Editions and memoirs of Lamb are numerous. TheLetters, with a sketch of his life by Sir Thomas Noon Talfourd, appeared in 1837; theFinal Memorials of Charles Lambby the same hand, after Mary Lamb’s death, in 1848; Barry Cornwall’sCharles Lamb: A Memoir, in 1866. Mr P. Fitzgerald’sCharles Lamb: his Friends, his Haunts and his Books(1866); W. Carew Hazlitt’sMary and Charles Lamb(1874). Mr Fitzgerald and Mr Hazlitt have also both edited theLetters, and Mr Fitzgerald brought Talfourd to date with an edition of Lamb’s works in 1870-1876. Later and fuller editions are those of Canon Ainger in 12 volumes, Mr Macdonald in 12 volumes and Mr E. V. Lucas in 7 volumes, to which in 1905 was addedThe Life of Charles Lamb, in 2 volumes.
Editions and memoirs of Lamb are numerous. TheLetters, with a sketch of his life by Sir Thomas Noon Talfourd, appeared in 1837; theFinal Memorials of Charles Lambby the same hand, after Mary Lamb’s death, in 1848; Barry Cornwall’sCharles Lamb: A Memoir, in 1866. Mr P. Fitzgerald’sCharles Lamb: his Friends, his Haunts and his Books(1866); W. Carew Hazlitt’sMary and Charles Lamb(1874). Mr Fitzgerald and Mr Hazlitt have also both edited theLetters, and Mr Fitzgerald brought Talfourd to date with an edition of Lamb’s works in 1870-1876. Later and fuller editions are those of Canon Ainger in 12 volumes, Mr Macdonald in 12 volumes and Mr E. V. Lucas in 7 volumes, to which in 1905 was addedThe Life of Charles Lamb, in 2 volumes.
(E. V. L.)
LAMB(a word common to Teutonic languages; cf. Ger.Lamm), the young of sheep. The Paschal Lamb or Agnus Dei is used as a symbol of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God (John i. 29), and “lamb,” like “flock,” is often used figuratively of the members of a Christian church or community, with an allusion to Jesus’ charge to Peter (John xxi. 15). The “lamb and flag” is an heraldic emblem, the dexter fore-leg of the lamb supporting a staff bearing a banner charged with the St George’s cross. This was one of the crests of the Knights Templars, used on seals as early as 1241; it was adopted as a badge or crest by the Middle Temple, the Inner Temple using another crest of the Templars, the winged horse or Pegasus. The old Tangier regiment, now the Queen’s Royal West Surrey Regiment, bore a Paschal Lamb as its badge. From their colonel, Percy Kirke (q.v.), they were known as Kirke’s Lambs. The exaggerated reputation of the regiment for brutality, both in Tangier and in England after Sedgmoor, lent irony to the nickname.
LAMBALLE, MARIE THÉRÈSE LOUISE OF SAVOY-CARIGNANO,Princesse de(1749-1792), fourth daughter of Louis Victor of Carignano (d. 1774) (great-grandfather of King Charles Albert of Sardinia), and of Christine Henriette of Hesse-Rheinfels-Rothenburg, was born at Turin on the 8th of September 1749. In 1767 she was married to Louis Alexandre Stanislaus de Bourbon, prince of Lamballe, son of the duke of Penthièvre, a grandson of Louis XIV.’s natural son the count of Toulouse. Her husband dying the following year, she retired with her father-in-law to Rambouillet, where she lived until the marriage of thedauphin, when she returned to court. Marie Antoinette, charmed by her gentle and naïve manners, singled her out for a companion and confidante. The impetuous character of the dauphiness found in Madame de Lamballe that submissive temperament which yields to force of environment, and the two became fast friends. After her accession Marie Antoinette, in spite of the king’s opposition, had her appointed superintendent of the royal household. Between 1776 and 1785 the comtesse de Polignac succeeded in supplanting her; but when the queen tired of the avarice of the Polignacs, she turned again to Madame de Lamballe. From 1785 to the Revolution she was Marie Antoinette’s closest friend and the pliant instrument of her caprices. She came with the queen to the Tuileries and as her salon served as a meeting-place for the queen and the members of the Assembly whom she wished to gain over, the people believed her to be the soul of all the intrigues. After a visit to England in 1791 to appeal for help for the royal family she made her will and returned to the Tuileries, where she continued her services to the queen until the 10th of August, when she shared her imprisonment in the Temple. On the 19th of August she was transferred to La Force, and having refused to take the oath against the monarchy, she was on the 3rd of September delivered over to the fury of the populace, after which her head was placed on a pike and carried before the windows of the queen.
See George Bertin,Madame de Lamballe(Paris, 1888); Austin Dobson,Four Frenchwomen(1890); B. C. Hardy,Princesse de Lamballe(1908); Comte de Lescure,La Princesse de Lamballe ... d’après des documents inédits(1864); some letters of the princess published by Ch. Schmidt inLa Révolution française(vol. xxxix., 1900); L. Lambeau,Essais sur la mort de madame la princesse de Lamballe(1902); Sir F. Montefiore,The Princesse de Lamballe(1896).The Secret Memoirs of the Royal Family of France ... now first published from the Journal, Letters and Conversations of the Princesse de Lamballe(London, 2 vols., 1826) have since appeared in various editions in English and in French. They are attributed to Catherine Hyde, Marchioness Govion-Broglio-Solari, and are apocryphal.
See George Bertin,Madame de Lamballe(Paris, 1888); Austin Dobson,Four Frenchwomen(1890); B. C. Hardy,Princesse de Lamballe(1908); Comte de Lescure,La Princesse de Lamballe ... d’après des documents inédits(1864); some letters of the princess published by Ch. Schmidt inLa Révolution française(vol. xxxix., 1900); L. Lambeau,Essais sur la mort de madame la princesse de Lamballe(1902); Sir F. Montefiore,The Princesse de Lamballe(1896).The Secret Memoirs of the Royal Family of France ... now first published from the Journal, Letters and Conversations of the Princesse de Lamballe(London, 2 vols., 1826) have since appeared in various editions in English and in French. They are attributed to Catherine Hyde, Marchioness Govion-Broglio-Solari, and are apocryphal.
