Chapter 11

LANGENSALZA, a town in the Prussian province of Saxony, on the Salza, about 20 m. N. W. from Erfurt. Pop. (1905) 12,545. Near it are the remains of the old Benedictine monastery of Homburg or Hohenburg, where the emperor Henry IV. defeated the Saxons in 1075. The manufacture of cloth is the chief industry; lace, starch, machines, cigars and chemicals are also produced, while spinning, dyeing, brewing and printing are carried on. There is a sulphur bath in the neighbourhood, situated in a pleasant park, in which there are monuments to those who fell in the war of 1866. Langensalza became a town in 1211 and was afterwards part of the electorate of Saxony. In 1815 it came into the possession of Prussia. It is remarkable in history as the scene of three battles: (1) the victory of the Prussians and English over the imperial army on the 15th of February 1761; (2) that of the Prussians over the Bavarians on the 17th of April 1813; and (3) the engagement on the 27th of June 1866 between the Prussians and the Hanoverians, in which the latter, though victorious in the field, were compelled to lay down their arms on the arrival of overwhelming Prussian reinforcements.

See Göschel,Chronik der Stadt Langensalza(Langensalza, 1818-1842); G. and H. Schütz,Chronik der Stadt Langensalza(Langensalza, 1901); and Gutbier,Schwefelbad Langensalza(Langensalza, 1900).

LANGHAM, SIMON(d. 1376), archbishop of Canterbury and cardinal, was born at Langham in Rutland, becoming a monk in the abbey of St Peter at Westminster, and later prior and then abbot of this house. In 1360 he was made treasurer of England and in 1361 he became bishop of Ely; he was appointed chancellor of England in 1363 and was chosen archbishop of Canterbury in 1366. Perhaps the most interesting incident in his primacy was when he drove the secular clergy from their college of Canterbury Hall, Oxford, and filled their places with monks. The expelled head of the seculars was a certain John de Wiclif, who has been identified with the great reformer Wycliffe. Notwithstanding the part Langham as chancellor had taken in the anti-papal measures of 1365 and 1366 he was made a cardinal by Pope Urban V. in 1368. This step lost him the favour of Edward III., and two months later he resigned his archbishopric and went to Avignon. He was soon allowed to hold other although less exalted positions in England, and in 1374 he was elected archbishop of Canterbury for the second time; but he withdrew his claim and died at Avignon on the 22nd of July 1376. Langham’s tomb is the oldest monument to an ecclesiastic in Westminster Abbey; he left the residue of his estate—a large sum of money—to the abbey, and has been called its second founder.

LANGHOLM, a burgh of barony and police burgh of Dumfriesshire, Scotland. Pop. (1901) 3142. It is situated on both sides of the Esk, 16 m. N.E. of Annan, the terminus of a branch line connecting with the North British railway system at Riddings Junction. The Esk is crossed by a three-arched stone bridge, uniting the old town on the left bank with the new on the right, and a suspension bridge. Ewes Water, which falls into the river, is spanned by a two-arched bridge, 1 m. N. of the town. The public buildings include the town hall—a substantial edifice with a tower rising in three tiers from the body of the structure, the Telford library, and the Hope hospital for aged poor. Already famous for its plaids and blankets, the prosperity of the burgh advanced when it took up the manufacture of tweeds. Distilling, brewing, dyeing and tanning are also important industries. The Esk and Liddel being favourite fishing streams, Langholm is the headquarters of the association which protects the rights of anglers. About 1 m. to the N.W. stands Langholm Lodge, a seat of the duke of Buccleuch, and some 4 m. S.E. is Gilnockie Tower, the peel-house that belonged to Johnny Armstrong, the freebooter, who was executed by order of James V. in 1530.

LANGHORNE, JOHN(1735-1779), English poet and translator of Plutarch, was born at Kirkby Stephen, Westmorland. He At first supported himself as a private tutor and schoolmaster, and, having taken orders, was appointed (1766) to the rectory of Blagdon, Somerset, where he died on the 1st of April 1779. His poems (original and translations), and sentimental tales, are now forgotten, but his translation of Plutarch’sLives(1770), in which he had the co-operation of his elder brother William (1721-1772), is not yet superseded. It is far less vigorous than Sir Thomas North’s version (translated from Amyot) but is free from its inaccuracies. His poems were published in 1804 by his son, J. T. Langhorne, with a memoir of the author; they will also be found in R. Anderson’sPoets of Great Britain, xi. (1794) and A. Chalmers’sEnglish Poets, xvi. (1810), with memoir. Of his poems,The Country Justice, a plea for the neglected poor, andThe Fables of Flora, were the most successful; of his prose writings,The Correspondence between Theodosius and Constantia, founded on a well-known story in theSpectator(No. 164).

