Chapter 10

A Memoir, by his grand-nephew, S. Lane-Poole, was prefixed to part vi. of theLexicon. It was published separately in 1877.

LANE, GEORGE MARTIN(1823-1897), American scholar, was born at Charlestown, Massachusetts, on the 24th of December 1823. He graduated in 1846 at Harvard, and in 1847-1851 studied at the universities of Berlin, Bonn, Heidelberg and Göttingen. In 1851 he received his doctor’s degree at Göttingen for his dissertationSmyrnaeorum Res Gestae et Antiquitates, and on his return to America he was appointed University Professor of Latin in Harvard College. From 1869 until 1894, when he resigned and became professor emeritus, he was Pope Professor of Latin in the same institution. HisLatin Pronunciation, which led to the rejection of the English method of Latin pronunciation in the United States, was published in 1871. He died on the 30th of June 1897. HisLatin Grammar, completed and published by Professor M. H. Morgan in the following year, is of high value. Lane’s assistance in the preparation of Harper’s Latin lexicons was also invaluable. English light verse he wrote with humour and fluency, and his songJonahand theBallad of the Lone Fishballwere famous.

LANE, JAMES HENRY(1814-1866), American soldier and politician, was born at Lawrenceburg, Indiana, on the 22nd of June 1814. He was the son of Amos Lane (1778-1849), a political leader in Indiana, a member of the Indiana House of Representatives in 1816-1818 (speaker in 1817-1818), in 1821-1822 and in 1839-1840, and from 1833 to 1837 a Democratic representative in Congress. The son received a common school education, studied law and in 1840 was admitted to the bar. In the Mexican War he served as a colonel under General Taylor, and then commanded the Fifth Indiana regiment (which he had raised) in the Southern Campaign under General Scott. Lane was lieutenant-governor of Indiana from 1849 to 1853, and from 1853 to 1855 was a Democratic representative in Congress. His vote in favour of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill ruined his political future in his own state, and he emigrated in 1855 to the Territory of Kansas, probably as an agent of Stephen A. Douglas to organize the Democratic party there. He soon joined the Free State forces, however, was a member of the first general Free State convention at Big Springs in September 1855, and wrote its “platform,” which deprecated abolitionism and urged the exclusion of negroes from the Territory; and he presided over the Topeka Constitutional Convention, composed of Free State men, in the autumn of 1855. Lane was second in command of the forces in Lawrence during the “Wakarusa War”; and in the spring of 1856 was elected a United States senator under the Topeka Constitution, the validity of which, however, and therefore the validity of his election, Congress refused to recognize. In May 1856, with George Washington Deitzler (1826-1884), Dr Charles Robinson, and other Free State leaders, he was indicted for treason; but he escaped from Kansas, made a tour of the northern cities, and by his fiery oratory aroused great enthusiasm in behalf of the Free State movement in Kansas. Returning to the Territory with John Brown in August 1856, he took an active part in the domestic feuds of 1856-1857. After Kansas became a state, Lane was elected in 1861 to the United States Senate as a Republican. Immediately on reaching Washington he organized a company to guard the President; and in August 1861, having gained the ear of the Federal authorities and become intimate with President Lincoln, he went to Kansas with vague military powers, and exercised them in spite of the protests of the governor and the regular departmental commanders. During the autumn, with a brigade of 1500 men, he conducted a devastating campaign on the Missouri border, and in July 1862 he was appointed commissioner of recruiting for Kansas, a position in which he rendered faithful service, though he frequently came into conflict with the state authorities. At this time he planned a chimerical “great Southern expedition” against New Mexico, but this came to nothing. In 1864 he laboured earnestly for the re-election of Lincoln. When President Johnson quarrelled with the Radical Republicans, Lane deserted the latter and defended the Executive. Angered by his defection, certain senators accused him of being implicated in Indian contracts of a fraudulent character; and in a fit of depression following this accusation he took his own life, dying near Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, on the 11th of July 1866, ten days after he had shot himself in the head. Ambitious, unscrupulous, rash and impulsive, and generally regarded by his contemporaries as an unsafe leader, Lane was a man of great energy and personal magnetism, and possessed oratorical powers of a high order.

See the article by L. W. Spring entitled “The Career of a Kansas Politician,” in vol. iv. (October 1898) of theAmerican Historical Review; and for the commoner view, which makes him not a coward as does Spring, but a “grim chieftain” and a hero, see John Speer,Life of Gen. James H. Lane, “The Saviour of Kansas,” (Garden City, Kansas, 1896).Senator Lane should not be confused with James Henry Lane (1833-1907), who served on the Confederate side during the Civil War, attaining the rank of brigadier-general in 1862, and after the war was professor of natural philosophy and military tactics in the Virginia Agricultural and Mechanical College from 1872 to 1880, and professor of civil engineering and drawing in the Alabama Polytechnic Institute from 1882 until his death.