LAMBALLE, a town of north-western France, in the department of Côtes-du-Nord, on the Gouessant 13 m. E.S.E. of St Brieuc by rail. Pop. (1906) 4347. Crowning the eminence on which the town is built is a beautiful Gothic church (13th and 14th centuries), once the chapel of the castle of the counts of Penthièvre. La Noue, the famous Huguenot leader, was mortally wounded in 1591 in the siege of the castle, which was dismantled in 1626 by Richelieu. Of the other buildings, the church of St Martin (11th, 15th and 16th centuries) is the chief. Lamballe has an importantharas(depot for stallions) and carries on trade in grain, tanning and leather-dressing; earthenware is manufactured in the environs. Lamballe was the capital of the territory of the counts of Penthièvre, who in 1569 were made dukes.
LAMBAYEQUE, a coast department of northern Peru, bounded N. by Piura, E. and S. by Cajamarca and Libertad. Area, 4614 sq. m. Pop. (1906 estimate) 93,070. It belongs to the arid region of the coast, and is settled along the river valleys where irrigation is possible. It is one of the chief sugar-producing departments of Peru, and in some valleys, especially near Ferreñafe, rice is largely produced. Four railways connect its principal producing centres with the small ports of Eten and Pimentel, viz.: Eten to Ferreñafe, 27 m.; Eten to Cayalti, 23 m.; Pimentel to Lambayeque, 15 m.; and Chiclayo to Pátapo, 15 m. The principal towns are Chiclayo, the departmental capital, with a population (1906 estimate) of 10,500, Ferreñafe 6000, and Lambayeque 4500.
LAMBEAUX, JEF(Joseph Marie Thomas), (1852-1908), Belgian sculptor, was born at Antwerp. He studied at the Antwerp Academy of Fine Arts, and was a pupil of Jean Geefs. His first work, “War,” was exhibited in 1871, and was followed by a long series of humorous groups, including “Children dancing,” “Say ‘Good Morning,’” “The Lucky Number” and “An Accident” (1875). He then went to Paris, where he executed for the Belgian salons “The Beggar” and “The Blind Pauper,” and produced “The Kiss” (1881), generally regarded as his masterpiece. After visiting Italy, where he was much impressed by the works of Jean Bologne, he showed a strong predilection for effects of force and motion. Other notable works are his fountain at Antwerp (1886), “Robbing the Eagle’s Eyrie” (1890), “Drunkenness” (1893), “The Triumph of Woman,” “The Bitten Faun” (which created a great stir at the Exposition Universelle at Liége in 1905), and “The Human Passions,” a colossal marble bas-relief, elaborated from a sketch exhibited in 1889. Of his numerous busts may be mentioned those of Hendrik Conscience, and of Charles Bals, the burgomaster of Brussels. He died on the 6th of June 1908.
LAMBERMONT, AUGUSTE,Baron(1819-1905), Belgian statesman, was born at Dion-le-Val in Brabant on the 25th of March 1819. He came of a family of small farmer proprietors, who had held land during three centuries. He was intended for the priesthood and entered the seminary of Floreffe, but his energies claimed a more active sphere. He left the monastery for Louvain University. Here he studied law, and also prepared himself for the military examinations. At that juncture the first Carlist war broke out, and Lambermont hastened to the scene of action. His services were accepted (April 1838) and he was entrusted with the command of two small cannon. He also acted as A.D.C. to Colonel Durando. He greatly distinguished himself, and for his intrepidity on one occasion he was decorated with the Cross of the highest military Order of St Ferdinand. Returning to Belgium he entered the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in 1842. He served in this department sixty-three years. He was closely associated with several of the most important questions in Belgian history during the last half of the 19th century—notably the freeing of the Scheldt. He was one of the very first Belgians to see the importance of developing the trade of their country, and at his own request he was attached to the commercial branch of the foreign office. The tolls imposed by the Dutch on navigation on the Scheldt strangled Belgian trade, for Antwerp was the only port of the country. The Dutch had the right to make this levy under treaties going back to the treaty of Munster in 1648, and they clung to it still more tenaciously after Belgium separated herself in 1830-1831 from the united kingdom of the Netherlands—the London conference in 1839 fixing the toll payable to Holland at 1.50 florins (3s.) per ton. From 1856 to 1863 Lambermont devoted most of his energies to the removal of this impediment. In 1856 he drew up a plan of action, and he prosecuted it with untiring perseverance until he saw it embodied in an international convention seven years later. Twenty-one powers and states attended a conference held on the question at Brussels in 1863, and on the 15th of July the treaty freeing the Scheldt was signed. For this achievement Lambermont was made a baron. Among other important conferences in which Lambermont took a leading part were those of Brussels (1874) on the usages of war, Berlin (1884-1885) on Africa and the Congo region, and Brussels (1890) on Central African Affairs and the Slave Trade. He was joint reporter with Baron de Courcel of the Berlin conference in 1884-1885, and on several occasions he was chosen as arbitrator by one or other of the great European powers. But his great achievement was the freeing of the Scheldt, and in token of its gratitude the city of Antwerp erected a fine monument to his memory. He died on the 7th of March 1905.
LAMBERT, DANIEL(1770-1809), an Englishman famous for his great size, was born near Leicester on the 13th of March 1770, the son of the keeper of the jail, to which post he succeeded in 1791. About this time his size and weight increased enormously, and though he had led an active and athletic life he weighed in 1793 thirty-two stone (448 ℔). In 1806 he resolved to profit by his notoriety, and resigning his office went up to London and exhibited himself. He died on the 21st of July 1809, and at the time measured 5 ft. 11 in. in height and weighed 52¾ stone (739 ℔). His waistcoat, now in the Kings Lynn Museum, measures 102 in. round the waist. His coffin contained 112 ft. of elm and was built on wheels. His name has been used as a synonym for immensity. George Meredith describes London as the “Daniel Lambert of cities,” and Herbert Spencer uses the phrase “a Daniel Lambert of learning.” His enormous proportions were depicted on a number of tavern signs, but the best portrait of him, a large mezzotint, is preserved at the British Museum in Lyson’sCollectanea.