LANGIEWICZ, MARYAN(1827-1887), Polish patriot, was born at Krotoszyn, in the province of Posen, on the 5th of August 1827, his father being the local doctor. Langiewicz was educated at Posen, Breslau and Prague, and was compelled to earn his daily bread by giving lectures. He subsequently entered the PrussianLandwehrand served for a year in the royal guard. In 1860 he migrated to Paris and was for a time professor in the high school founded there by Mieroslawski. The same year he took part in Garibaldi’s Neapolitan campaign, and was then a professor in the military school at Cuneo till the establishment was closed. In 1862 he entered into communication with the central Polish committee at Warsaw, and on the outbreak of the insurrection of the 22nd of January 1863, took the command of the armed bands. He defeated the Russians at Wachock and Slupia (February), capturing 1000 muskets and 8 cannon. This victory drew hundreds of young recruits to his standard, till at last he had 12,000 men at his disposal. On the 23rd of February he again defeated the Russians, at Malogoszcza, and captured 500 muskets and 2 cannon. On the 10th of March he proclaimed himself dictator and attempted to form a regular government; but either he had insufficient organizing talent, or had not time enough to carry out his plans, and after a fresh series of engagements his army was almost annihilated at Zagosc (18th of March), whereupon he took refuge in Austrian territory and was interned at Tarnow. He was subsequently transferred to the fortress of Josephstadt, from which he was released in 1865. He then lived at Solothurn as a citizen of the Swiss Republic, and subsequently entered the Turkish service as Langie Bey. He died at Constantinople on the 11th of May 1887.

See Boleslaw Limanowski,The National Insurrection of 1863-64(Pol.) (Lemberg, 1900); Paolo Mazzoleni,I Bergamaschi in Polonia nel 1863(Bergamo, 1893); W. H. Bavink,De Poolsche opstand 1863, &c. (Haarlem, 1864).

LANGLAND, WILLIAM(c.1332-c.1400), the supposed English poet, generally regarded until recently as the single author of the remarkable 14th-century poemPiers the Plowman. Its full title is—The Vision of William concerning Piers the Plowman, together with Vita de Do-wel, Do-bet, et Do-best, secundum Wit et Resoun; usually given in Latin asVisio Willelmi de Petra Plowman, &c.; the whole work being sometimes briefly described asLiber de Petro Plowman. We know nothing of William Langland except from the supposed evidence of the MSS. of the poem and the text itself, and it will be convenient first to give a brief general description of them.

The poem exists in three forms. If we denote these by the names of A-text (or Vernon), B-text (or Crowley), and C-text (or Whitaker), we find, of the first, ten MSS., of the second fourteen, and of the third seventeen, besides seven others of a mixed type. It will be seen that we thus have abundance of material, a circumstance which proves the great popularity of the poem in former times. Owing to the frequent expressions which indicate a desire for reformation in religion, it was, in the time of Edward VI., considered worthy of being printed. Three impressions of the B-text were printed by Robert Crowley in 1550; and one of these was badly reprinted by Owen Rogers in 1561. In 1813 the best MS. of the C-text was printed by Dr E. Whitaker. In 1842 Mr Thomas Wright printed an edition from an excellentMS. of the B-text in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge (2nd ed., 1856, new ed., 1895). A complete edition of all three texts was printed for the Early English Text Society as edited by the Rev. W. W. Skeat, with the addition ofRichard the Redeless, and containing full notes to all three texts, with a glossary and indexes, in 1867-1885. The Clarendon Press edition, by the same editor, appeared in 1886.

The A-text contains a prologue and 12 passus or cantos (i.-iv., the vision of the Lady Meed; v.-viii., the vision of Piers the Plowman; ix.-xii., the vision of Do-wel, Do-bet and Do-best), with 2567 lines. The B-text is much longer, containing 7242 lines, with additional passus following after xi. of A, the earlier passus being altered in various respects. The C-text, with 7357 lines, is a revision of B.

The general contents of the poem may be gathered from a brief description of the C-text. This is divided into twenty-three passus, nominally comprising four parts, called respectively Visio de Petro Plowman, Visio de Do-wel, Visio de Do-bet and Visio de Do-best. HereDo-betsignifies “do better” in modern English; the explanation of the names being that he who does a kind actiondoes well, he who teaches others to act kindlydoes better, whilst he who combines both practice and theory, both doing good himself and teaching others to do the same,does best. But the visions by no means closely correspond to these descriptions; and Skeat divides the whole into a set of eleven visions, which may be thus enumerated: (1) Vision of the Field Full of Folk, of Holy Church, and of the Lady Meed (passus i.-v.); (2) Vision of the Seven Deadly Sins, and of Piers the Plowman (pass. vi.-x.); (3) Wit, Study, Clergy and Scripture (pass. xi., xii.); (4) Fortune, Nature, Recklessness and Reason (pass. xiii., xiv.); (5) Vision of Imaginative (pass. xv.); (6) Conscience, Patience and Activa-Vita (pass. xvi., xvii.); (7) Free-will and the Tree of Charity (pass. xviii., xix.); (8) Faith, Hope and Charity (pass. xx.); (9) The Triumph of Piers the Plowman,i.e.the Crucifixion, Burial and Resurrection of Jesus Christ (pass. xxi.); (10) The Vision of Grace (pass. xxii.); (11) The Vision of Antichrist (pass. xxiii.).

