I am an excitable person who only understands life lyrically, musically, in whom feelings are much stronger as reason. I am so thirsty for the marvelous that only the marvelous has power over me. Anything I can not transform into something marvelous, I let go. Reality doesn't impress me. I only believe in intoxication, in ecstasy, and when ordinary life shackles me, I escape, one way or another. No more walls.
The ordinary life of man is like that of the saints. They all seek their satisfaction, and differ only in the object wherein they place it; they call those their enemies who hinder them, etc. God then has shown the power which he has to give invisible possessions, by the power which he has shown over things visible.
In the time of Pythagoras that proverbial phrase "Ipse dixit" was introduced into ordinary life.
Reality doesn't impress me. I only believe in intoxication, in ecstasy, and when ordinary life shackles me, I escape, one way or another. No more walls.
Seldom, in the business and transactions of ordinary life, do we find the sympathy we want.
~Insanity.~--Insanity is not a distinct and separate empire; our ordinary life borders upon it, and we cross the frontier in some part of our nature.--_Taine._
The strength of a man's virtue must not be measured by his occasional efforts, but by his ordinary life.
Such is the position of ethnology, such are the objects of the ethnologist. The paths or methods, by following which he may hope to reach his goal, are diverse. He may work at man from the point of view of the pure zoologist, and investigate the anatomical and physiological peculiarities of Negroes, Australians, or Mongolians, just as he would inquire into those of pointers, terriers, and turnspits,--"persistent modifications" of man's almost universal companion. Or he may seek aid from researches into the most human manifestation of humanity-Language; and assuming that what is true of speech is true of the speaker--a hypothesis as questionable in science as it is in ordinary life--he may apply to mankind themselves the conclusions drawn from a searching analysis of their words and grammatical forms.
This is common to ordinary life and that of the saints, that all endeavour after happiness, and differ only in the object in which they place it. Both call those their enemies who hinder them from attaining it.
Joseph Alexeevich was not in Petersburg--he had of late stood aside from the affairs of the Petersburg lodges, and lived almost entirely in Moscow. All the members of the lodges were men Pierre knew in ordinary life, and it was difficult for him to regard them merely as Brothers in Freemasonry and not as Prince B. or Ivan Vasilevich D., whom he knew in society mostly as weak and insignificant men. Under the masonic aprons and insignia he saw the uniforms and decorations at which they aimed in ordinary life. Often after collecting alms, and reckoning up twenty to thirty rubles received for the most part in promises from a dozen members, of whom half were as well able to pay as himself, Pierre remembered the masonic vow in which each Brother promised to devote all his belongings to his neighbor, and doubts on which he tried not to dwell arose in his soul.
A remarkable feature of the subjects on black-figured vases is that a stereotyped form of composition is invariably adopted at least for the principal figures, but minor variations are generally to be found, as, for instance, in the number of bystanders; and it is almost an impossibility to find any two vase-paintings which are exact duplicates. The form of the composition, was partly determined by the field available for the design; when this took the form of a long frieze the space was filled up with a series of spectators or the repetition of typical groups, but when the design is on a framed panel or confined by ornamental borders the method of treatment is adapted from that of a sculptured metope, and the figures limited to two or three. In many cases it is difficult to decide, in the absence of inscriptions, whether or no a scene has mythological signification; the mythological types are over and over again adopted for scenes of ordinary life, even to the divine attributes or poses of certain figures. Entry: A
Lucilius furnishes a specimen of the language of the period, free from the restraints of tragic diction and the imitation of Greek originals. Unfortunately the greater part of his fragments are preserved only by a grammarian whose text is exceptionally corrupt; but they leave no doubt as to the justice of the criticism passed by Horace on his careless and "muddy" diction. The _urbanitas_ which is with one accord conceded to him by ancient critics seems to indicate that his style was free from the taint of provincial Latinity, and it may be regarded as reproducing the language of educated circles in ordinary life; the numerous Graecisms and Greek quotations with which it abounds show the familiarity of his readers with the Greek language and literature. Varro ascribes to him the _gracile genus dicendi_, the distinguishing features of which were _venustas_ and _subtilitas_. Hence it appears that his numerous archaisms were regarded as in no way inconsistent