LAMBERT, FRANCIS(c.1486-1530), Protestant reformer, was the son of a papal official at Avignon, where he was born between 1485 and 1487. At the age of 15 he entered the Franciscan monastery at Avignon, and after 1517 he was an itinerant preacher, travelling through France, Italy and Switzerland. His study of the Scriptures shook his faith in Roman Catholic theology, and by 1522 he had abandoned his order, and became known to the leaders of the Reformation in Switzerland and Germany. He did not, however, identify himself either with Zwinglianism or Lutheranism; he disputed with Zwingli at Zürich in 1522, and then made his way to Eisenach and Wittenberg, where he married in 1523. He returned to Strassburg in 1524, being anxious to spread the doctrines of the Reformation among the French-speaking population of the neighbourhood. By the Germans he was distrusted, and in 1526 his activities were prohibited by the city of Strassburg. He was, however, befriended by Jacob Sturm, who recommended him to the Landgraf Philip of Hesse, the most liberal of the German reforming princes. With Philip’s encouragement he drafted that scheme of ecclesiastical reform for which he is famous. Its basis was essentially democratic and congregational, though it provided for the government of the whole church by means of a synod. Pastors were to be elected by the congregation, and the whole system of canon-law was repudiated. This scheme was submitted by Philip to a synod at Homburg; but Luther intervened and persuaded the Landgraf to abandon it. It was far too democratic to commend itself to the Lutherans, who had by this time bound the Lutheran cause to the support of princes rather than to that of the people. Philip continued to favour Lambert, who was appointed professor and head of the theological faculty in the Landgraf’s new university of Marburg. Patrick Hamilton (q.v.), the Scottish martyr, was one of his pupils; and it was at Lambert’s instigation that Hamilton composed hisLoci communes, orPatrick’s Pleasas they were popularly called in Scotland. Lambert was also one of the divines who took part in the great conference of Marburg in 1529; he had long wavered between the Lutheran and the Zwinglian view of the Lord’s Supper, but at this conference he definitely adopted the Zwinglian view. He died of the plague on the 18th of April 1530, and was buried at Marburg.
A catalogue of Lambert’s writings is given in Haag’sLa France protestante. See also lives of Lambert by Baum (Strassburg, 1840); F. W. Hessencamp (Elberfeld, 1860), Stieve (Breslau, 1867) and Louis Ruffet (Paris, 1873); Lorimer,Life of Patrick Hamilton(1857); A. L. Richter,Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des 16. Jahrh. (Weimar, 1846); Hessencamp,Hessische Kirchenordnungen im Zeitalter der Reformation; Philip ofHesse’s Correspondence with Bucer, ed. M. Lenz; Lindsay,Hist. Reformation;Allgemeine deutsche Biographie.
A catalogue of Lambert’s writings is given in Haag’sLa France protestante. See also lives of Lambert by Baum (Strassburg, 1840); F. W. Hessencamp (Elberfeld, 1860), Stieve (Breslau, 1867) and Louis Ruffet (Paris, 1873); Lorimer,Life of Patrick Hamilton(1857); A. L. Richter,Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des 16. Jahrh. (Weimar, 1846); Hessencamp,Hessische Kirchenordnungen im Zeitalter der Reformation; Philip ofHesse’s Correspondence with Bucer, ed. M. Lenz; Lindsay,Hist. Reformation;Allgemeine deutsche Biographie.
(A. F. P.)
LAMBERT, JOHANN HEINRICH(1728-1777), German physicist, mathematician and astronomer, was born at Mulhausen, Alsace, on the 26th of August 1728. He was the son of a tailor; and the slight elementary instruction he obtained at the free school of his native town was supplemented by his own private reading. He became book-keeper at Montbéliard ironworks, and subsequently (1745) secretary to Professor Iselin, the editor of a newspaper at Basel, who three years later recommended him as private tutor to the family of Count A. von Salis of Coire. Coming thus into virtual possession of a good library, Lambert had peculiar opportunities for improving himself in his literary and scientific studies. In 1759, after completing with his pupils a tour of two years’ duration through Göttingen, Utrecht, Paris, Marseilles and Turin, he resigned his tutorship and settled at Augsburg. Munich, Erlangen, Coire and Leipzig became for brief successive intervals his home. In 1764 he removed to Berlin, where he received many favours at the hand of Frederick the Great and was elected a member of the Royal Academy of Sciences of Berlin, and in 1774 edited the BerlinEphemeris. He died of consumption on the 25th of September 1777. His publications show him to have been a man of original and active mind with a singular facility in applying mathematics to practical questions.
His mathematical discoveries were extended and overshadowed by his contemporaries. His development of the equationxm+px=qin an infinite series was extended by Leonhard Euler, and particularly by Joseph Louis Lagrange. In 1761 he proved the irrationality of π; a simpler proof was given somewhat later by Legendre. The introduction of hyperbolic functions into trigonometry was also due to him. His geometrical discoveries are of great value, hisDie freie Perspective(1759-1774) being a work of great merit. Astronomy was also enriched by his investigations, and he was led to several remarkable theorems on conics which bear his name. The most important are: (1) To express the time of describing an elliptic arc under the Newtonian law of gravitation in terms of the focal distances of the initial and final points, and the length of the chord joining them. (2) A theorem relating to the apparent curvature of the geocentric path of a comet.
Lambert’s most important work,Pyrometrie(Berlin, 1779), is a systematic treatise on heat, containing the records and full discussion of many of his own experiments. Worthy of special notice also arePhotometria(Augsburg, 1760),Insigniores orbitae cometarum proprietates(Augsburg, 1761), andBeiträge zum Gebrauche der Mathematik und deren Anwendung(4 vols., Berlin, 1765-1772).TheMemoirsof the Berlin Academy from 1761 to 1784 contain many of his papers, which treat of such subjects as resistance of fluids, magnetism, comets, probabilities, the problem of three bodies, meteorology, &c. In theActa Helvetica(1752-1760) and in theNova acta erudita(1763-1769) several of his contributions appear. In Bode’sJahrbuch(1776-1780) he discusses nutation, aberration of light, Saturn’s rings and comets; in theNova acta Helvetica(1787) he has a long paper “Sur le son des corps élastiques,” in Bernoulli and Hindenburg’sMagazin(1787-1788) he treats of the roots of equation and of parallel lines; and in Hindenburg’sArchiv(1798-1799) he writes on optics and perspective. Many of these pieces were published posthumously. Recognized as among the first mathematicians of his day, he was also widely known for the universality and depth of his philological and philosophical knowledge. The most valuable of his logical and philosophical memoirs were published collectively in 2 vols. (1782).See Huber’sLambert nach seinem Leben und Wirken; M. Chasles,Geschichte der Geometrie; and Baensch, LambertsPhilosophie und seine Stellung zu Kant(1902).