Senator Lane should not be confused with James Henry Lane (1833-1907), who served on the Confederate side during the Civil War, attaining the rank of brigadier-general in 1862, and after the war was professor of natural philosophy and military tactics in the Virginia Agricultural and Mechanical College from 1872 to 1880, and professor of civil engineering and drawing in the Alabama Polytechnic Institute from 1882 until his death.

LANESSAN, JEAN MARIE ANTOINE DE(1843- ), French statesman and naturalist, was born at Sainte-André de Cubzac (Gironde) on the 13th of July 1843. He entered the navy in 1862, serving on the East African and Cochin-China stations in the medical department until the Franco-German War, when he resigned and volunteered for the army medical service. He now completed his studies, taking his doctorate in 1872. Elected to the Municipal Council of Paris in 1879, he declared in favour of communal autonomy and joined with Henri Rochefort in demanding the erection of a monument to the Communards; but after his election to the Chamber of Deputies for the 5th arrondissement of Paris in 1881 he gradually veered from the extreme Radical party to the Republican Union, and identified himself with the cause of colonial expansion. A government mission to the French colonies in 1886-1887, in connexion with the approaching Paris exhibition, gave him the opportunity of studying colonial questions, on which, after his return, he published three works:La Tunisie(Paris, 1887);L’Expansion coloniale de la France(ib., 1888),L’Indo-Chine française(ib., 1889). In 1891 he was made civil and military governor of French Indo-China, where his administration, which involved him in open rupture with Admiral Fournier, was severely criticized. Nevertheless he consolidated French influence in Annam and Cambodia, and secured a large accession of territory on the Mekong river from the kingdom of Siam. He was recalled in 1894, and published an apology for his administration (La Colonisation française en Indo-Chine) in the following year. In the Waldeck-Rousseau cabinet of 1899 to 1902 he was minister of marine, and in 1901 he secured the passage of a naval programme intended to raise the French navy during the next six years to a level befitting the place of France among the great powers. At the general election of 1906 he was not re-elected. He was political director of theSiècle, and president of the French Colonization Society, and wrote, besides the books already mentioned, various works on political and biological questions.

LANFRANC(d. 1089), archbishop of Canterbury, was a Lombard by extraction. He was born in the early years of the 11th century at Pavia, where his father, Hanbald, held the rank of a magistrate. Lanfranc was trained in the legal studies for which northern Italy was then becoming famous, and acquired such proficiency that tradition links him with Irnerius of Bologna as a pioneer in the renaissance of Roman law. Though designed for a public career Lanfranc had the tastes of a student. After his father’s death he crossed the Alps to found a school in France; but in a short while he decided that Normandy would afford him a better field. About 1039 he became the master of the cathedral school at Avranches, where he taught for three years with conspicuous success. But in1042he embraced the monastic profession in the newly founded house of Bec. Until1045he lived at Bec in absolute seclusion. He was then persuaded by Abbot Herluin to open a school in themonastery. From the first he was celebrated (totius Latinitatis magister). His pupils were drawn not only from France and Normandy, but also from Gascony, Flanders, Germany and Italy. Many of them afterwards attained high positions in the Church; one, Anselm of Badagio, became pope under the title of Alexander II. In this way Lanfranc set the seal of intellectual activity on the reform movement of which Bec was the centre. The favourite subjects of his lectures were logic and dogmatic theology. He was therefore naturally invited to defend the doctrine of transubstantiation against the attacks of Berengar of Tours. He took up the task with the greatest zeal, although Berengar had been his personal friend; he was the protagonist of orthodoxy at the councils of Vercelli (1050), Tours (1054) and Rome (1059). To his influence we may attribute the desertion of Berengar’s cause by Hildebrand and the more broad-minded of the cardinals. Our knowledge of Lanfranc’s polemics is chiefly derived from the tractDe corpore et sanguine Dominiwhich he wrote many years later (after 1079) when Berengar had been finally condemned. Though betraying no signs of metaphysical ability, his work was regarded as conclusive and became a text-book in the schools. It is the most important of the works attributed to Lanfranc; which, considering his reputation, are slight and disappointing.

In the midst of his scholastic and controversial activities Lanfranc became a political force. While merely a prior of Bec he led the opposition to the uncanonical marriage of Duke William with Matilda of Flanders (1053) and carried matters so far that he incurred a sentence of exile. But the quarrel was settled when he was on the point of departure, and he undertook the difficult task of obtaining the pope’s approval of the marriage. In this he was successful at the same council which witnessed his third victory over Berengar (1059), and he thus acquired a lasting claim on William’s gratitude. In 1066 he became the first abbot of St Stephen’s at Caen, a house which the duke had been enjoined to found as a penance for his disobedience to the Holy See. Henceforward Lanfranc exercised a perceptible influence on his master’s policy. William adopted the Cluniac programme of ecclesiastical reform, and obtained the support of Rome for his English expedition by assuming the attitude of a crusader against schism and corruption. It was Alexander II., the former pupil of Lanfranc, who gave the Norman Conquest the papal benediction—a notable advantage to William at the moment, but subsequently the cause of serious embarrassments.