The bare outline of the C-text gives little idea of the real nature of the poem. The author’s object, as Skeat describes it, was to “afford himself opportunities (of which he has amply availed himself) for describing the life and manners of the poorer classes; for inveighing against clerical abuses and the rapacity of the friars; for representing the miseries caused by the great pestilences then prevalent and by the hasty and ill-advised marriages consequent thereupon; and for denouncing lazy workmen and sham beggars, the corruption and bribery then too common in the law courts, and all the numerous forms of falsehood which are at all time the fit subjects for satire and indignant exposure. In describing, for example, the seven deadly sins, he gives so exact a description of Glutton and Sloth that the reader feels them to be no mere abstractions, but drawn from the life; and it becomes hardly more difficult to realize Glutton than it is to realize Sir John Falstaff. The numerous allegorical personages so frequently introduced, such as Scripture, Clergy, Conscience, Patience and the like, are all mouthpieces of the author himself, uttering for the most part his own sentiments, but sometimes speaking in accordance with the character which each is supposed to represent. The theological disquisitions which are occasionally introduced are somewhat dull and tedious, but the earnestness of the author’s purpose and his energy of language tend to relieve them, and there are not many passages which might have been omitted without loss. The poem is essentially one of those which improve on a second reading, and as a linguistic monument it is of very high value. Mere extracts from the poem, even if rather numerous and of some length, fail to give a fair idea of it. The whole deserves, and will repay, a careful study; indeed, there are not many single works from which a student of English literature and of the English language may derive more substantial benefit.

“The metre is alliterative, and destitute of final rhyme. It is not very regular, as the author’s earnestness led him to use the fittest words rather than those which merely served the purpose of rhythm. The chief rule is that, in general, the same letter or combination of letters should beginthreestressed syllables in the same line, as, for example, in the line which may be modernized thus: ‘Of allmanner ofmen, themean and the rich.’ Sometimes there are buttwosuch rhyme-letters, as: ‘Might of the commonsmade him to reign.’ Sometimes there arefour, as: ‘In a summer season, when soft was the sun.’ There is invariably a pause, more or less distinct, in the middle of each line” (Ency. Brit., 9th ed., art.Langland).

The traditional view, accepted by such great authorities as Skeat and Jusserand, that a single author—and that author Langland—was responsible for the whole poem, in all its versions, has been so recently disputed that it seems best to state it in Skeat’s own words, before giving briefly the alternative view, which propounds a theory of composite authorship, denying any real existence to “William Langland.” The account of the single-author theory is repeated from Professor Skeat’s article in the 9th edition of this work, slightly revised by him in 1905 for this edition.

“The author’s name is not quite certain, and the facts concerning his life are few and scanty. As to his Christian name we are sure, from various allusions in the poem itself, and the titleVisio Willelmi, &c., in many MSS.; so that we may at once reject the suggestion that his name may have been Robert. In no less than three MSS. [of the C-text; one not later than 1427] occurs the following colophon: ‘Explicit visio Willelmi W. de Petro le Plowman.’ What is here meant by W. it is difficult to conjecture; but it is just possible that it may represent Wychwood (of which more presently), or Wigornensis,i.e.of Worcester. As to the surname, we find the note that ‘Robert or William Langland made pers ploughman,’ in a handwriting of the 15th century, on the fly-leaf of a MS. copy [of the B-text] formerly belonging to Lord Ashburnham, and now in the British Museum; and in a Dublin MS. [of the C-text] is the note [in a 15th-century hand]: ‘Memorandum, quod Stacy de Rokayle, pater Willielmi de Langlond, qui Stacius fuit generosus et morabatur in Schiptone-under-Whicwode, tenens domini le Spenser in comitatu Oxon., qui predictus Willielmus fecit librum qui vocatur Perys Ploughman.’ There is no trace of any Langland family in the midland counties, while the Langley family were wardens of Wychwood forest in Oxfordshire between the years 1278 and 1362; but this consideration can hardly set aside the above statement. According to Bale, our author was born at Cleobury Mortimer, which is quite consistent with the supposition that his father may have removed from that place to Shipton in Oxfordshire, as there seems to have been a real connexion between the families in those places.

