It was a winter night, and the ground around Paris was covered with snow, although the flakes had ceased to fall since some hours.?Spite of the cold and the darkness, a young man, wrapped in a mantle so voluminous as to hide a babe in his arms, strode over the white fields out of the town of Villers Cotterets, in the woods, eighteen leagues from the capital, which he had reached by the stage-coach, towards a hamlet called Haramont. His assured step seemed to indicate that he had previously gone this road.?Soon above him streaked the leafless boughs upon the grey sky. The sharp air, the odor of the oaks, the icicles and beads on the tips of branches, all appealed to the poetry in the wanderer.??Through the clumps he looked for the village spire and the blue smoke of the chimneys, filtering from the cottages through the natural trellis of the limbs.?It was dawn when he crossed a brook, bordered with yellow cress and frozen vines, and at the first hovel asked for the laborer's boy to take him to Madeline Pi-tou's home.??Mute and attentive, not so dull as most of their kind, the children sprang up and staring at the stranger, led him by the hand to a rather large and good-looking cottage, on the bank of the rivulet running by most of the dwellings.?A plank served as a bridge.?"There," said one of the guides nodding his head to-wards it.?Gilbert gave them a coin, which made their eyes open still more widely, and crossed the board to the door which he pushed open, while the children, taking one another's hand, started with all their might at the handsome gentleman in a brown cloth coat, buckled shoes and large cloak, who wanted to find Madeline Pitou.?Apart from them, Gilbert, for such was the young man's name, simply so for he had no other, saw no liv-ing things: Haramont was the deserted village he was seeking.??As soon as the door was open, his sight was struck by a scene full of charm, for almost anybody, and par-ticularly for a young philosopher like our roamer.?A robust peasant woman was suckling a baby, while another child, a sturdy boy of four or five, was saying a prayer in a loud voice.?In the chimney corner, near a window or rather a hole in the wall in which was stuck a pane of glass, an-other woman, going on for thirty-five or six, was spin-ning, with a stool under her feet, and a fat poodle on an end of this stool.?Catching sight of the visitor the dog barked in a civil and hospitable manner just to show that he had not been caught napping. The praying boy turned, cutting the devotional phrase in two, and both females uttered an exclamation between joy and surprise.?"I greet you, good mother Madeline," said Gilbert with a smile.

Cea dinti monografie care ofer o imagine cuprinztoare asupra receptrii literaturii romne n Cehia, cartea de fa este o incursiune n diversele etape ale totalitarismului comunist: stalinismul integral, perioada dezgheului, anii aizeci (cu transformrile din jurul Primverii de la Praga), urmai de perioada de normalizare care se ntinde pn la momentul Revoluiei de Catifea. Ineditul acestei lucrri este dat i de explorarea manifestrii unor opere i a unor personaliti literare romneti (precum Mircea Eliade, Constantin Virgil Gheorghiu sau Petru Dumitriu) n zona literar ceh prohibit din anii supui studiului, mai precis n publicaiile din exil i n revistele de tip samizdat. Cititorului i este oferit un tablou amplu asupra autorilor romni receptai cu predilecie de ctre cehi sub comunism i asupra tendinelor manifestate de romnitii cehi (coloana vertebral a procesului receptrii), de criticii literari i de recenzeni. Cartea definete o epoc n istoria raporturilor culturale dintre romni i cehi, dou popoare legate de un trecut adeseori comun i de o prietenie sincer.“ – Profesor dr. Mihai Mitu

i corbul, croncnind, a rguit, Vestind c sorii fost au aruncai! Venii! Venii! Voi, duhuri, ce vegheai Pe gndurile morii, crunta zee! i m nvai s nu mai fiu femeie! M umplei, de la cretet pn’ la tlpi Cu o rutate nenduplecat! The raven himself is hoarse That croaks the fatal entrance of Duncan Under my battlements. Come, you spirits That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here, And fill me from the crown to the toe top full Of direst cruelty!