Lambert’s most important work,Pyrometrie(Berlin, 1779), is a systematic treatise on heat, containing the records and full discussion of many of his own experiments. Worthy of special notice also arePhotometria(Augsburg, 1760),Insigniores orbitae cometarum proprietates(Augsburg, 1761), andBeiträge zum Gebrauche der Mathematik und deren Anwendung(4 vols., Berlin, 1765-1772).
TheMemoirsof the Berlin Academy from 1761 to 1784 contain many of his papers, which treat of such subjects as resistance of fluids, magnetism, comets, probabilities, the problem of three bodies, meteorology, &c. In theActa Helvetica(1752-1760) and in theNova acta erudita(1763-1769) several of his contributions appear. In Bode’sJahrbuch(1776-1780) he discusses nutation, aberration of light, Saturn’s rings and comets; in theNova acta Helvetica(1787) he has a long paper “Sur le son des corps élastiques,” in Bernoulli and Hindenburg’sMagazin(1787-1788) he treats of the roots of equation and of parallel lines; and in Hindenburg’sArchiv(1798-1799) he writes on optics and perspective. Many of these pieces were published posthumously. Recognized as among the first mathematicians of his day, he was also widely known for the universality and depth of his philological and philosophical knowledge. The most valuable of his logical and philosophical memoirs were published collectively in 2 vols. (1782).
See Huber’sLambert nach seinem Leben und Wirken; M. Chasles,Geschichte der Geometrie; and Baensch, LambertsPhilosophie und seine Stellung zu Kant(1902).
LAMBERT[aliasNicholson],JOHN(d. 1538), English Protestant martyr, was born at Norwich and educated at Cambridge, where he graduated B.A. and was admitted in 1521 a fellow of Queen’s College on the nomination of Catherine of Aragon. After acting for some years as a “mass-priest,” his views were unsettled by the arguments of Bilney and Arthur; and episcopal persecution compelled him, according to his own account, to assume the name Lambert instead of Nicholson. He likewise removed to Antwerp, where he became chaplain to the English factory, and formed a friendship with Frith and Tyndale. Returning to England in 1531, he came under the notice of Archbishop Warham, who questioned him closely on his religious beliefs. Warham’s death in August 1532 relieved Lambert from immediate danger, and he earned a living for some years by teaching Latin and Greek near the Stocks Market in London. The duke of Norfolk and other reactionaries accused him of heresy in 1536, but reforming tendencies were still in the ascendant, and Lambert escaped. In 1538, however, the reaction had begun, and Lambert was its first victim. He singled himself out for persecution by denying the Real Presence: and Henry VIII., who had just rejected the Lutheran proposals for a theological union, was in no mood to tolerate worse heresies. Lambert had challenged some views expressed by Dr John Taylor, afterwards bishop of Lincoln; and Cranmer as archbishop condemned Lambert’s opinions. He appealed to the king as supreme head of the Church, and on the 16th of November Henry heard the case in person before a large assembly of spiritual and temporal peers. For five hours Lambert disputed with the king and ten bishops; and then, as he boldly denied that the Eucharist was the body of Christ, he was condemned to death by Cromwell as vicegerent. Henry’s condescension and patience produced a great impression on his Catholic subjects; but Cromwell is said by Foxe to have asked Lambert’s pardon before his execution, and Cranmer eventually adopted the views he condemned in Lambert. Lambert was burnt at Smithfield on the 22nd of November.
SeeLetters and Papers of Henry VIII.; Foxe’sActs and Monuments; Froude,History; Dixon,Church History; Gairdner,Lollardy and the Reformation,Dict. of Nat. Biog.and authorities there cited.
SeeLetters and Papers of Henry VIII.; Foxe’sActs and Monuments; Froude,History; Dixon,Church History; Gairdner,Lollardy and the Reformation,Dict. of Nat. Biog.and authorities there cited.
(A. F. P.)
LAMBERT, JOHN(1619-1694), English general in the Great Rebellion, was born at Calton Hall, Kirkby Malham, in the West Riding of Yorkshire. His family was of ancient lineage, and long settled in the county. He studied law, but did not make it his profession. In 1639 he married Frances, daughter of Sir William Lister. At the opening of the Civil War he took up arms for the parliament, and in September 1642 was appointed a captain of horse in the army commanded by Ferdinando, Lord Fairfax. A year later he had become colonel of a regiment of horse, and he distinguished himself at the siege of Hull in October, 1643. Early in 1644 he did good service at the battles of Nantwich and Bradford. At Marston Moor Lambert’s own regiment was routed by the charge of Goring’s horse; but he cut his way through with a few troops and joined Cromwell on the other side of the field. When the New Model army was formed in the beginning of 1645, Colonel Lambert was appointed to succeed Fairfax in command of the northern forces. General Poyntz, however, soon replaced him, and under this officer he served in the Yorkshire campaign of 1645, receiving a wound before Pontefract. In 1646 he was given a regiment in the New Model, serving with Fairfax in the west of England, and he was a commissioner, with Cromwell and others, for the surrender of Oxford in the same year. “It is evident,” says C. H. Firth (Dict. Nat. Biog.), “that he was from the first regarded as an officer of exceptional capacity and specially selected for semi-political employments.”
When the quarrel between the army and the parliament began, Lambert threw himself warmly into the army’s cause. He assisted Ireton in drawing up the several addresses and remonstrances issued by the army, both men having had some experience in the law, and being “of a subtle and working brain.” Early in August 1647 Lambert was sent by Fairfax as major-general to take charge of the forces in the northern counties. His wise and just managing of affairs in those parts is commended by Whitelocke. He suppressed a mutiny among his troops, kept strict discipline and hunted down the moss-troopers who infested the moorland country.