with grace and precision of diction. But it may be remembered that Varro was himself something of an archaizer, and also that the grammarians' quotations may bring this aspect too much into prominence. Lucilius shares with the comic poets the use of many plebeian expressions, the love for diminutives, abstract terms and words of abuse; but occasionally he borrows from the more elevated style of Ennius forms like _simitu_ (= simul), _noenu_ (= non), _facul_ (= facile), and the genitive in -_ai_, and he ridicules the contemporary tragedians for their _zetematia_, their high-flown diction and _sesquipedalia verba_, which make the characters talk "not like men but like portents, flying winged snakes." In his ninth book he discusses questions of grammar, and gives some interesting facts as to the tendencies of the language. For instance, when he ridicules a _praetor urbanus_ for calling himself _pretor_, we see already the intrusion of the rustic degradation of _ae_ into _e_, which afterwards became universal. He shows a great command of technical language, and (partly owing to the nature of the fragments) [Greek: hapax legomena] are very numerous. Entry: 49
His chief work is a philosophical romance, in which he describes the awakening and growth of intellect in a child removed from the influences of ordinary life. Its Arabic title is _Risalat Hayy ibn Yaqzan_; it was edited by E. Pococke as _Philosophus autodidactus_ (Oxford, 1671; 2nd ed., 1700), and with a French translation by L. Gauthier (Algiers, 1900). An English translation by S. Ockley was published in 1708 and has been reprinted since. A Spanish translation by F. Pons Boigues was published at Saragossa (1900). Another work of Ibn Tufail, the _Kitab Asrar ul-Hikma ul-mashraqiyya_ ("Secrets of Eastern Science"), was published at Bulaq (1882); cf. S. Munk, _Mélanges_ (1859), pp. 410 sqq., and T. J. de Boer, _Geschichte der Philosophie im Islam_ (Stuttgart, 1901), pp. 160 sqq. (also an English translation). (G. W. T.) Entry: IBN
_Reason in Dreams._--Studies of dreams of normal individuals based on large collections of instances are singularly few in number; such as there are indicate great variations in the source of dream thoughts and images, in the coherence of the dream, and in the powers of memory. In ordinary life attention dominates the images presented; in dreams heterogeneous and disconnected elements are often combined; a resemblance need not even have been consciously recognized for the mind to combine two impressions in a dream; for example, an aching tooth may (according to the dream) be extracted, and found to resemble rocks on the sea-shore, which had not struck the waking mind as in any way like teeth. Incongruence and incoherence are not, however, a necessary characteristic of dreams, and individuals are found whose dream ideas and scenes show a power of reasoning and orderliness equal to that of a scene imagined or experienced in ordinary life. In some cases the reasoning power may attain a higher level than that of the ordinary conscious life. In a well-authenticated case Professor Hilprecht was able in a dream to solve a difficulty connected with two Babylonian inscriptions, which had not previously been recognized as complementary to each other; a point of peculiar interest is the dramatic form in which the information came to him--an old Babylonian priest appeared in his dream and gave him the clue to the problem (see also below, Personality). Entry: DREAM
48. _Ennius._--The language of Ennius deserves especial study because of the immense influence which he exerted in fixing the literary style. He first established the rule that in hexameter verse all vowels followed by two consonants (except in the case of a mute and a liquid), or a double consonant, must be treated as lengthened by position. The number of varying quantities is also much diminished, and the elision of final -_m_ becomes the rule, though not without exceptions. On the other hand he very commonly retains the original length of verbal terminations (_esset_, _faciet_) and of nominatives in _or_ and _a_, and elides final _s_ before an initial consonant. In declension he never uses -_ae_ as the genitive, but -_ai_ or -_as_; the older and shorter form of the gen. plur. is -_um_ in common; obsolete forms of pronouns are used, as _mis_, _olli_, _sum_ (= eum), _sas_, _sos_, _sapsa_; and in verbal inflexion there are old forms like _morimur_ (§ 15), _fuimus_ (§ 17, vi.), _potestur_ (cf. § 5, iv.). Some experiments in the way of tmesis (_saxo_ cere _comminuit_-brum) and apocope (_divum domus altisonum_ cael, _replet te laetificum_ gau) were happily regarded as failures, and never came into real use. His syntax is simple and straightforward, with the occasional pleonasms of a rude style, and conjunctions are comparatively rare. From this time forward the literary language of Rome parted company with the popular dialect. Even to the classical writers Latin was in a certain sense a dead language. Its vocabulary was not identical with that of ordinary life. Now and again a writer would lend new vigour to his style by phrases and constructions drawn from homely speech. But on the whole, and in ever-increasing measure, the language of literature was the language of the schools, adapted to foreign models. The genuine current of Italian speech is almost lost to view with Plautus and Terence, and reappears clearly only in the semi-barbarous products of the early Romance literature. Entry: 48