“The internal evidence concerning the author is fuller and more satisfactory. By piecing together the various hints concerning himself which the poet gives us, we may compile the following account. His name was William (and probably Langland), and he was born about 1332, perhaps at Cleobury Mortimer in Shropshire. His father, who was doubtless a franklin or farmer, and his other friends put him to school, made a ‘clerk’ or scholar of him, and taught him what Holy Writ meant. In 1362, at the age of about thirty, he found himself wandering upon the Malvern hills, and fell asleep beside a stream, and saw in a vision a field full of folk,i.e.this present world, and many other remarkable sights which he duly records. From this supposed circumstance he named his poemThe Vision of William, though it is really a succession of visions, since he mentions several occasions on which he awoke, and afterwards again fell asleep; and he even tells us of some adventures which befel him in his waking moments. In some of these visions there is no mention of Piers the Plowman, but in others he describes him as being the coming reformer who was to remedy all abuses, and restore the world to a right condition. It is remarkable that his conception of this reformer changes from time to time, and becomes more exalted as the poem advances. At first he is no more than a ploughman, one of the true and honest labourers who are the salt of the earth; but at last he is identified with the great reformer who has come already, the regenerator of theworld in the person of Jesus Christ; in the author’s own phrase—’Petrus est Christus.’ If this be borne in mind, it will not be possible to make the mistake into which so many have fallen, of speaking of Piers the Plowman as being the author, not the subject, of the poem. The author once alludes to the nickname of Long Will bestowed upon him from his tallness of stature—just as the poet Gascoigne was familiarly called Long George. Though there is mention of the Malvern hills more than once near the beginning of the poem, it is abundantly clear that the poet lived for ‘many years in Cornhill (London), with his wife Kitte and his daughter Calote.’ He seems to have come to London soon after the date of the first commencement of his work, and to have long continued there. He describes himself as being a tall man, one who was loath to reverence lords or ladies or persons in gay apparel, and not deigning to say ‘God save you’ to the sergeants whom he met in the street, insomuch that many people took him to be a fool. He was very poor, wore long robes, and had a shaven crown, having received the clerical tonsure. But he seems only to have taken minor orders, and earned a precarious living by singing theplacebo,dirigeand seven psalms for the good of men’s souls. The fact that he was married may explain why he never rose in the church. But he had another source of livelihood in his ability to write out legal documents, and he was extremely familiar with the law courts at Westminster. His leisure time must have been entirely occupied with his poem, which was essentially the work of his lifetime. He was not satisfied with rewriting it once, but he actually re-wrote it twice; and from the abundance of the MSS. which still exist we can see its development from the earliest draught (A-text), written about 1362, to its latest form (C-text), written about 1393.1

“In 1399, just before the deposition of Richard II., appeared a poem addressed to the king, who is designated as ‘Richard the Redeless,’i.e.devoid of counsel. This poem, occurring in only one MS. [of the B-text] in which it is incomplete, breaking off abruptly in the middle of a page, may safely be attributed to Langland, who was then in Bristol. As he was at that time about sixty-seven years of age, we may be sure that he did not long survive the accession of Henry IV. It may here be observed that the well-known poem, entitledPierce Ploughman’s Crede, though excellently written, is certainly an imitation by another hand; for the Pierce Ploughman of theCredeis very different in conception from the subject of ‘William’s Vision.’”

On the other hand, the view taken by Professor J. M. Manly, of Chicago, which has recently obtained increasing acceptance among scholars, is that the early popularity of thePiers Plowmanpoems has resulted in “the confusion of what is really the work of five different men,” and that Langland himself is “a mythical author.” The argument for the distinction in authorship rests on internal evidence, and on analysis of the style, diction and “visualizing” quality within the different texts. Whereas Skeat, regarding the three texts as due to the same author, gives most attention to the later versions, and considers B the intermediate form, as on the whole the best, Manly recognizes in A the real poet, and lays special stress on the importance of attention to the A-text, and particularly pass. i.-viii. In this A-text the two first visions are regarded as by a single author of genius, but the third is assigned to a continuator who tried to imitate him, the whole conclusion of the 12th passus being, moreover, by a third author, whose name, John But, is in fact given towards the end, but in a way leading Skeat only to credit him with a few lines. The same process of analysis leads to crediting the B-text and the C-text to separate and different authors, B working over the three visions of the A-text and making additions of his own, while C again worked over the B-text. The supposed references to the original author A, introduced by B and C, are then to be taken as part of the fiction. Who were the five authors? That question is left unsolved. John But, according to Professor Manly, was “doubtless a scribe” or “a minstrel.” B, C and the continuator of A “seem to have been clerics, and, from their criticisms of monks and friars, to have been of the secular clergy,” C being “a better scholar than either the continuator of A or B.” A, who “exempts from his satire no order of society except monks,” may have been himself a monk, but “as he exhibits no special technical knowledge or interests” he “may have been a layman.” As regards Richard the Redeless, Professor Manly attributes this to another imitator; he regards identity of authorship as out of the question, in consequences of differences in style and thought, apart altogether from the conclusion as to the authorship ofPiers the Plowman.

