Brûlemonde_), returned to Ghor, and Bahram reoccupied Ghazni; he died in 1157. In the time of his son Khusru Shah, Ghazni was taken by the Turkish tribes called Ghuzz (generally believed to have been what are now called Turkomans). The king fled to Lahore, and the dynasty ended with his son. In 1173 the Ghuzz were expelled by Ghiyasuddin sultan of Ghor (nephew of Ala-uddin Jahansoz), who made Ghazni over to his brother Muizuddin. This famous prince, whom the later historians call Mahommed Ghori, shortly afterwards (1174-1175) invaded India, taking Multan and Uchh. This was the first of many successive inroads on western and northern India, in one of which Lahore was wrested from Khusru Malik, the last of Mahmud's house, who died a captive in the hills of Ghor. In 1192 Prithvi Rai or Pithora (as the Moslem writers call him), the Chauhan king of Ajmere, being defeated and slain near Thanewar, the whole country from the Himalaya to Ajmere became subject to the Ghori king of Ghazni. On the death of his brother Ghiyasuddin, with whose power he had been constantly associated, and of whose conquests he had been the chief instrument, Muizuddin became sole sovereign over Ghor and Ghazni, and the latter place was then again for a brief period the seat of an empire nearly as extensive as that of Mahmud the son of Sabuktagin. Muizuddin crossed the Indus once more to put down a rebellion of the Khokhars in the Punjab, and on his way back was murdered by a band of them, or, as some say, by one of the _Mulahidah_ or Assassins. The slave lieutenants of Muizuddin carried on the conquest of India, and as the rapidly succeeding events broke their dependence on any master, they established at Delhi that monarchy of which, after it had endured through many dynasties, and had culminated with the Mogul house of Baber, the shadow perished in 1857. The death of Muizuddin was followed by struggle and anarchy, ending for a time in the annexation of Ghazni to the empire of Khwarizm by Mahommed Shah, who conferred it on his famous son, Jelaluddin, and Ghazni became the headquarters of the latter. After Jenghiz Khan had extinguished the power of his family in Turkestan, Jelaluddin defeated the army sent against him by the Mongol at Parwan, north of Kabul. Jenghiz then advanced and drove Jelaluddin across the Indus, after which he sent Ogdai his son to besiege Ghazni. Henceforward Ghazni is much less prominent in Asiatic history. It continued subject to the Mongols, sometimes to the house of Hulagu in Persia, and sometimes to that of Jagatai in Turkestan. In 1326, after a battle between Amir Hosain, the viceroy of the former house in Khorasan, and Tarmashirin, the reigning khan of Jagatai, the former entered Ghazni and once more subjected it to devastation, and this time the tomb of Mahmud to desecration. Entry: GHAZNI

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 11, Slice 8 "Germany" to "Gibson, William"     1910-1911