He was tall and erect in figure, and lived on the whole a temperate life, though he used to say that he had been drunk about a hundred times. His favourite exercise was tennis, which he played regularly even after the age of seventy. Socially he was genial and courteous, though in argument he occasionally lost his temper. As a friend he was generous and loyal. Intellectually bold in the extreme, he was curiously timid in ordinary life, and is said to have had a horror of ghosts. He read little, and often boasted that he would have known as little as other men if he had read as much. He appears to have had an illegitimate daughter for whom he made generous provision. In the National Portrait Gallery there is a portrait of him by J. M. Wright, and two others are in the possession of the Royal Society. Entry: HOBBES
The natural region to look to for signs of the will of Jupiter was the sky, where lightning and the flight of birds seemed directed by him as counsel to men. The latter, however, was the more difficult of interpretation, and upon it, therefore, mainly hinged the system of divination with which the augurs were occupied. It was the duty of the augur, before the auspices properly so called (those from the sky and from birds) were taken, to mark out with his staff the templum or consecrated space within which his observations were intended to be made. The method of procedure was as follows. At midnight, when the sky was clear and there was an absence of wind, the augur, in the presence of a magistrate, took up his position on a hill which afforded a wide view. After prayer and sacrifice, he marked out the templum both in the sky and on the ground and dedicated it. Within its limits he then pitched a tent, in which he sat down with covered head, asked the gods for a sign, and waited for an answer. As the augur looked south he had the east, the lucky quarter, on his left, and therefore signs on the left side were considered favourable, those on the right unfavourable. The practice was the reverse in Greece; the observers of signs looked towards the north, so that signs on the right were regarded as the favourable ones, and this is frequently adopted in the Roman poets. The augur afterwards announced the result of his observations in a set form of words, by which the magistrate was bound. Signs of the will of the gods were of two kinds, either in answer to a request (_auspicia impetrativa_), or incidental (_auspicia oblativa_). Of such signs there were five classes: (1) Signs in the sky (_caelestia auspicia_), consisting chiefly of thunder and lightning, but not excluding falling stars and other phenomena. Lightning from left to right was favourable, from right to left unfavourable; but on its mere appearance, in either direction, all business in the public assemblies was suspended for the day. Since the person charged to take the auspices for a certain day was constitutionally subject to no other authority who could test the truth or falsehood of his statement that he had observed lightning, this became a favourite device for putting off meetings of the public assembly. Restrictions were, however, imposed in later republican times. When a new consul, praetor or quaestor entered on his first day of office and prayed the gods for good omens, it was a matter of custom to report to him that lightning from the left had been seen. (2) Signs from birds (_signa ex avibus_), with reference to the direction of their flight, and also to their singing, or uttering other sounds. To the first class, called _alites_, belonged the eagle and the vulture; to the second, called _oscines_, the owl, the crow and the raven. The mere appearance of certain birds indicated good or ill luck, while others had a reference only to definite persons or events. In matters of ordinary life on which divine counsel was prayed for, it was usual to have recourse to this form of divination. For public affairs it was, by the time of Cicero, superseded by the fictitious observation of lightning. (3) Feeding of birds (_auspicia ex tripudiis_), which consisted in observing whether a bird--usually a fowl--on grain being thrown before it, let fall a particle from its mouth (_tripudium sollistimum_). If it did so, the will of the gods was in favour of the enterprise in question. The simplicity of this ceremony recommended it for very general use, particularly in the army when on service. The fowls were kept in cages by a servant, styled _pullarius_. In imperial times _decuriales pullarii_ are mentioned. (4) Signs from animals (_pedestria auspicia_, or _ex quadrupedibus_), i.e. observation of the course of, or sounds uttered by, quadrupeds and reptiles within a fixed space, corresponding to the observations of the flight of birds, but much less frequently employed. It had gone out of use by the time of Cicero. (5) Warnings (_signa ex diris_), consisting of all unusual phenomena, but chiefly such as boded ill. Being accidental in their occurrence, they belonged to the _auguria oblativa_, and their interpretation was not a matter for the augurs, unless occurring in the course of some public transaction, in which case they formed a divine veto against it. Otherwise, reference was made for an interpretation to the pontifices in olden times, afterwards frequently to the Sibylline books, or the Etruscan haruspices, when the incident was not already provided for by a rule, as, for example, that it was unlucky for a person leaving his house to meet a raven, that the sudden death of a person from epilepsy at a public meeting was a sign to break up the assembly. Entry: AUGURS