See the editions already referred to:The Deposition of Richard II., ed. T. Wright (Camden Society), which is the same poem asRichard the Redeless; Warton,Hist. of Eng. Poetry; Rev. H. H. Milman,Hist. of Latin Christianity; G. P. Marsh,Lectures on English; H. Morley,English Writers; B. ten Brink,Early English Literature; J. J. Jusserand,Observations sur la vision de P. P.(Paris, 1879);Les Anglais au moyen âge: L’Épopée mystique de William Langland(1893, Eng. trans.Piers Plowman, revised and enlarged by another 1894); J. M. Manly inCambridge Hist. of English Lit., vol. ii. and bibliography. A long and careful summary of the whole poem is given in Morley’sEnglish Writers, and is repeated in hisIllustrations of English Religion, ch. iii.

1According to Jusserand, 1398.

LANGLEY, SAMUEL PIERPONT(1834-1906), American physicist and astronomer, was born at Roxbury, Boston, Massachusetts, on the 22nd of August 1834. After acting for a short time as assistant in Harvard College Observatory, he was appointed assistant professor of mathematics in the U.S. Naval Academy in 1866, and in the following year became director of the Allegheny Observatory at Pittsburg, a position which he held until his selection in 1887 as secretary of the Smithsonian Institution at Washington. His name is especially associated with two main branches of investigation—aeronautics, and the exploration of the infra-red portions of the solar spectrum. The study of the latter he took up as a result of the publication in 1871 of an energy-curve of the spectrum by S. I. Lamansky. The imperfections of the thermopile, with which he began his work, led him, about 1880, to the invention of the bolometer, an instrument of extraordinary delicacy, which in its most refined form is believed to be capable of detecting a change of temperature amounting to less than one-hundred-millionth of a degree Centigrade. Depending on the fact that the electrical conductivity of a metallic conductor is decreased by heat, it consists of two strips of platinum, arranged to form the two arms of a Wheatstone bridge; one strip being exposed to a source of radiation from which the other is shielded, the heat causes a change in the resistance of one arm, the balance of the bridge is destroyed, and a deflection is marked on the galvanometer. The platinum strips are exceedingly minute, being in some cases only1⁄250in. in width, and less than one-tenth of that amount in thickness. By the aid of this instrument, Langley, working on Mount Whitney, 12,000 ft. above sea-level, discovered in 1881 an entirely unsuspected extension of the invisible infra-red rays, which he called the “new spectrum.” The importance of his achievement may be judged from the fact that, while the visible spectrum includes rays having wave-lengths of from about 0.4 μ to 0.76 μ, and no invisible heat-rays were known before 1881 having a wave-length greater than 1.8 μ, he detected rays having a wave-length of 5.3 μ. In addition, taking advantage of the accuracy with which the bolometer can determine the position of a source of heat by which it is affected, he mapped out in this infra-red spectrum over 700 dark lines or bands resembling the Fraunhofer lines of the visible spectrum, with a probable accuracy equal to that of refined astronomical observations. In aeronautics he succeeded in demonstrating the practicability of mechanical flight. He first undertook a preliminary inquiry into the principles upon which flight depends, and established at Allegheny a huge “whirling table,” the revolving arm of which could be driven by a steam-engine at any circumferential speed up to 70 m. an hour. The construction of a flying machine was next attempted. The first difficulty was to make it sufficiently light in relation to the power its machinery could develop; and several machines were built in which trials were made of steam, and of compressed air and carbonic acid gas as motive agents. About 1893 asatisfactory machine was ready, and a new series of troubles had to be faced, for it had to be launched at a certain initial speed, and in the face of any wind that might be blowing. To enable these conditions to be fulfilled, as well as to ensure that the machine, when it fell, should fall on water, the experiments were carried out on the Potomac river, some 30 m. below Washington. It was not till the autumn of 1894 that an efficient launching apparatus was devised, and then the wings were found not to be strong enough to bear the pressures to which they were subjected. Various other delays and mishaps followed, but ultimately, on the 6th of May 1896, a successful flight was made. On that day an aerodrome, weighing about 30 ℔ and about 16 ft. in length, with wings measuring between 12 and 13 ft. from tip to tip, twice sustained itself in the air for 1½ minutes (the full time for which it was supplied with fuel and water), and traversed on each occasion a distance of over half a mile, falling gently into the water when the engines stopped. Later in the same year, on the 28th of November, a similar aerodrome flew about three-quarters of a mile, attaining a speed of 30 m. an hour. In 1903 he experimented with an aerodrome capable of carrying a man, but repeated accidents prevented it from being launched, and finally through lack of funds the experiments had to be abandoned without the machine ever having been free in the air (see alsoFlight And Flying). Langley died on the 27th of February 1906.