Naturally, when the see of Rouen next fell vacant (1067), the thoughts of the electors turned to Lanfranc. But he declined the honour, and he was nominated to the English primacy as soon as Stigand had been canonically deposed (1070). The new archbishop at once began a policy of reorganization and reform. His first difficulties were with Thomas of Bayeux, archbishop-elect of York, who asserted that his see was independent of Canterbury and claimed jurisdiction over the greater part of midland England. Lanfranc, during a visit which he paid the pope for the purpose of receiving his pallium, obtained an order from Alexander that the disputed points should be settled by a council of the English Church. This was held at Winchester in 1072. Thanks to a skilful use of forged documents, the primate carried the council’s verdict upon every point. Even if he were not the author of the forgeries he can scarcely have been the dupe of his own partisans. But the political dangers to be apprehended from the disruption of the English Church were sufficiently serious to palliate the fraud. This was not the only occasion on which Lanfranc allowed his judgment to be warped by considerations of expediency. Although the school of Bec was firmly attached to the doctrine of papal sovereignty, he still assisted William in maintaining the independence of the English Church; and appears at one time to have favoured the idea of maintaining a neutral attitude on the subject of the quarrels between papacy and empire. In the domestic affairs of England the archbishop showed more spiritual zeal. His grand aim was to extricate the Church from the fetters of the state and of secular interests. He was a generous patron of monasticism. He endeavoured to enforce celibacy upon the secular clergy. He obtained the king’s permission to deal with the affairs of the Church in synods which met apart from the Great Council, and were exclusively composed of ecclesiastics. Nor can we doubt that it was his influence which shaped the famous ordinance separating the ecclesiastical from the secular courts (c.1076). But even in such questions he allowed some weight to political considerations and the wishes of his sovereign. He acknowledged the royal right to veto the legislation of national synods. In the cases of Odo of Bayeux (1082) and of William of St Calais, bishop of Durham (1088), he used his legal ingenuity to justify the trial of bishops before a lay tribunal. He accelerated the process of substituting Normans for Englishmen in all preferments of importance; and although his nominees were usually respectable, it cannot be said that all of them were better than the men whom they superseded. For this admixture of secular with spiritual aims there was considerable excuse. By long tradition the primate was entitled to a leading position in the king’s councils; and the interests of the Church demanded that Lanfranc should use his power in a manner not displeasing to the king. On several occasions when William I. was absent from England Lanfranc acted as his vicegerent; he then had opportunities of realizing the close connexion between religious and secular affairs.

Lanfranc’s greatest political service to the Conqueror was rendered in 1075, when he detected and foiled the conspiracy which had been formed by the earls of Norfolk and Hereford. But this was not the only occasion on which he turned to good account his influence with the native English. Although he regarded them as an inferior race he was just and honourable towards their leaders. He interceded for Waltheof’s life and to the last spoke of the earl as an innocent sufferer for the crimes of others; he lived on terms of friendship with Bishop Wulfstan. On the death of the Conqueror (1087) he secured the succession for William Rufus, in spite of the discontent of the Anglo-Norman baronage; and in 1088 his exhortations induced the English militia to fight on the side of the new sovereign against Odo of Bayeux and the other partisans of Duke Robert. He exacted promises of just government from Rufus, and was not afraid to remonstrate when the promises were disregarded. So long as he lived he was a check upon the worst propensities of the king’s administration. But his restraining hand was too soon removed. In 1089 he was stricken with fever and he died on the 24th of May amidst universal lamentations. Notwithstanding some obvious moral and intellectual defects, he was the most eminent and the most disinterested of those who had co-operated with William I. in riveting Norman rule upon the English Church and people. As a statesman he did something to uphold the traditional ideal of his office; as a primate he elevated the standards of clerical discipline and education. Conceived in the Hildebrandine spirit, his reforms led by a natural sequence to strained relations between Church and State; the equilibrium which he established was unstable, and depended too much upon his personal influence with the Conqueror. But of all the Hildebrandine statesmen who applied their teacher’s ideas within the sphere of a particular national church he was the most successful.

The chief authority is theVita Lanfranciby Milo Crispin, who was precentor at Bec and died in 1149. Milo drew largely upon theVita Herluini, composed by Gilbert Crispin, abbot of Westminster. TheChronicon Beccensis abbatiae, a 14th-century compilation, should also be consulted. The first edition of these two sources, and of Lanfranc’s writings, is that of L. d’Achery,Beati Lanfranci opera omnia(Paris, 1648). Another edition, slightly enlarged, is that of J. A. Giles,Lanfranci opera(2 vols., Oxford, 1844). The correspondence between Lanfranc and Gregory VII. is given in theMonumenta Gregoriana(ed. P. Jaffé, Berlin, 1865). Of modern works A. Charma’sLanfranc(Paris, 1849), H. Boehmer’sDie Fälschungen Erzbischof Lanfranks von Canterbury(Leipzig, 1902), and the same author’sKirche und Staat in England und in der Normandie(Leipzig, 1899) are useful. See also the authorities cited in the articles onWilliam I.andWilliam II.