When the Scottish army under the marquis of Hamilton invaded England in the summer of 1648, Lambert was engaged in suppressing the Royalist rising in his district. The arrival of the Scots obliged him to retreat; but Lambert displayed the greatest energy and did not cease to harass the invaders till Cromwell came up from Wales and with him destroyed the Scottish army in the three days’ fighting from Preston to Warrington. After the battle Lambert’s cavalry headed the chase, pursuing the defeated armyà outrance, and finally surrounded it at Uttoxeter, where Hamilton surrendered to Lambert on the 25th of August. He then led the advance of Cromwell’s army into Scotland, where he was left in charge on Cromwell’s return. From December 1648 to March 1649 he was engaged in the siege of Pontefract Castle; Lambert was thus absent from London at the time of Pride’s Purge and the trial and execution of the king.
When Cromwell was appointed to the command of the war in Scotland (July 1650), Lambert went with him as major-general and second in command. He was wounded at Musselburgh, but returned to the front in time to take a conspicuous share in the victory of Dunbar. He himself defeated the “Protesters” or “Western Whigs” at Hamilton, on the 1st of December 1650. In July 1651 he was sent into Fife to get in the rear and flank of the Scottish army near Falkirk, and force them to decisive action by cutting off their supplies. This mission, in the course of which Lambert won an important victory at Inverkeithing, was executed with entire success, whereupon Charles II., as Lambert had foreseen, made for England. For the events of the Worcester campaign, which quickly followed, seeGreat Rebellion. Lambert’s part in the general plan was carried out most brilliantly, and in the crowning victory of Worcester he commanded the right wing of the English army, and had his horse shot under him. Parliament now conferred on him a grant of lands in Scotland worth £1000 per annum.
In October 1651 Lambert was made a commissioner to settle the affairs of Scotland, and on the death of Ireton he was appointed lord deputy of Ireland (January 1652). He accepted the office with pleasure, and made magnificent preparations; parliament, however, soon afterwards reconstituted the Irish administration and Lambert refused to accept office on the new terms. Henceforward he began to oppose the Rump. In the council of officers he headed the party desiring representative government, as opposed to Harrison who favoured a selected oligarchy of “God-fearing” men, but both hated what remained of the Long parliament, and joined in urging Cromwell to dissolve it by force. At the same time Lambert was consulted by the parliamentary leaders as to the possibility of dismissing Cromwell from his command, and on the 15th of March 1653 Cromwell refused to see him, speaking of him contemptuously as “bottomless Lambert.” On the 20th of April, however, Lambert accompanied Cromwell when he dismissed the council of state, on the same day as the forcible expulsion of the parliament. Lambert now favoured the formation of a small executive council, to be followed by an elective parliament whose powers should be limited by a written instrument of government. Being at this time the ruling spirit in the council of state, and the idol of the army, there were some who looked on him as a possible rival of Cromwell for the chief executive power, while the royalists for a short time had hopes of his support. He was invited, with Cromwell, Harrison and Desborough, to sit in the nominated parliament of 1653; and when the unpopularity of that assembly increased, Cromwell drew nearer to Lambert. In November 1653 Lambert presided over a meeting of officers, when the question of constitutional settlement was discussed, and a proposal made for the forcible expulsion of the nominated parliament. On the 1st of December he urged Cromwell to assume the title of king, which the latter refused. On the 12th the parliament resigned its powers into Cromwell’s hands, and on the 13th Lambert obtained the consent of the officers to the Instrument of Government (q.v.), in the framing of which he had taken a leading part. He was one of the seven officers nominated to seats in the council created by the Instrument. In the foreign policy of the protectorate he was the most clamorous of those who called for alliance with Spain and war with France in 1653, and he firmly withstood Cromwell’s design for an expedition to the West Indies.
In the debates in parliament on the Instrument of Government in 1654 Lambert proposed that the office of protector should be made hereditary, but was defeated by a majority which included members of Cromwell’s family. In the parliament of this year, and again in 1656, Lord Lambert, as he was now styled, sat as member for the West Riding. He was one of the major-generals appointed in August 1655 to command the militia in the ten districts into which it was proposed to divide England, and who were to be responsible for the maintenance of order and the administration of the law in their several districts. Lambert took a prominent part in the committee of council which drew up instructions to the major-generals, and he was probably the originator, and certainly the organizer, of the system of police which these officers were to control. Gardiner conjectures that it was through divergence of opinion between the protector and Lambert in connexion with these “instructions” that the estrangement between the two men began. At all events, although Lambert had himself at an earlier date requested Cromwell to take the royal dignity, when the proposal to declare Oliver king was started in parliament (February 1657) he at once declared strongly against it. A hundred officers headed by Fleetwood and Lambert waited on the protector, and begged him to put a stop to the proceedings. Lambert was not convinced by Cromwell’s arguments, and their complete estrangement, personal as well as political, followed. On his refusal to take the oath of allegiance to the protector, Lambert was deprived of his commissions, receiving, however, a pension of£2000 a year. He retired to his garden at Wimbledon, and appeared no more in public during Oliver Cromwell’s lifetime; but shortly before his death Cromwell sought a reconciliation, and Lambert and his wife visited him at Whitehall.