LANGLOIS, HIPPOLYTE(1839- ), French general, was born at Besançon in 1839, and, after passing through the École Polytechnique, was appointed to the artillery as sub-lieutenant in 1858, attaining the rank of captain in 1866. He served in the army of Metz in the war of 1870. Eight years later he became major, in 1887 lieutenant-colonel and in 1888 colonel. At this time he was appointed professor of artillery at the École de Guerre, and in this post he devoted himself to working out the tactical principles of the employment of field artillery under the new conditions of armament of which he foresaw the advent. The public result of his work was the great treatiseL’Artillerie de campagne(1891-1892), which may still be regarded as the classic of the arm. In 1894 he became general of brigade, and in 1898 general of division. For two years after this he was the commandant of the École de Guerre at the time that the modern French strategical and tactical “doctrine” was being developed and taught. He was, however, regarded as a leader as well as a theorist, and in 1901 he was selected to command the XX. Army Corps on the German frontier, popularly called the “iron” corps. In 1902 he became a member of the Conseil supérieur de la Guerre, consisting of senior generals marked out for the higher commands in war. He retired from the active list in 1904 on reaching the age limit, and devoted himself with the greatest energy to critical military literature. In 1907 he began the publication of a monthly journal of military art and history, theRevue militaire générale. The most important of his other works areEnseignements de deux guerres recentesandConséquences tactiques du progrès de l’armement.

LANGPORT, a market town in the eastern parliamentary division of Somersetshire, England, 13½ m. E. of Taunton by the Great Western railway. Pop. (1901) 890. It lies on the right (east) bank of the river Parret, near the point where that river debouches from the hills on to the plain through which it flows to the Bristol Channel. The main street leads up a slope from the river to the fine Perpendicular church of All Saints. Close to this an archway crosses the road, bearing a Perpendicular building known as the hanging chapel. After serving this purpose it housed first the grammar-school (founded 1675), then the Quekett museum, named after John Thomas Quekett (1815-1861) the histologist, a native of the town, whose father was master of the school. The hanging chapel afterwards became a masonic hall. Not far distant is the church of Huish Episcopi, with one of the finest of the Perpendicular towers for which Somersetshire is noted. Langport has a considerable general and agricultural trade.

Langport (Llongborth,Langeberga,Langeport) owed its origin to its defensible position on a hill, and its growth to its facilities for trade on the chief river of Somerset. It occupies the site of the British town of Llongborth, and was important during the Roman occupation. It was a royal borough in Saxon times, and in 1086 had 34 resident burgesses. The first charter, given by Elizabeth in 1562, recognized that Langport was a borough of great antiquity, which had enjoyed considerable privileges, being governed by a portreve. It was incorporated by James I. in 1617, but the corporation was abolished in 1883. Langport was represented in parliament in 1304 and 1306. The charter of 1562 granted three annual fairs to Langport, on the 28th of June, the 11th of November and the second Monday in Lent. One fair only is now held, on the 3rd of September, which is a horse and cattle fair. A Saturday market was held under the grant of 1562, but in the 19th century the market day was changed to Tuesday.

LANGREO, a town of northern Spain, in the province of Oviedo, in very hilly country, on the left bank of the river Nalon, and on a branch railway from Oviedo to Labiana. Pop. (1900) 18,714. In the neighbourhood large quantities of wheat, hemp, fruit and cider are produced; and there are important coal and iron mines, foundries, and factories for the manufacture of coarse cloth.

LANGRES, a town of eastern France, capital of an arrondissement in the department of Haute-Marne, 22 m. S.S.E. of Chaumont on the eastern railway to Belfort. Pop. (1906) town, 6663; commune, 9803. Langres stands at a height of some 1550 ft. on a jutting promontory of the tableland known as the plateau de Langres, and overlooks eastward and westward respectively the valleys of the Marne and its tributary the Bonnelle. From the cathedral tower and the ramparts which surround the town there is an extensive view over the valley of the Marne, the Vosges and the Côte d’Or, and in clear weather Mt Blanc (160 m. distant) is visible. The cathedral of St Mammès, for the most part in the Transitional style of the 12th century, has a west front in the Graeco-Roman style of the 18th century and a fine Renaissance chapel. The church of St Martin (13th, 15th and 18th centuries) possesses a figure of Christ of the 16th century, one of the finest wood carvings known. The ramparts are protected by several towers, most of which date from the 16th century. The Gallo-Roman gate, one of four entrances in the Roman period, is preserved, but is walled up. The Porte des Moulins (17th century) is the most interesting of the other gates. The town possesses a museum rich in Gallo-Roman antiquities, a picture gallery and an important library. The birth of Denis Diderot here is commemorated by a statue. Langres is the seat of a bishop and a sub-prefect, and has tribunals of first instance and of commerce, a higher ecclesiastical seminary and communal colleges for both sexes. It manufactures well-known cutlery and grind-stones. Trade is in grain and other farm-produce, live stock, wine, &c.