(H. W. C. D.)

LANFREY, PIERRE(1828-1877), French historian and politician, was born at Chambéry (Savoie) on the 26th of October1828. His father had been one of Napoleon’s officers. The son studied philosophy and history in Paris and wrote historical works of an anti-clerical and rationalizing tendency. These includedL’Église et les philosophes au XVIIIesiècle(1855; new edition, with a notice of the author by E. de Pressensé, 1879);Essai sur la révolution française(1858);Histoire politique des papes(1860);Lettres d Evérard(1860), a novel in the form of letters;Le Rétablissement de la Pologne(1863). Hismagnum opuswas hisHistoire de Napoléon Ier(5 vols., 1867-1875 and 1886; Eng. trans., 4 vols., 1871-1879), which ceased unfortunately at the end of 1811 with the preparations for the Russian campaign of 1812. This book, based on the emperor’s correspondence published in 1858-1870, attempted the destruction of the legends which had grown up around his subject, and sought by a critical examination of the documents to explain the motives of his policy. In his desire to controvert current misconceptions and exaggerations of Napoleon’s abilities Lanfrey unduly minimized his military and administrative genius. A stanch republican, he was elected to the National Assembly in 1871, became ambassador at Bern (1871-1873), and life senator in 1875. He died at Pau on the 15th of November 1877.

HisŒuvres complèteswere published in 12 vols. (1879 seq.), and hisCorrespondancein 2 vols. (1885).

LANG, ANDREW(1844- ), British man of letters, was born on the 31st of March 1844, at Selkirk, Scotland. He was educated at the Edinburgh Academy, St Andrews University and at Balliol College, Oxford, where he took a first class in the final classical schools in 1868, becoming a fellow and subsequently honorary fellow of Merton College. As a journalist, poet, critic and historian, he soon made a reputation as one of the ablest and most versatile writers of the day. His first publication was a volume of metrical experiments,The Ballads and Lyrics of Old France(1872), and this was followed at intervals by other volumes of dainty verse,xxii.Ballades in Blue China(1880, enlarged edition, 1888),Ballads and Verses Vain(1884), selected by Mr Austin Dobson;Rhymes à la Mode(1884),Grass of Parnassus(1888),Ban and Arrière Ban(1894),New Collected Rhymes(1905). He collaborated with S. H. Butcher in a prose translation (1879) of theOdyssey, and with E. Myers and Walter Leaf in a prose version (1883) of theIliad, both of them remarkable for accurate scholarship and excellence of style. As a Homeric scholar, of conservative views, he took a high rank. HisHomer and the Epicappeared in 1893; a new prose translation ofThe Homeric Hymnsin 1899, with essays literary and mythological, in which parallels to the Greek myths are given from the traditions of savage races; and hisHomer and his Agein 1906. His purely journalistic activity was from the first of a varied description, ranging from sparkling “leaders” for theDaily Newsto miscellaneous articles for theMorning Post, and for many years he was literary editor ofLongman’s Magazine; no critic was in more request, whether for occasional articles and introductions to new editions or as editor of dainty reprints. To the study of Scottish history Mr Lang brought a scholarly care for detail, a piquant literary style, and a gift for disentangling complicated questions. TheMystery of Mary Stuart(1901, new and revised ed., 1904) was a consideration of the fresh light thrown on Mary’s history by the Lennox MSS. in the University library, Cambridge, strengthening her case by restating the perfidy of her accusers. He also wrote monographs onThe Portraits and Jewels of Mary Stuart(1906) andJames VI. and the Gowrie Mystery(1902). The somewhat unfavourable view of John Knox presented in his bookJohn Knox and the Reformation(1905) aroused considerable controversy. He gave new information about the continental career of the Young Pretender inPickle the Spy(1897), an account of Alastair Ruadh Macdonell, whom he identified with Pickle, a notorious Hanoverian spy. This was followed in 1898 byThe Companions of Pickle, and in 1900 by a monograph onPrince Charles Edward. In 1900 he began aHistory of Scotland from the Roman Occupation, the fourth volume of which (1907) brought Scottish history down to 1746.The Valet’s Tragedy(1903), which takes its title from an essay on the “Man with the Iron Mask,” (seeIron Mask), collects twelve papers on historical mysteries, andA Monk of Fife(1896) is a fictitious narrative purporting to be written by a young Scot in France in 1429-1431. Mr Lang’s versatility was also shown in his valuable works on folk-lore and on primitive religion. The earliest of these works wasCustom and Myth(1884); inMyth, Literature and Religion(2 vols., 1887, French trans., 1896) he explained the irrational elements of mythology as survivals from earlier savagery; inThe Making of Religion(an idealization of savage animism) he maintained the existence of high spiritual ideas among savage races, and instituted comparisons between savage practices and the occult phenomena among civilized races; he dealt with the origins of totemism (q.v.) inSocial Origins, printed (1903) together with J. J. Atkinson’sPrimal Law. He was one of the founders of the study of “Psychical Research,” and his other writings on anthropology includeThe Book of Dreams and Ghosts(1897),Magic and Religion(1901) andThe Secret of the Totem(1905). He carried the humour and sub-acidity of discrimination which marked his criticism of fellow folk-lorists into the discussion of purely literary subjects in hisBooks and Bookmen(1886),Letters to Dead Authors(1886),Letters on Literature(1889), &c. HisBlue Fairy Tale Book(1889), beautifully produced and illustrated, was followed annually at Christmas by a book of fairy tales and romances drawn from many sources. He editedThe Poems and Songs of Robert Burns(1896), and was responsible for theLife and Letters(1897) of J. G. Lockhart, andThe Life, Letters and Diaries(1890) of Sir Stafford Northcote, first earl of Iddesleigh.