When Richard Cromwell was proclaimed protector his chief difficulty lay with the army, over which he exercised no effective control. Lambert, though holding no military commission, was the most popular of the old Cromwellian generals with the rank and file of the army, and it was very generally believed that he would instal himself in Oliver’s seat of power. Richard’s adherents tried to conciliate him, and the royalist leaders made overtures to him, even proposing that Charles II. should marry Lambert’s daughter. Lambert at first gave a lukewarm support to Richard Cromwell, and took no part in the intrigues of the officers at Fleetwood’s residence, Wallingford House. He was a member of the parliament which met in January 1659, and when it was dissolved in April under compulsion of Fleetwood and Desborough, he was restored to his commands. He headed the deputation to Lenthall in May inviting the return of the Rump, which led to the tame retirement of Richard Cromwell into obscurity; and he was appointed a member of the committee of safety and of the council of state. When the parliament, desirous of controlling the power of the army, withheld from Fleetwood the right of nominating officers, Lambert was named one of a council of seven charged with this duty. The parliament’s evident distrust of the soldiers caused much discontent in the army; while the entire absence of real authority encouraged the royalists to make overt attempts to restore Charles II., the most serious of which, under Sir George Booth and the earl of Derby, was crushed by Lambert near Chester on the 19th of August. He promoted a petition from his army that Fleetwood might be made lord-general and himself major-general. The republican party in the House took offence. The Commons (October 12th, 1659) cashiered Lambert and other officers, and retained Fleetwood as chief of a military council under the authority of the speaker. On the next day Lambert caused the doors of the House to be shut and the members kept out. On the 26th a “committee of safety” was appointed, of which he was a member. He was also appointed major-general of all the forces in England and Scotland, Fleetwood being general. Lambert was now sent with a large force to meet Monk, who was in command of the English forces in Scotland, and either negotiate with him or force him to terms. Monk, however, set his army in motion southward. Lambert’s army began to melt away, and he was kept in suspense by Monk till his whole army fell from him and he returned to London almost alone. Monk marched to London unopposed. The “excluded” Presbyterian members were recalled. Lambert was sent to the Tower (March 3rd, 1660), from which he escaped a month later. He tried to rekindle the civil war in favour of the Commonwealth, but was speedily recaptured and sent back to the Tower (April 24th). On the Restoration he was exempted from danger of life by an address of both Houses to the king, but the next parliament (1662) charged him with high treason. Thenceforward for the rest of his life Lambert remained in custody in Guernsey. He died in 1694.
Lambert would have left a better name in history if he had been a cavalier. His genial, ardent and excitable nature, easily raised and easily depressed, was more akin to the royalist than to the puritan spirit. Vain and sometimes overbearing, as well as ambitious, he believed that Cromwell could not stand without him; and when Cromwell was dead, he imagined himself entitled and fitted to succeed him. Yet his ambition was less selfish than that of Monk. Lambert is accused of no ill faith, no want of generosity, no cold and calculating policy. As a soldier he was far more than a fighting general and possessed many of the qualities of a great general. He was, moreover, an able writer and speaker, and an accomplished negotiator and took pleasure in quiet and domestic pursuits. He learnt his love of gardening from Lord Fairfax, who was also his master in the art of war. He painted flowers, besides cultivating them, and incurred the blame of Mrs Hutchinson by “dressing his flowers in his garden and working at the needle with his wife and his maids.” He made no special profession of religion; but no imputation is cast upon his moral character by his detractors. It has been said that he became a Roman Catholic before his death.
Lambert would have left a better name in history if he had been a cavalier. His genial, ardent and excitable nature, easily raised and easily depressed, was more akin to the royalist than to the puritan spirit. Vain and sometimes overbearing, as well as ambitious, he believed that Cromwell could not stand without him; and when Cromwell was dead, he imagined himself entitled and fitted to succeed him. Yet his ambition was less selfish than that of Monk. Lambert is accused of no ill faith, no want of generosity, no cold and calculating policy. As a soldier he was far more than a fighting general and possessed many of the qualities of a great general. He was, moreover, an able writer and speaker, and an accomplished negotiator and took pleasure in quiet and domestic pursuits. He learnt his love of gardening from Lord Fairfax, who was also his master in the art of war. He painted flowers, besides cultivating them, and incurred the blame of Mrs Hutchinson by “dressing his flowers in his garden and working at the needle with his wife and his maids.” He made no special profession of religion; but no imputation is cast upon his moral character by his detractors. It has been said that he became a Roman Catholic before his death.
LAMBERT OF HERSFELD(d.c.1088), German chronicler, was probably a Thuringian by birth and became a monk in the Benedictine abbey of Hersfeld in 1058. As he was ordained priest at Aschaffenburg he is sometimes called Lambert of Aschaffenburg, or Schafnaburg. He made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, and visited various monasteries of his order; but he is famous as the author of someAnnales. From the creation of the world until about 1040 theseAnnalesare a jejune copy of other annals, but from 1040 to their conclusion in 1077 they are interesting for the history of Germany and the papacy. The important events during the earlier part of the reign of the emperor Henry IV., including the visit to Canossa and the battle of Hohenburg, are vividly described. Their tone is hostile to Henry IV. and friendly to the papacy; their Latin style is excellent. TheAnnaleswere first published in 1525 and are printed in theMonumenta Germaniae historica, Bände iii. and v. (Hanover and Berlin, 1826 fol.). Formerly Lambert’s reputation for accuracy and impartiality was very high, but both qualities have been somewhat discredited.
Lambert is also regarded as the author of theHistoria Hersfeldensis, the extant fragments of which are published in Band v. of theMonumentaof aVita Lulli, Lullus, archbishop of Mainz, being the founder of the abbey of Hersfeld; and of aCarmen de bello Saxonico. HisOperahave been edited with an introduction by O. Holder-Egger (Hanover, 1894).See H. Delbrück,Über die Glaubwürdigkeit Lamberts von Hersfeld(Bonn, 1873); A. Eigenbrodt,Lampert von Hersfeld und die neuere Quellenforschung(Cassel, 1896); L. von Ranke,Zur Kritik frankisch-deutscher Reichsannalisten(Berlin, 1854); W. Wattenbach,Deutschlands GeschichtsquellenBand ii. (Berlin, 1906) and A. Potthast,Bibliotheca Historica(Berlin, 1896).
Lambert is also regarded as the author of theHistoria Hersfeldensis, the extant fragments of which are published in Band v. of theMonumentaof aVita Lulli, Lullus, archbishop of Mainz, being the founder of the abbey of Hersfeld; and of aCarmen de bello Saxonico. HisOperahave been edited with an introduction by O. Holder-Egger (Hanover, 1894).
See H. Delbrück,Über die Glaubwürdigkeit Lamberts von Hersfeld(Bonn, 1873); A. Eigenbrodt,Lampert von Hersfeld und die neuere Quellenforschung(Cassel, 1896); L. von Ranke,Zur Kritik frankisch-deutscher Reichsannalisten(Berlin, 1854); W. Wattenbach,Deutschlands GeschichtsquellenBand ii. (Berlin, 1906) and A. Potthast,Bibliotheca Historica(Berlin, 1896).