In one of his letters to Kelsall Beddoes wrote:--"I am convinced the man who is to awaken the drama must be a bold, trampling fellow--no creeper into worm-holes--no reviser even--however good. These reanimations are vampire cold. Such ghosts as Marloe, Webster, &c., are better dramatists, better poets, I dare say, than any contemporaries of ours--but they are ghosts--the worm is in their pages" (_Letters_, p. 50). In spite of this wise judgment, Beddoes was himself a "creeper into worm-holes," a close imitator of Marston and of Cyril Tourneur, especially in their familiar handling of the phenomena of death, and in the remoteness from ordinary life of the passions portrayed. In his blank verse he caught to a certain degree the manner of his Jacobean models, and his verse abounds in beautiful imagery, but his _Death's Jest Book_ is only finished in the sense of having five acts completed; it remains a bizarre production which appeals to few minds, and to them rather for the occasional excellence of the poetry than as an entire composition. His lyrics show the influence of Shelley as well as the study of 17th-century models, but they are by no means mere imitations, and some of them, like the "Dirge for Wolfram" ("If thou wilt ease thy heart"), and "Dream Pedlary" ("If there were dreams to sell"), are among the most exquisite of 19th-century lyrics. Entry: BEDDOES
Before the rise of comparative philology it was a popular opinion that Hebrew was the original speech of mankind, from which all others were descended. This belief, derived from the Jews (cf. Pal. Targ. Gen. xi. 1), was supported by the etymologies and other data supplied by the early chapters of Genesis. But though Hebrew possesses a very old literature, it is not, as we know it, structurally as early as, e.g. Arabic, or, in other words, it does not come so near to that primitive Semitic speech which may be pre-supposed as the common parent of all the Semitic languages. Owing to the imperfection of the Hebrew alphabet, which, like that of most Semitic languages, has no means of expressing vowel-sounds, it is only partly possible to trace the development of the language. In its earliest form it was no doubt most closely allied to the Canaanite or Phoenician stock, to the language of Moab, as revealed by the stele of Mesha (c. 850 B.C.), and to Edomite. The vocalization of Canaanite, as far as it is known to us, e.g. from glosses in the Tell-el-Amarna tablets (15th century B.C.)[2] and much later from the Punic passages in the _Poenulus_ of Plautus, differs in many respects from that of the Hebrew of the Old Testament, as also does the Septuagint transcription of proper names. The uniformity, however, of the Old Testament text is due to the labours of successive schools of grammarians who elaborated the Massorah (see HEBREW LITERATURE), thereby obliterating local or dialectic differences, which undoubtedly existed, and establishing the pronunciation current in the synagogues about the 7th century A.D. The only mention of such differences in the Old Testament is in Judges xii. 6, where it is stated that the Ephraimites pronounced [Hebrew: sh] (sh) as [Hebrew: s] or [Hebrew: s] (s). In Neh. xiii. 24, the "speech of Ashdod" is more probably a distinct (Philistine) language. Certain peculiarities in the language of the Pentateuch ([Hebrew: hu] for [Hebrew: hi], [Hebrew: naar] for [Hebrew: naara]), which used to be regarded as archaisms, are to be explained as purely orthographical.[3] In a series of writings, however, extending over so long a period as those of the Old Testament, some variation or development in language is to be expected apart from the natural differences between the poetic (or prophetic) and prose styles. The consonantal text sometimes betrays these in spite of the Massorah. In general, the later books of the Old Testament show, roughly speaking, a greater simplicity and uniformity of style, as well as a tendency to Aramaisms. For some centuries after the Exile, the people of Palestine must have been bilingual, speaking Aramaic for ordinary purposes, but still at least understanding Hebrew. Not that they forgot their own tongue in the Captivity and learnt Aramaic in Babylon, as used to be supposed. In the western provinces of the Persian empire Aramaic was the official language, spoken not only in Palestine but in all the surrounding countries, even in Egypt and among Arab tribes such as the Nabateans. It is natural, therefore, that it should influence and finally supplant