LANG, KARL HEINRICH,Ritter von(1764-1835), German historian, was born on the 7th of June 1764 at Balgheim, near Nördlingen. From the first he was greatly attracted towards historical studies, and this was shown when he began to attend the gymnasium of Oettingen, and in 1782, when he went to the university of Altdorf, near Nuremberg. At the same time he studied jurisprudence, and in 1782 became a government clerk at Oettingen. About the same period began his activities as a journalist and publicist. But Lang did not long remain an official. He was of a restless, changeable character, which constantly involved him in personal quarrels, though he was equally quick to retire from them. In 1788 he obtained a position as private tutor in Hungary, and in 1789 became private secretary to Baron von Bühler, the envoy of Württemberg at Vienna. This led to further travels and to his entering the service of the prince of Oettingen-Wallerstein. In 1792 Lang again betook himself to a university, this time to Göttingen. Here he came under the influence of the historian, Ludwig Timotheus Spittler, from whom, as also from Johannes von Müller and Friedrich Schlegel, his historical studies received a fresh impulse. At intervals from 1793 to 1801 Lang was closely connected with the Prussian statesman Hardenberg, who employed him as his private secretary and archivist, and in 1797 he was present with Hardenberg at the congress of Rastadt as secretary to the legation. He was occupied chiefly with affairs of the principalities of Anspach and Bayreuth, newly acquired by Prussia, and especially in the settlement of disputes with Bavaria as to their boundaries.

When in 1805 the principalities became part of Bavaria, Lang entered the Bavarian service (1806), was ennobled in 1808 and from 1810 to 1817 held the office of archivist in Munich. He again devoted himself with great enthusiasm to historical studies, which naturally dealt chiefly with Bavarian history. He evolved the theory, among other things, that the boundaries of the old counties orpagi(Gaue) were identical with those of the dioceses. This theory was combated in later days, and caused great confusion in the province of historical geography. For the rest, Lang did great service to the study of the history of Bavaria, especially by bringing fresh material from the archives to bear upon it. He also kept up his activity as a publicist, in 1814 defending in a detailed and somewhat biassed pamphlet the policy of the minister Montgelas, and he undertook critical studies in the history of the Jesuits. In 1817 Lang retired from active life, and until his death, which took place on the 26th of March 1835, lived chiefly in Ansbach.

Lang is best known through hisMemoiren, which appeared at Brunswick in two parts in 1842, and were republished in 1881 in a second edition. They contain much of interest for the history of the period, but have to be used with the greatest caution on account of their pronounced tendency to satire. Lang’s character, as can be gathered especially from a consideration of his behaviour at Munich, is darkened by many shadows. He did not scruple, for instance, to strike out of the lists of witnesses to medieval charters, before publishing them, the names of families which he disliked.

Of his very numerous literary productions the following may be mentioned:Beiträge zur Kenntnis der natürlichen und politischen Verfassung des oettingischen Vaterlandes(1786);Ein Votum über den Wucher von einem Manne sine voto(1791);Historische Entwicklung der deutschen Steuerverfassungen(1793);Historische Prüfung des vermeintlichen Alters der deutschen Landstände(1796);Neuere Geschichte des Fürstentums Bayreuth(1486-1603) (1798-1811);Tabellen über Flächeninhalt &c. und bevorstehende Verluste der deutschen Reichsstände. (On the occasion of the congress of Rastadt, 1798);Der Minister Graf von Montgelas(1814);Geschichte der Jesuiten in Bayern(1819); andBayerns Gauen(Nuremberg, 1830).See K. Th. v. Heigel,Augsburger allgemeine Zeitungfor 1878, p. 1969 et seq., 1986 et seq. (Beilage of the 14th and 15th of May); F. Muncker, inAllgemeine deutsche Biographie, vol. xvii. (1883); F. X. v. Wegele,Geschichte der deutschen Historiographie(1885).

See K. Th. v. Heigel,Augsburger allgemeine Zeitungfor 1878, p. 1969 et seq., 1986 et seq. (Beilage of the 14th and 15th of May); F. Muncker, inAllgemeine deutsche Biographie, vol. xvii. (1883); F. X. v. Wegele,Geschichte der deutschen Historiographie(1885).

(J. Hn.)