LAMBESSA, the ancient Lambaesa, a village of Algeria, in the arrondissement of Batna and department of Constantine, 7 m. S.E. of Batna and 17 W. of Timgad. The modern village, the centre of an agricultural colony founded in 1848, is noteworthy for its great convict establishment (built about 1850). The remains of the Roman town, and more especially of the Roman camp, in spite of wanton vandalism, are among the most interesting ruins in northern Africa. They are now preserved by theService des Monuments historiquesand excavations have resulted in many interesting discoveries. The ruins are situated on the lower terraces of the Jebel Aures, and consist of triumphal arches (one to Septimius Severus, another to Commodus), temples, aqueducts, vestiges of an amphitheatre, baths and an immense quantity of masonry belonging to private houses. To the north and east lie extensive cemeteries with the stones standing in their original alignments; to the west is a similar area, from which, however, the stones have been largely removed for building the modern village. Of the temple of Aesculapius only one column is standing, though in the middle of the 19th century its façade was entire. The capitol or temple dedicated to Jupiter, Juno and Minerva, which has been cleared of débris, has a portico with eight columns. On level ground about two-thirds of a mile from the centre of the ancient town stands the camp, its site now partly occupied by the penitentiary and its gardens. It measures 1640 ft. N. to S. by 1476 ft. E. to W., and in the middle rise the ruins of a building commonly called, but incorrectly, the praetorium. This noble building, which dates fromA.D.268, is 92 ft. long by 66 ft. broad and 49 ft. high; its southern façade has a splendid peristyle half the height of the wall, consisting of a front row of massive Ionic columns and an engaged row of Corinthian pilasters. Behind this building (which was roofed), is a large court giving access to other buildings, one being the arsenal. In it have been found many thousands of projectiles. To the S.E. are the remains of the baths. The ruins of both city and camp have yielded many inscriptions (Renier edited 1500, and there are 4185 in theCorpus Inscr. Lat.vol. viii.); and, though a very large proportion are epitaphs of the barest kind, the more important pieces supply an outline of the history of the place. Over 2500 inscriptions relating to the camp have been deciphered. In a museum in the village are objects of antiquity discovered in the vicinity. Besides inscriptions, statues, &c., are some fine mosaics found in 1905 near the arch of Septimius Severus. The statues includethose of Aesculapius and Hygieia, taken from the temple of Aesculapius.
Lambaesa was a military foundation. The camp of the third legion (Legio III. Augusta), to which it owes its origin, appears to have been established betweenA.D.123 and 129, in the time of Hadrian, whose address to his soldiers was found inscribed on a pillar in a second camp to the west of the great camp still extant. By 166 mention is made of the decurions of a vicus, 10 curiae of which are known by name; and the vicus became a municipium probably at the time when it was made the capital of the newly founded province of Numidia. The legion was removed by Gordianus, but restored by Valerianus and Gallienus; and its final departure did not take place till after 392. The town soon afterwards declined. It never became the seat of a bishop, and no Christian inscriptions have been found among the ruins.About 2 m. S. of Lambessa are the ruins of Markuna, the ancient Verecunda, including two triumphal arches.See S. Gsell,Les Monuments antiques de l’Algérie(Paris, 1901) andL’Algérie dans l’antiquité(Algiers, 1903); L. Renier,Inscriptions romaines de l’Algérie(Paris, 1855); Gustav Wilmann, “Die röm. Lagerstadt Afrikas,” inCommentationes phil. in honorem Th. Mommseni(Berlin, 1877); Sir L. Playfair,Travels in the Footsteps of Bruce(London, 1877); A. Graham,Roman Africa(London, 1902).
Lambaesa was a military foundation. The camp of the third legion (Legio III. Augusta), to which it owes its origin, appears to have been established betweenA.D.123 and 129, in the time of Hadrian, whose address to his soldiers was found inscribed on a pillar in a second camp to the west of the great camp still extant. By 166 mention is made of the decurions of a vicus, 10 curiae of which are known by name; and the vicus became a municipium probably at the time when it was made the capital of the newly founded province of Numidia. The legion was removed by Gordianus, but restored by Valerianus and Gallienus; and its final departure did not take place till after 392. The town soon afterwards declined. It never became the seat of a bishop, and no Christian inscriptions have been found among the ruins.
About 2 m. S. of Lambessa are the ruins of Markuna, the ancient Verecunda, including two triumphal arches.
See S. Gsell,Les Monuments antiques de l’Algérie(Paris, 1901) andL’Algérie dans l’antiquité(Algiers, 1903); L. Renier,Inscriptions romaines de l’Algérie(Paris, 1855); Gustav Wilmann, “Die röm. Lagerstadt Afrikas,” inCommentationes phil. in honorem Th. Mommseni(Berlin, 1877); Sir L. Playfair,Travels in the Footsteps of Bruce(London, 1877); A. Graham,Roman Africa(London, 1902).
LAMBETH,a southern metropolitan borough of London, England, bounded N.W. by the river Thames, N.E. by Southwark, E. by Camberwell and W. by Wandsworth and Battersea, and extending S. to the boundary of the county of London. Pop. (1901) 301,895. The name is commonly confined to the northern part of the borough, bordering the river; but the principal districts included are Kennington and Vauxhall (north central), Brixton (central) and part of Norwood (south). Four road-bridges cross the Thames within the limits of the borough, namely Waterloo, Westminster, Lambeth and Vauxhall, of which the first, a fine stone structure, dates from 1817, and is the oldest Thames bridge standing within the county of London. The main thoroughfare runs S. from Westminster Bridge Road as Kennington Road, continuing as Brixton Road and Brixton Hill, Clapham Road branching S.W. from it at Kennington. Several thoroughfares also converge upon Vauxhall Bridge, and from a point near this down to Westminster Bridge the river is bordered by the fine Albert Embankment.
