To be, or not to be: that is the question: Whether 't is nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep: No more; and by a sleep to say we end The heartache and the thousand natural shocks That flesh is heir to,--'t is a consummation Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep; To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there 's the rub: For in that sleep of death what dreams may come, When we have shuffled off this mortal coil, Must give us pause: there 's the respect That makes calamity of so long life; For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely, The pangs of despised love, the law's delay, The insolence of office and the spurns That patient merit of the unworthy takes, When he himself might his quietus make With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear, To grunt and sweat under a weary life, But that the dread of something after death, The undiscover'd country from whose bourn No traveller returns, puzzles the will And makes us rather bear those ills we have Than fly to others that we know not of? Thus conscience does make cowards of us all; And thus the native hue of resolution Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought, And enterprises of great pith and moment With this regard their currents turn awry, And lose the name of action.
Who would fardels bear, / To grunt and sweat under a weary life, / But that the dread of something after death, / The undiscover'd country from whose bourn / No traveller returns, puzzles the will, / And makes us rather bear those ills we have / Than fly to others that we know not of?
Greuze was Diderot's favourite among contemporary artists, and it is easy to see why. Greuze's most characteristic pictures were the rendering in colour of the same sentiment of domestic virtue and the pathos of common life, which Diderot attempted with inferior success to represent upon the stage. For Diderot was above all things interested in the life of men,--not the abstract life of the race, but the incidents of individual character, the fortunes of a particular family, the relations of real and concrete motives in this or that special case. He delighted with the enthusiasm of a born casuist in curious puzzles of right and wrong, and in devising a conflict between the generalities of ethics and the conditions of an ingeniously contrived practical dilemma. Mostly his interest expressed itself in didactic and sympathetic form; in two, however, of the most remarkable of all his pieces, it is not sympathetic, but ironical. _Jacques le fataliste_ (written in 1773, but not published until 1796) is in manner an imitation of _Tristram Shandy_ and _The Sentimental Journey_. Few modern readers will find in it any true diversion. In spite of some excellent criticisms dispersed here and there, and in spite of one or two stories that are not without a certain effective realism, it must as a whole be pronounced savourless, forced, and as leaving unmoved those springs of laughter and of tears which are the common fountain of humour. _Le Neveu de Rameau_ is a far superior performance. If there were any inevitable compulsion to name a masterpiece for Diderot, one must select this singular "farce-tragedy." Its intention has been matter of dispute; whether it was designed to be merely a satire on contemporary manners, or a reduction of the theory of self-interest to an absurdity, or the application of an ironical clincher to the ethics of ordinary convention, or a mere setting for a discussion about music, or a vigorous dramatic sketch of a parasite and a human original. There is no dispute as to its curious literary flavour, its mixed qualities of pungency, bitterness, pity and, in places, unflinching shamelessness. Goethe's translation (1805) was the first introduction of _Le Neveu de Rameau_ to the European public. After executing it, he gave back the original French manuscript to Schiller, from whom he had it. No authentic French copy of it appeared until the writer had been nearly forty years in his grave (1823). Entry: DIDEROT
The names which the new community received from its founder are both philological puzzles; for the natural sense of Moslem (_Muslim_) appear to be "traitors," and to this a contemporary war-song of Mahomet's enemies alludes; while _Hanif_ (especially applied in the Koran to Abraham) seems to be the Hebrew word for "hypocrite." The former is explained in the Koran to mean "one who hands over his face or person to God," and is said to have been invented by Abraham; of the latter no explanation is given, but it seems to signify from the context "devotee." Since the divine name _Rahman_ was at one time favoured by Mahomet, and this was connected with one Maslama of the tribe Hanifa, who figures in politics at the end of Mahomet's career but must have been a religious leader far earlier, it has been suggested that the names originally belonged to Maslama's community. The honour of having been Mahomet's first convert is claimed for three persons: his wife Khadija, his cousin Ali, who must have been a lad at the commencement of the mission, and Abu Bekr, son of Abu Quhafah, afterwards Mahomet's first successor. This last person became Mahomet's _alter ego_, and is usually known as the _Siddiq_ (Heb. word signifying "the saint," but to the Arabs meaning "faithful friend)". His loyalty from first to last was absolutely unswerving; he was selected to accompany Mahomet on the most critical occasion of his life, the Flight from Mecca; Mahomet is said to have declared that had he ever