Hebrew in popular use, so that translations even of the Old Testament eventually appear in it (TARGUMS). Meanwhile Hebrew did not become a dead language--indeed it can hardly be said ever to have died, since it has continued in use till the present day for the purposes of ordinary life among educated Jews in all parts of the world. It gradually became a literary rather than a popular tongue, as appears from the style of the later books of the Old Testament (Chron., Dan., Eccles.), and from the Hebrew text of Ecclesiasticus (c. 170 B.C.). During the 1st century B.C. and the 1st century A.D. we have no direct evidence of its characteristics. After that period there is a great development in the language of the Mishna. It was still living Hebrew, although mainly confined to the schools, with very clear differences from the biblical language. In the Old Testament the range of subjects was limited. In the Mishna it was very much extended. Matters relating to daily life had to be discussed, and words and phrases were adopted from what was no doubt the popular language of an earlier period. A great many foreign words were also introduced. The language being no longer familiar in the same sense as formerly, greater definiteness of expression became necessary in the written style. In order to avoid the uncertainty arising from the lack of vowels to distinguish forms consisting of the same consonants (for the vowel-points were not yet invented), the aramaising use of the reflexive conjugations (Hithpa'el, Nithpa'el) for the internal passives (Pu'al, Hoph'al) became common; particles were used to express the genitive and other relations, and in general there was an endeavour to avoid the obscurities of a purely consonantal writing. What is practically Mishnic Hebrew continued to be used in Midrash for some centuries. The language of both Talmuds, which, roughly speaking, were growing contemporaneously with Midrash, is a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic (Eastern Aram. in the Babylonian, Western in the Jerusalem Talmud), as was also that of the earlier commentators. As the popular use of Aramaic was gradually restricted by the spread of Arabic as the vernacular (from the 7th century onwards), while the dispersion of the Jews became wider, biblical Hebrew again came to be the natural standard both of East and West. The cultivation of it is shown and was no doubt promoted by the many philological works (grammars, lexicons and masorah) which are extant from the 10th century onward. In Spain, under Moorish dominion, most of the important works of that period were composed in Arabic, and the influence of Arabic writers both on language and method may be seen in contemporaneous Hebrew compositions. No other vernacular (except, of course, Aramaic) ever had the same influence upon Hebrew, largely because no other bears so close a relation to it. At the present day in the East, and among learned Jews elsewhere, Hebrew is still cultivated conversationally, and it is widely used for literary purposes. Numerous works on all kinds of subjects are produced in various countries, periodicals flourish, and Hebrew is the vehicle of correspondence between Jews in all parts of the world. Naturally its quality varies with the ability and education of the writer. In the modern _pronunciation_ the principal differences are between the Ashkenazim (German and Polish Jews) and the Sephardim (Spanish and Portuguese Jews), and concern not only the vowels but also certain consonants, and in some cases probably go back to early times. As regards _writing_, it is most likely that the oldest Hebrew records were preserved in some form of cuneiform script. The alphabet (see WRITING) subsequently adopted is seen in its earliest form on the stele of Mesha, and has been retained, with modifications, by the Samaritans. According to Jewish tradition Ezra introduced the Assyrian character ([Hebrew: ktav ashuri]), a much-debated statement which no doubt means that the Aramaic hand in use in Babylonia was adopted by the Jews about the 5th century B.C. Another form of the same hand, allowing for differences of material, is found in Egyptian Aramaic papyri of the 5th and 4th centuries B.C. From this were developed (a) the _square_ character used in MSS. of the Bible or important texts, and in most printed books, (b) the _Rabbinic_ (or Rashi) character, used in commentaries and treatises of all kinds, both in MS. and in printed books, (c) the _Cursive_ character, used in letters and for informal purposes, not as a rule printed. In the present state of Hebrew palaeography it is not possible to determine accurately the date of a MS., but it is easy to recognize the country in which it was written. The most clearly marked distinctions are between Spanish, French, German, Italian, Maghrebi, Greek, Syrian (including Egyptian), Yemenite, Persian and Qaraite hands. It is in the Rabbinic and Cursive characters that the differences are most noticeable. The Hebrew alphabet is also used, generally with the addition of some diacritical marks, by Jews to write other languages, chiefly Arabic, Spanish, Persian, Greek, Tatar (by Qaraites) and in later times German. Entry: HEBREW