Langres, the ancientAndematunum, was capital of theLingones. Under Roman rule it was at first to some extent autonomous, but was reduced to the rank of colony after the revolt of the chief Sabinus inA.D.71. The bishopric was founded about 200 and in the middle ages its holders became peers of the realm and enjoyed the temporal power in the town. In 301 the Alemanni were defeated at Langres by the Romans, but in the next century it was burnt by the Vandals and by Attila.

The “plateau of Langres” appears frequently in the military history of the 18th and 19th centuries as a dominant strategic point, though its importance as such has appealed chiefly to the advocates of wars of positions and passive defence. The modern fortifications of Langres, which serves as a second line fortress, consist of (a) Fort St Menge or Ligniville on high ground above the confluence of the Marne and the Neuilly brook, about 5 m. N. by W. of the town; (b) the west front, comprising Humes battery (2¼ m. N.W. of Langres), Fort de la Pointe de Diamant, and the redoubts of Perrancey, Le Fays and Noidant (the last 4 m. S.W. of the town), overlooking the deep valley of the Mouche brook (this front was attacked in the mock siege of August 1907); (c) the south front, comprising Fort de la Bonnelle or Décrès (2 m. S.S.W. of the town), a small work commanding the Chalon-Langres road, Le Mont and Le Pailly batteries, Fort Vercingetorix, the last, 5 m. S.W. of the place, standing on a steep and narrow spur of the main plateau, and in second line the old fort de la Marnotte, and the large bastioned citadel (the town enceinte is “déclassée”); (d) the east front, marked by Forts Montlandon and Plesnoy at the north and south ends respectively of a long steep ridge, 6 m. E. of Langres, the bridges over the Marne leading to these works being commanded by Fort Peigney,a work about half a mile east of the town; (e) Fort Dampierre, 8 m. N.E. of the town, which commands all the main approaches from the north, and completes the circle by crossing its fire with that of Fort St Menge.

LANGTOFT, PETER(d.c.1307), English chronicler, took his name from the village of Langtoft in Yorkshire, and was a canon of the Augustinian priory in Bridlington. His name is also given as Langetoft and Langetost. He wrote in French verse aChronicledealing with the history of England from the earliest times to the death of Edward I. in 1307. It consists of three parts and contains about 9000 rhyming verses. The earlier part of theChronicleis taken from Geoffrey of Monmouth and other writers; for the period dealing with the reign of Edward I. Langtoft is a contemporary and valuable authority, especially for affairs in the north of England and in Scotland. Langtoft’sChronicleseems to have enjoyed considerable popularity in the north, and the latter part of it was translated into English by Robert Mannyng, sometimes called Robert of Brunne, about 1330. It has been edited for the Rolls Series by T. Wright (1866-1868).

See Wright’s preface, and also O. Preussner,Robert Mannyng of Brunne’s Übersetzung von Pierre de Langtofts Chronicle und ihr Verhältniss zum Originale(Breslau, 1891).

LANGTON, JOHN(d. 1337), chancellor of England and bishop of Chichester, was a clerk in the royal chancery, and became chancellor in 1292. He obtained several ecclesiastical appointments, but owing to the resistance of Pope Boniface VIII. he failed to secure the bishopric of Ely in 1298, although he was supported by Edward I. and visited Rome to attain his end. Resigning his office as chancellor in 1302, he was chosen bishop of Chichester in 1305, and again became chancellor shortly after the accession of Edward II. in 1307. Langton was one of the “ordainers” elected in 1310, and it was probably his connexion with this body that led to his losing the office of chancellor about this time. He continued, however, to take part in public affairs; mediating between the king and Earl Thomas of Lancaster in 1318, and attempting to do so between Edward and his rebellious barons in 1321. He died in June or July 1337. Langton built the chapterhouse at Chichester, and was a benefactor of the university of Oxford.

LANGTON, STEPHEN(d. 1228), cardinal and archbishop of Canterbury, was the son of English parents; but the date and place of his birth are unknown. Since he became early in his career a prebendary of York, and since his brother Simon (d. 1248) was elected1to that see in 1215, we may suppose the family to have been of northern extraction. Stephen, however, migrated to Paris, and having graduated in that university became one of its most celebrated theologians. This was probably the time when he composed his voluminous commentaries (many of which still exist in manuscript) and divided the Bible into chapters. At Paris also he contracted the friendship with Lothar of Segni, the future Innocent III., which played so important a part in shaping his career. Upon becoming pope, Innocent summoned Langton to Rome, and in 1206 designated him as cardinal-priest of S. Chrysogonus. Immediately afterwards Langton was drawn into the vortex of English politics.