LANGDELL, CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS(1826-1906), American jurist, was born in New Boston, Hillsborough county, New Hampshire, on the 22nd of May 1826, of English and Scotch-Irish ancestry. He studied at Phillips Exeter Academy in 1845-1848, at Harvard College in 1848-1850 and in the Harvard Law School in 1851-1854. He practised law in 1854-1870 in New York City, but he was almost unknown when, in January 1870, he was appointed Dane professor of law (and soon afterwards Dean of the Law Faculty) of Harvard University, to succeed Theophilus Parsons, to whoseTreatise on the Law of Contracts(1853) he had contributed as a student. He resigned the deanship in 1895, in 1900 became Dane professor emeritus, and on the 6th of July 1906 died in Cambridge. He received the degree of LL.D. in 1875; in 1903 a chair in the law school was named in his honour; and after his death one of the school’s buildings was named Langdell Hall. He made the Harvard Law School a success by remodelling its administration and by introducing the “case” system of instruction.

Langdell wroteSelection of Cases on the Law of Contracts(1870, the first book used in the “case” system; enlarged, 1877);Cases on Sales(1872);Summary of Equity Pleading(1877, 2nd ed., 1883);Cases in Equity Pleading(1883); andBrief Survey of Equity Jurisdiction(1905).

LANGDON, JOHN(1741-1819), American statesman, was born in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, on the 25th of June 1741. After an apprenticeship in a counting-house, he led a seafaring life for several years, and became a shipowner and merchant. In December 1774, as a militia captain he assisted in the capture of Fort William and Mary at New Castle, New Hampshire, one of the first overt acts of the American colonists against the property of the crown. He was elected to the House of Representatives of the last Royal Assembly of New Hampshire and then to the second Continental Congress in 1775, and was a member of the first Naval Committee of the latter, but he resigned in 1776, and in June 1776 became Congress’s agent of prizes in New Hampshire and in 1778 continental (naval) agent of Congress in this state, where he supervised the building of John Paul Jones’s “Ranger” (completed in June 1777), the “America,” launched in 1782, and other vessels. He was a judge of the New Hampshire Court of Common Pleas in 1776-1777, a member (and speaker) of the New Hampshire House of Representatives from 1776 until 1782, a member of the state Constitutional Convention of 1778 and of the state Senate in 1784-1785, and in 1783-1784 was again a member of Congress. He contributed largely to raise troops in 1777 to meet Burgoyne; and he served as a captain at Bennington and at Saratoga. He was president of New Hampshire in 1785-1786 and in 1788-1789; a member of the Federal Constitutional Convention in 1787, where he voted against granting to Congress the power of issuing paper money; a member of the state convention which ratified the Federal Constitution for New Hampshire; a member of the United States Senate in 1789-1801, and its presidentpro tem. during the first Congress and the second session of the second Congress; a member of the New Hampshire House of Representatives in 1801-1805 and its speaker in 1803-1805; and governor of the state in 1805-1809 and in 1810-1812. He received nine electoral votes for the vice-presidency in 1808, and in 1812 was an elector on the Madison ticket. He died in Portsmouth on the 18th of September 1819. He was an able leader during the Revolutionary period, when his wealth and social position were of great assistance to the patriot party. In the later years of his life in New Hampshire he was the most prominent of the local Republican leaders and built up his party by partisan appointments. He refused the naval portfolio in Jefferson’s cabinet.

His elder brother,Woodbury Langdon(1739-1805), was a delegate to the Continental Congress in 1779-1780, a member of the executive council of New Hampshire in 1781-1784, judge of the Supreme Court of the state in 1782 and in 1786-1790 (although he had had no legal training), and a state senator in 1784-1785.

Alfred Langdon Elwyn has editedLetters by Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Others, Written During and After the Revolution, to John Langdon of New Hampshire(Philadelphia, 1880), a book of great interest and value. See a biographical sketch of John Langdon by Charles R. Corning in theNew England Magazine, vol. xxii. (Boston, 1897).

LANGE, ANNE FRANÇOISE ELIZABETH(1772-1816), French actress, was born in Genoa on the 17th of September 1772, the daughter of a musician and an actress at the Comédie Italienne. She made her first appearance on the stage at Tours in 1787 and a successful début at the Comédie Française in 1788 inL’ÉcossaiseandL’Oracle. She followed Talma and the others in 1791 to the Rue Richelieu, but returned after a few months to the Comédie Française. Here her talent and beauty gave her an enormous success in François de Neuchâteau’sPamela, the performance of which brought upon the theatre the vials of wrath of the Committee of Safety. With the author and the other members of the caste, she was arrested and imprisoned. After the 9th Thermidor she rejoined her comrades at the Feydeau, but retired on the 16th of December 1797, reappearing only for a few performances in 1807. She had, meantime, married the son of a rich Belgian named Simons. She died on the 25th of May 1816.