made a confidant of any one, that person would have been Abu Bekr; implying that there were things which were not confided even to him. The success of the Prophet's enterprise seems to have been very largely due to the part played by this adherent, who possessed a variety of attainments which he put at Mahomet's service; who when an intermediary was required was always ready to represent him, and who placed the commendation of the Prophet above every other consideration, private or public. The two appear to have regularly laid siege to those persons in Mecca whose adherence was desirable; and the ability which many of the earlier converts afterwards displayed, whether as statesmen or generals, is a remarkable testimony to their power of gauging men. It seems clear that the growth of wealth in Mecca had led to the accentuation of the difference between persons of different station, and that many were discontented with the oligarchy which governed the city. Converts could, therefore, be won without serious difficulty among the aliens and in general those who suffered under various disqualifications. Some members of the Jewish community seem also to have joined; and some relics of the Abyssinian expedition (i.e. descendants of the invaders). Among the most important converts of the Meccan period were Mahomet's uncle Hamza, afterwards for his valour called "the Lion of God"; 'Abd al-Rahman (Abdar-rahman) son of 'Auf; Othman, son of 'Affan, who married two of the Prophet's daughters successively, and was Mahomet's third successor; and, more important than any save Abu Bekr, Omar, son of al-Khattab, a man of extraordinary force of character, to whom siege seems to have been laid with extraordinary skill. At some time he received the honourable title _Faruq_ ("Deliverer"); he is represented as regularly favouring force, where Abu Bekr favoured gentle methods; unlike Abu Bekr, his loyalty was not always above suspicion. His adherence is ascribed to the period of publicity. Entry: MAHOMET
The cause of the sudden outpouring of the Scandinavian deluge upon the lands of Christendom at this particular date is one of the puzzles of history. So far as memory ran, the peoples beyond the North Sea had been seafaring races addicted to piracy. Even Tacitus mentions their fleets. Yet since the 5th century they had been restricting their operations to their own shores, and are barely heard of in the chronicles of their southern neighbours. It seems most probable that the actual cause of their sudden activity was the conquest of the Saxons by Charles the Great, and his subsequent advance into the peninsula of Denmark. The emperor seemed to be threatening the independence of the North, and in terror and resentment the Scandinavian peoples turned first to strike at the encroaching Frank, and soon after to assail the other Christian kingdoms which lay behind, or on the flank of, the Empire. But their offensive action proved so successful and so profitable that, after a short time, the whole manhood of Denmark and Norway took to the pirate life. Never since history first began to be recorded was there such a supreme example of the potentialities of sea-power. Civilized Europe had been caught at a moment when it was completely destitute of a war-navy; the Franks had never been maritime in their tastes, the English seemed to have forgotten their ancient seafaring habits. Though their ancestors had been pirates as fierce as the vikings of the 9th century, and though some of their later kings had led naval armaments--Edwin had annexed for a moment Man and Anglesea, and Ecgfrith had cruelly ravaged part of Ireland--yet by the year 800 they appear to have ceased to be a seafaring race. Perhaps the long predominance of Mercia, an essentially inland state, had something to do with the fact. At any rate England was as helpless as the Empire when first the Danish and Norwegian galleys began to cross the North Sea, and to beat down both sides of Britain seeking for prey. The number of the invaders was not at first very great; their fleets were not national armaments gathered by great kings, but squadrons of a few vessels collected by some active and enterprising adventurer. Their original tactics were merely to land suddenly near some thriving seaport, or rich monastery, to sack it, and to take to the water again before the local militia could turn out in force against them. But such raids proved so profitable that the vikings soon began to take greater things in hand; they began to ally themselves in confederacies: two, six or a dozen "sea-kings" would join their forces for something more than a desultory raid. With fifty or a hundred ships they would fall upon some unhappy region, harry it for many miles inland, and offer battle to the landsfolk unless the latter came out in overpowering force. And as their crews were trained warriors chosen for their high spirit, contending with a raw militia fresh from the plough, they were generally successful. If the odds were too great they could always retire to their ships, put to sea, and resume their predatory operations on some other coast three hundred miles away. As long as their enemies were unprovided with a navy they were safe from pursuit and annihilation. The only chance against them was that, if caught too far from the base-fort where they had run their galleys ashore, they might find their communication with the sea cut off, and be forced to fight for their lives surrounded by an infuriated countryside. But in the earlier years of their struggles with Christendom the vikings seldom suffered a complete disaster; they were often beaten but seldom annihilated. Ere long they grew so bold that they would stay ashore for months, braving the forces of a whole kingdom, and sheltering themselves in great palisaded camps on peninsulas or islands when the enemy pressed them too hard. On well-guarded strongholds like Thanet or Sheppey in England, Noirmoutier at the Loire mouth, or the Isle of Walcheren, they defied the local magnates to evict them. Finally they took to wintering on the coast of England or the Empire, a preliminary to actual settlement and conquest. (See VIKING.) Entry: I