Early records present the nameLamb-hythein various forms. The suffix is common along the river in the meaning of a haven, but the prefix is less clear; a Saxon word signifying mud is suggested. Brixton and Kennington are mentioned in Domesday; and in Vauxhall is concealed the name of Falkes de Breauté, an unscrupulous adventurer of the time of John and Henry III. exiled in 1225. The manor of North Lambeth was given to the bishopric of Rochester in the time of Edward the Confessor, and the bishops had a house here till the 16th century. They did not, however, retain the manor beyond the close of the 12th century, when it was acquired by the see of Canterbury. The palace of the archbishops is still here, and forms, with the parish church, a picturesque group of buildings, lying close to the river opposite the majestic Houses of Parliament, and to some extent joining with them to make of this reach of the Thames one of the finest prospects in London. The oldest part of the palace remaining is the Early English chapel. The so-called Lollard’s Tower, which retains evidence of its use as a prison, datesc.1440. There is a fine Tudor gatehouse of brick, and the hall is dated 1663. The portion now inhabited by the archbishops was erected in 1834 and fronts a spacious quadrangle. Among the portraits of the archbishops here are examples by Holbein, Van Dyck, Hogarth and Reynolds. There is a valuable library. The church of St Mary was rebuiltc.1850, though the ancient monuments preserved give it an appearance of antiquity. Here are tombs of some of the archbishops, including Bancroft (d. 1610), and of the two Tradescants, collectors, and a memorial to Elias Ashmole, whose name is preserved in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford University, to which he presented the collections of his friend the younger Tradescant (d. 1662). In the present Westminster Bridge Road was a circus, well known in the later 18th and early 19th centuries as Astley’s, and near Vauxhall Bridge were the celebrated Vauxhall Gardens.
The principal modern pleasure grounds are Kennington Park (20 acres), and Brockwell Park (127 acres) south of Brixton, and near the southern end of Kennington Road is Kennington Oval, the ground of the Surrey County Cricket Club, the scene of its home matches and of other important fixtures. Among institutions the principal is St Thomas’ Hospital, the extensive buildings of which front the Albert Embankment. The original foundation dated from 1213, was situated in Southwark, and was connected with the priory of Bermondsey. The existing buildings, subsequently enlarged, were opened in 1871, are divided into a series of blocks, and include a medical school. Other hospitals are the Royal, for children and women, Waterloo Road, the Lying-in Hospital, York Road, and the South-western fever hospital in Stockwell. There are technical institutes in Brixton and Norwood; and on Brixton Hill is Brixton Prison. In the northern part of the borough are numerous factories, including the great Doulton pottery works. The parliamentary borough of Lambeth has four divisions, North, Kennington, Brixton and Norwood, each returning one member. The borough council consists of a mayor, 10 aldermen and 60 councillors. Area, 4080.4 acres.
The principal modern pleasure grounds are Kennington Park (20 acres), and Brockwell Park (127 acres) south of Brixton, and near the southern end of Kennington Road is Kennington Oval, the ground of the Surrey County Cricket Club, the scene of its home matches and of other important fixtures. Among institutions the principal is St Thomas’ Hospital, the extensive buildings of which front the Albert Embankment. The original foundation dated from 1213, was situated in Southwark, and was connected with the priory of Bermondsey. The existing buildings, subsequently enlarged, were opened in 1871, are divided into a series of blocks, and include a medical school. Other hospitals are the Royal, for children and women, Waterloo Road, the Lying-in Hospital, York Road, and the South-western fever hospital in Stockwell. There are technical institutes in Brixton and Norwood; and on Brixton Hill is Brixton Prison. In the northern part of the borough are numerous factories, including the great Doulton pottery works. The parliamentary borough of Lambeth has four divisions, North, Kennington, Brixton and Norwood, each returning one member. The borough council consists of a mayor, 10 aldermen and 60 councillors. Area, 4080.4 acres.
LAMBETH CONFERENCES,the name given to the periodical assemblies of bishops of the Anglican Communion (Pan-Anglican synods), which since 1867 have met at Lambeth Palace, the London residence of the archbishop of Canterbury. The idea of these meetings was first suggested in a letter to the archbishop of Canterbury by Bishop Hopkins of Vermont in 1851, but the immediate impulse came from the colonial Church in Canada. In 1865 the synod of that province, in an urgent letter to the archbishop of Canterbury (Dr Longley), represented the unsettlement of members of the Canadian Church caused by recent legal decisions of the Privy Council, and their alarm lest the revived action of Convocation “should leave us governed by canons different from those in force in England and Ireland, and thus cause us to drift into the status of an independent branch of the Catholic Church.” They therefore requested him to call a “national synod of the bishops of the Anglican Church at home and abroad,” to meet under his leadership. After consulting both houses of the Convocation of Canterbury, Archbishop Longley assented, and convened all the bishops of the Anglican Communion (then 144 in number) to meet at Lambeth in 1867. Many Anglican bishops (amongst them the archbishop of York and most of his suffragans) felt so doubtful as to the wisdom of such an assembly that they refused to attend it, and Dean Stanley declined to allow Westminster Abbey to be used for the closing service, giving as his reasons the partial character of the assembly, uncertainty as to the effect of its measures and “the presence of prelates not belonging to our Church.” Archbishop Longley said in his opening address, however, that they had no desire to assume “the functions of a general synod of all the churches in full communion with the Church of England,” but merely to “discuss matters of practical interest, and pronounce what we deem expedient in resolutions which may serve as safe guides to future action.” Experience has shown how valuable and wise this course was. The resolutions of the Lambeth Conferences have never been regarded as synodical decrees, but their weight has increased with each conference. Apprehensions such as those which possessed the mind of Dean Stanley have long passed away.
Seventy-six bishops accepted the primate’s invitation to the first conference, which met at Lambeth on the 24th of September 1867, and sat for four days, the sessions being in private. The archbishop opened the conference with an address: deliberation followed; committees were appointed to report on special questions; resolutions were adopted, and an encyclical letter was addressed to the faithful of the Anglican Communion. Each of the subsequent conferences has been first received in Canterbury cathedral and addressed by the archbishop from the chair of St Augustine. It has then met at Lambeth, and after sitting for five days for deliberation upon the fixed subjects and appointment of committees, has adjourned, to meet again at the end of a fortnight and sit for five days more, to receive reports, adopt resolutions and to put forth the encyclical letter.