LANGE, ERNST PHILIPP KARL(1813-1899), German novelist, who wrote under the pseudonymPhilipp Galen, was born at Potsdam on the 21st of December 1813. He studied medicine at Berlin (1835-1840), and on taking his degree, in 1840, entered the Prussian army as surgeon. In this capacity he saw service in the Schleswig-Holstein campaign of 1849. He settled at Bielefeld as medical practitioner and here issued his first novel,Der Inselkönig(1852, 3rd ed., 1858), which enjoyed considerable popularity. In Bielefeld he continued to work at his profession and to write, until his retirement, with the rank ofOberstabsarzt(surgeon-general) to Potsdam in 1878; there he died on the 20th of February 1899. Lange’s novels are distinguished by local colouring and pretty, though not powerful, descriptions of manners and customs. He particularly favoured scenes of English life, though he had never been in that country, and on the whole he succeeded well in his descriptions. Chief among his novels are,Der Irre von St James(1853, 5th ed., 1871), andEmery Glandon(3rd ed., Leip., 1865), while of those dealing with the Schleswig-Holstein campaignAndreas Burns(1856) andDie Tochter des Diplomaten(1865) commanded considerable attention.

HisGesammelte Schriftenappeared in 36 vols. (1857-1866).

LANGE, FRIEDRICH ALBERT(1828-1875), German philosopher and sociologist, was born on the 28th of September 1828, at Wald, near Solingen, the son of the theologian, J. P. Lange (q.v.). He was educated at Duisburg, Zürich and Bonn, where he distinguished himself by gymnastics as much as by study. In 1852 he became schoolmaster at Cologne; in 1855privatdozentin philosophy at Bonn; in 1858 schoolmasterat Duisburg, resigning when the government forbade schoolmasters to take part in political agitation. Lange then entered on a career of militant journalism in the cause of political and social reform. He was also prominent in the affairs of his town, yet found leisure to write most of his best-known books,Die Leibesübungen(1863),Die Arbeiterfrage(1865, 5th ed. 1894),Geschichte des Materialismus und Kritik seiner Bedeutung in der Gegenwart(1866; 7th ed. with biographical sketch by H. Cohen, 1902; Eng. trans., E. C. Thomas, 1877), andJ. S. Mill’s Ansichten über die sociale Frage(1866). In 1866, discouraged by affairs in Germany, he moved to Winterthur, near Zürich, to become connected with the democratic newspaper,Winterthurer Landbote. In 1869 he wasPrivatdozent at Zürich, and next year professor. The strong French sympathies of the Swiss in the Franco-German War led to his speedy resignation. Thenceforward he gave up politics. In 1872 he accepted a professorship at Marburg. Unhappily, his vigorous frame was already stricken with disease, and, after a lingering illness, he died at Marburg, on the 23rd of November 1875, diligent to the end. HisLogische Studienwas published by H. Cohen in 1877 (2nd ed., 1894). His main work, theGeschichte des Materialismus, which is brilliantly written, with wide scientific knowledge and more sympathy with English thought than is usual in Germany, is rather a didactic exposition of principles than a history in the proper sense. Adopting the Kantian standpoint that we can know nothing but phenomena, Lange maintains that neither materialism nor any other metaphysical system has a valid claim to ultimate truth. For empirical phenomenal knowledge, however, which is all that man can look for, materialism with its exact scientific methods has done most valuable service. Ideal metaphysics, though they fail of the inner truth of things, have a value as the embodiment of high aspirations, in the same way as poetry and religion. In Lange’sLogische Studien, which attempts a reconstruction of formal logic, the leading idea is that reasoning has validity in so far as it can be represented in terms of space. HisArbeiterfrageadvocates an ill-defined form of socialism. It protests against contemporary industrial selfishness, and against the organization of industry on the Darwinian principle of struggle for existence.

See O. A. Ellissen,F. A. Lange(Leipzig, 1891), and inMonatsch. d. Comeniusgesell. iii., 1894, 210 ff.; H. Cohen inPreuss.Jahrb.xxvii., 1876, 353 ff.; Vaihinger,Hartmann, Dühring und Lange(Iserlohn, 1876); J. M. Bösch,F. A. Lange und sein Standpunkt d. Ideals(Frauenfeld, 1890); H. Braun,F. A. Lange, als Socialökonom(Halle, 1881).

(H. St.)

LANGE, JOHANN PETER(1802-1884), German Protestant theologian, was of peasant origin and was born at Sonneborn near Elberfeld on the 10th of April 1802. He studied theology at Bonn (from 1822) under K. I. Nitzsch and G. C. F. Lücke, held several pastorates, and eventually (1854) settled at Bonn as professor of theology in succession to Isaac A. Dorner, becoming also in 1860 counsellor to the consistory. He died on the 9th of July 1884. Lange has been called the poetical theologianpar excellence: “It has been said of him that his thoughts succeed each other in such rapid and agitated waves that all calm reflection and all rational distinction become, in a manner, drowned” (F. Lichtenberger). As a dogmatic writer he belonged to the school of Schleiermacher. HisChristliche Dogmatik(3 vols., 1849-1852, new edition, 1870) “contains many fruitful and suggestive thoughts, which, however, are hidden under such a mass of bold figures and strange fancies, and suffer so much from want of clearness of presentation, that they did not produce any lasting effect” (Otto Pfleiderer).