The _Life and Letters of Lord Macaulay_ (2 vols., 1876), by his nephew, Sir George Otto Trevelyan, is one of the best biographies in the English language. The life (1882) in the "English Men of Letters" series was written by J. Cotter Morison. Far further criticism, see Hepworth Dixon, in his _Life of Penn_ (1841); John Paget, _The New Examen: Inquiry into Macaulay's History_ (1861) and _Paradoxes and Puzzles_ (1874); Walter Bagehot, in the _National Review_ (Jan. 1856), reprinted in his _Literary Studies_ (1879); James Spedding, _Evenings with a Reviewer_ (1881), discussing his essay on Bacon; Sir L. Stephen, _Hours in a Library_, vol. ii. (1892); Lord Morley, _Critical Miscellanies_ (1877), vol. ii.; Lord Avebury, _Essays and Addresses_ (1903); Thum, _Anmerkungen zu Macaulay's History of England_ (Heilbronn, 1882). A bibliography of German criticism of Macaulay is given in G. Körting's _Grd. der engl. Literatur_ (4th ed., Munster, 1905). Entry: A
The editions of La Rochefoucauld's _Maxims_ (as the full title runs, _Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales_) published in his lifetime bear the dates 1665 (_editio princeps_), 1666, 1671, 1675, 1678. An important edition which appeared after his death in 1693 may rank almost with these. As long as the _Memoirs_ remained in the state above described, no edition of them need be mentioned, and none of the complete works was possible. The previous more or less complete editions are all superseded by that of MM Gilbert and Gourdault (1868-1883), in the series of "Grands Écrivains de la France," 3 vols. There are still some puzzles as to the text; but this edition supplies all available material in regard to them. The handsomest separate edition of the _Maxims_ is the so-called _Édition des bibliophiles_ (1870); but cheap and handy issues are plentiful. See the English version by G. H. Powell (1903). Nearly all the great French critics of the 19th century have dealt more or less with La Rochefoucauld: the chief recent monograph on him is that of J. Bourdeau in the _Grands écrivains français_ (1893). (G. Sa.) Entry: LA
Many hundreds of the short suttas and verses in these two collections are found, word for word, in the dialogues. And there are numerous instances of the introductory story stating how, and when, and to whom the sutta was enunciated--a sort of narrative framework in which the sutta is set--recurring also. This is very suggestive as to the way in which the earliest Buddhist records were gradually built up. The suttas came first embodying, in set phrases, the doctrine that had to be handed down. Those episodes, found in two or three different places, and always embodying several suttas, came next. Then several of these were woven together to form a suttanta. And finally the suttantas were grouped together into the two Nik[=a]yas, and the suttas and episodes separately into the two others. Parallel with this evolution, so to say, of the suttas, the short statements of doctrine, in prose, ran the treatment of the verses. There was a great love of poetry in the communities in which Buddhism arose. Verses were helpful to the memory. And they were adopted not only for this reason. The adherents of the new view of life found pleasure in putting into appropriate verse the feelings of enthusiasm and of ecstasy which the reforming doctrines inspired. When particularly happy in literary finish, or peculiarly rich in religious feeling, such verses were not lost. These were handed on, from mouth to mouth, in the small companies of the brethren or sisters. The oldest verses are all lyrics, expressions either of emotion, or of some deep saying, some pregnant thought. Very few of them have been preserved alone. And even then they are so difficult to understand, so much like puzzles, that they were probably accompanied from the first by a sort of comment in prose, stating when, and why, and by whom they were supposed to have been uttered. As a general rule such a framework in prose is actually preserved in the old Buddhist literature. It is only in the very latest books included in the canon that the narrative part is also regularly in verse, so that a whole work consists of a collection of ballads. The last step, that of combining such ballads into one long epic poem, was not taken till after the canon was closed. The whole process, from the simple anecdote in mixed prose and verse, the so-called _[=a]khy[=a]na_, to the complete epic, comes out with striking clearness in the history of the Buddhist canon. It is typical, one may notice in passing, of the evolution of the epic elsewhere; in Iceland, for instance, in Persia and in Greece. And we may safely draw the conclusion that if the great Indian epics, the Mah[=a]-bh[=a]rata and the R[=a]m[=a]yana, had been in existence when the formation of the Buddhist canon began, the course of its development would have been very different from what it was. Entry: A