Archbishop Hubert Walter had died in 1205, and the election of his successor had raised thorny questions. The suffragans of Canterbury claimed a share in choosing the new primate, although that right had been exclusively reserved to the monks of Canterbury by a papal privilege; and John supported the bishops since they were prepared to give their votes for his candidate, John de Gray, bishop of Norwich. A party of the younger monks, to evade the double pressure of the king and bishops, secretly elected their sub-prior Reginald and sent him to Rome for confirmation. The plot leaked out; the rest of the monks were induced to elect John de Gray, and he too was despatched to Rome. After hearing the case Innocent declared both elections void; and with John’s consent ordered that a new election should be made in his presence by the representatives of the monks. The latter, having confessed that they had given John a secret pledge to elect none but the bishop of Norwich, were released from the promise by Innocent; and at his suggestion elected Stephen Langton, who was consecrated by the pope on the 17th of June 1207. On hearing the news the king banished the monks of Canterbury and lodged a protest with the pope, in which he threatened to prevent any English appeals from being brought to Rome. Innocent replied by laying England under an interdict (March 1208), and excommunicating the king (November 1209). As John still remained obstinate, the pope at length invited the French king Philip Augustus to enter England and depose him. It was this threat which forced John to sue for a reconciliation; and the first condition exacted was that he should acknowledge Langton as archbishop. During these years Langton had been residing at Pontigny, formerly the refuge of Becket. He had addressed to the English people a dignified protest against the king’s conduct, and had at last pressed the pope to take extreme measures. But he had consistently adopted towards John as conciliatory an attitude as his duty to the church would allow, and had more than once entered upon negotiations for a peaceful compromise. Immediately after entering England (July 1213) he showed his desire for peace by absolving the king. But, unlike the pope, he gave ear to the popular cry for redress of political grievances; and persisted in associating with the baronial opposition, even after he was ordered by Innocent to excommunicate them as disturbers of the peace. Langton encouraged the barons to formulate their demands, and is said to have suggested that they should take their stand upon the charter of Henry I. It is uncertain what further share he took in drafting Magna Carta. At Runnymede he appeared as a commissioner on the king’s side, and his influence must therefore be sought in those clauses of the Charter which differ from the original petitions of the barons. Of these the most striking is that which confirms the “liberties” of the church; and this is chiefly remarkable for its moderation.

Soon after the issue of the charter the archbishop left England to attend the Fourth Lateran Council. At the moment of his departure he was suspended by the representatives of Innocent for not enforcing the papal censures against the barons. Innocent confirmed the sentence, which remained in force for two years. During this time the archbishop resided at Rome. He was allowed to return in 1218, after the deaths of Innocent and John. From that date till his death he was a tower of strength to the royal party. Through his influence Pandulf was recalled to Rome (1221) and Honorius III. promised that no legate should be sent to reside in England during the archbishop’s lifetime. In 1222, in a synod held at Oseney, he promulgated a set of Constitutions still recognized as forming a part of the law of the English Church. Beyond this little is recorded of his latter years. He died on the 9th of July 1228, and was buried in Canterbury Cathedral, where his tomb, unless tradition errs, may still be seen.

The authorities are mainly those for the reign of John. No contemporary biography has come down to us. Some letters, by Langton and others, relating to the quarrel over his election are preserved in a Canterbury Chronicle (ed. W. Stubbs in the “Rolls” edition ofGervase of Canterbury, vol. ii.). There are many references to him in the correspondence of Innocent III. (Migne’sPatrologia Latina, vols. ccxiv.-ccxvii.). Of modern works see F. Hurter,Geschichte Papst Innocenz III.(Hamburg, 1841-1844); W. F. Hook,Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury(London, 1860-1876), and W. Stubbs’s preface to the second volume ofWalter of Coventry(“Rolls” ed.), which devotes special attention to Langton. The MSS. of Langton’s writings are noticed in J. Bale’sIndex Britanniae scriptorum(ed. R. L. Poole, 1902); his Constitutions are printed in D. Wilkin’sConcilia, vol. ii. (London, 1737).(H. W. C. D.)Another English prelate who bore the name of Langton wasThomas Langton, bishop of Winchester, chaplain to Edward IV. In 1483 he was chosen bishop of St Davids; in 1485 he was made bishop of Salisbury and provost of Queen’s College, Oxford, and he became bishop of Winchester in 1493. In 1501 he was elected archbishop of Canterbury, but he died on the 27th of January 1501, before his election had been confirmed.

(H. W. C. D.)

Another English prelate who bore the name of Langton wasThomas Langton, bishop of Winchester, chaplain to Edward IV. In 1483 he was chosen bishop of St Davids; in 1485 he was made bishop of Salisbury and provost of Queen’s College, Oxford, and he became bishop of Winchester in 1493. In 1501 he was elected archbishop of Canterbury, but he died on the 27th of January 1501, before his election had been confirmed.

1Pope Innocent, however, would not confirm this election, and the disappointed candidate threw himself into the contest between the English barons on the one side and King John and the pope on the other. Later Simon made peace with Henry III. and was appointed archdeacon of Canterbury; he was consulted by Pope Gregory IX. and was sent to France on diplomatic business by Henry III.

Back to Index Next