His other works includeDas Leben Jesu(3 vols., 1844-1847),Das apostolische Zeitalter(2 vols., 1853-1854).Grundriss der theologischen Enzyklopädie(1877).Grundriss der christlichen Ethik(1878), andGrundriss der Bibelkunde(1881). In 1857 he undertook with other scholars aTheologisch-homiletisches Bibelwerk, to which he contributed commentaries on the first four books of the Pentateuch, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Matthew, Mark, Revelation. TheBibelwerkhas been translated, enlarged and revised under the general editorship of Dr Philip Schaff.

LANGEAIS, a town of west-central France in the department of Indre-et-Loire, on the right bank of the Loire, 16 m. W.S.W. of Tours by rail. Pop. (1906) town, 1755; commune, 3550. Langeais has a church of the 11th, 12th and 15th centuries but is chiefly interesting for the possession of a large château built soon after the middle of the 15th century by Jean Bourré, minister of Louis XI. Here the marriage of Charles VIII. and Anne of Brittany took place in 1491. In the park are the ruins of a keep of late 10th-century architecture, built by Fulk Nerra, count of Anjou.

LANGEN, JOSEPH(1837-1901), German theologian, was born at Cologne on the 3rd of June 1837. He studied at Bonn, was ordained priest in 1859, was nominated professor extraordinary at the university of Bonn in 1864, and a professor in ordinary of the exegesis of the New Testament in 1867—an office which he held till his death. He was one of the able band of professors who in 1870 supported Döllinger in his resistance to the Vatican decrees, and was excommunicated with Ignaz v. Döllinger, Johann Huber, Johann Friedrich, Franz Heinrich Reusch, Joseph Hubert Reinkens and others, for refusing to accept them. In 1878, in consequence of the permission given to priests to marry, he ceased to identify himself with the Old Catholic movement, although he was not reconciled with the Roman Catholic Church. Langen was more celebrated as a writer than as a speaker. His first work was an inquiry into the authorship of the Commentary on St Paul’s Epistles and the Treatise on Biblical Questions, ascribed to Ambrose and Augustine respectively. In 1868 he published anIntroduction to the New Testament, a work of which a second edition was called for in 1873. He also published works on theLast Days of the Life of Jesus, onJudaism in the Time of Christ, onJohn of Damascus(1879) and anExamination of the Vatican Dogma in the Light of Patristic Exegesis of the New Testament. But he is chiefly famous for hisHistory of the Church of Rome to the Pontificate of Innocent III.(4 vols., 1881-1893), a work of sound scholarship, based directly upon the authorities, the most important sources being woven carefully into the text. He also contributed largely to theInternationale theologische Zeitschrift, a review started in 1893 by the Old Catholics to promote the union of National Churches on the basis of the councils of the Undivided Church, and admitting articles in German, French and English. Among other subjects, he wrote on the School of Hierotheus, on Romish falsifications of the Greek Fathers, on Leo XIII., on Liberal Ultramontanism, on the Papal Teaching in regard to Morals, on Vincentius of Lerins and he carried on a controversy with Professor Willibald Beyschlag, of the German Evangelical Church, on the respective merits of Protestantism and Old Catholicism regarded as a basis for teaching the Christian faith. An attack of apoplexy put an end to his activity as a teacher and hastened his death, which occurred in July 1901.

(J. J. L.*)

LANGENBECK, BERNHARD RUDOLF KONRAD VON(1810-1887), German surgeon, was born at Horneburg on the 9th of November 1810, and received his medical education at Göttingen, where he took his doctor’s degree in 1835 with a thesis on the structure of the retina. After a visit to France and England, he returned to Göttingen asPrivatdozent, and in 1842 became professor of surgery and director of the Friedrichs Hospital at Kiel. Six years later he succeeded J. F. Dieffenbach (1794-1847) as director of the Clinical Institute for Surgery and Ophthalmology at Berlin, and remained there till 1882, when failing health obliged him to retire. He died at Wiesbaden on the 30th of September 1887. Langenbeck was a bold and skilful operator, but was disinclined to resort to operation while other means afforded a prospect of success. He devoted particular attention to military surgery, and was a great authority in the treatment of gunshot wounds. Besides acting as general field-surgeon of the army in the war with Denmark in 1848, he saw active service in 1864, 1866, and again in the Franco-German campaign of 1870-71. He was in Orleans at the end of 1870, after the city had been taken by the Prussians, and was unwearied in his attentions, whether as operator or consultant, to wounded men with whom every public building was packed. He also utilized the opportunities for instruction that thus arose, and the “Militär-Aerztliche Gesellschaft,” which met twice a week for some months, and in the discussions of which every surgeonin the city was invited to take part, irrespective of nationality, was mainly formed by his energy and enthusiasm. He was ennobled for his services in the Danish War of 1864.

Back to Index Next