O nuan autobiografic, perfect ntemeiat, irizeaz concepia lui Breban de la acest nivel, miza mare a ideii fiind aceea de a demonstra – ceea ce romancierul a mai fcut… – c generaia din care face el nsui parte (Nichita Stnescu, Matei Clinescu etc.) a transformat literatura ntr-un asemenea mediu germinativ de excelene, prin intermediul promovrii esteticului ca replic alternativ sublim la grotescul ideologic din jur. Trebuie s recunoatem c Breban rmne seniorial i impecabil de fiecare dat cnd enun aceast dihotomie: de pild, nu trebuie uitat faptul c Istoria dramatic a prezentului s-a zamislit cnd mpotriva autorului se trgea cu tunul, pe motivul orchestratei acuze de colaborare cu Securitatea. Nici un raspuns n volum, nimic insidios, revanard sau resentimentar: doar idei i fapte, nu psihologie. Jos plria!“ (tefan Borbély)Numai cultura, carevaszica, ne poate lecui de aceast nesiguran identitar i numai ea poate nnobila istoria noastr de care, s-a putut constata, prozatorul maramureean nu-i mulumit… Face i alte profeii, atunci cnd n capitolul final vorbete despre specificul naional, dar despre toate acestea vom putea discuta cu alt prilej. Este o tem pe care noi, romnii, o aducem mereu n discuie fie pentru a o sataniza, fie pentru a o apra. Observ c N. Breban n-o respinge, de plano, cum fac globalitii, nici n-o smintete cu un discurs encomiastic, cum fac localitii. El procedeaz corect, aa cum procedeaz orice intelectual lucid i responsabil, adic analizeaz un concept (un concept esenial) i ncearc s-i vad viitorul… Este trist, i are de ce, cnd se gndete la lumea politic de azi i la retorica resentimentului i a rzbunrii care domin lumea intelectual… S mai spun c are i n acest caz dreptate, c dup douzeci de ani de libertate intelectualii romni, cu precdere scriitorii (ei, care s-au inut bine sub regimul totalitar), se detest cu o grea sinceritate mi amintesc de o propoziie din Eminescu (reproduc din memorie): Nu eti liber, dac nu eti drept. Se poate spune i invers: Nu eti drept, dac nu eti liber. Liber, n cazul oamenilor de litere, de prejudeci, de complexe i idiosincrazii, de eecurile i vexaiunile pe care i le-a provocat istoria i pe care spiritul nu poate s le stpneasc.“ (Eugen Simion)

Lucrarea aduce in dezbaterile istoricilor si economistilor evolutia economica si politica a Romaniei in perioada 1859-1900, marcand o contributie insemnata in acest domeniu destul de putin studiat, analizat si dezbatut.Tema centrala a lucrarii o constituie necesitatea crearii unei industrii romanesti inca de la inceputul secolului al XIX-lea, pledand in favoarea protectionismului, a independentei capitalurilor si a mainii de lucru calificata.De asemenea, autorul analizeaza dezbaterile care au avut loc in epoca pe tema industrializarii si protectionismului intre cele doua partide mari existente in a doua jumatate a secolului XIX: Conservator si Liberal, precum si cele dintre economistii de conceptie din acea vreme: D.P. Martian, I. Ghica, Ionica Tautu, P.S. Aurelian.

The work represents a synthesis published and printed in two volumes (the 1st volume in 2002, the second one, in 2004) under the aegis of Mica Valahie Publishing House in Bucharest. Being elaborated on the basis of some documents discovered in the Romanian and foreign archives, the two volumes cover the period up to 1929 in the first volume and the period from 1929 to 2005 in the second one. The paper reveals the role and place of Romanian oil in the evolution of the national and worldwide history, especially during the World War between 1939 and 1945 and in the development of the so-called “cold war”. The book insists upon the prospects of the specific “black gold” evolution.In the addendum there are to be found some interesting documents and the complete bibliography of oil.

Fire?te c?, de la schimbarea de paradigm? numit? apari?ia genurilor rock ?i folk (precedate de jazz, dar mai cu seam? de blues... ?i ?n m?sur? cov?r?itoare de explozia beat!), ?n Rom?nia comunist? (?ncerc?nd mereu s? fie sincron? cu voga occidental?), lucrurile n-au fost tocmai roz. Unii chiar se bat ?n piept c? de la ei ?ncoace se poate vorbi de...; al?ii (implica?i direct) sunt sc?rbi?i de ceea ce se ?nt?mpl?, mai cu seam? ?n lipsa unei istorii oficiale ?i documentate, ?i ??i v?d de treab?. ?n era net/Wikipedia, oricine se poate da ?n stamb?, se poate lua la tr?nt? (sub pav?za anonimatului, implicit a nesim?irii) cu orice; cum anticipa parc? Andy Warhol, a venit vremea ?n care oricine va fi fost vedet? 15 minute.Dar au existat ?i vedete reale, grei ai genurilor a?a-zis u?oare, mon?tri sacri! Celor acum ?n umbr? (cite?te underground) le este dedicat acest volum. M?rturii orale puse cap la cap despre aceia care au trecut ?i – iat? – se ?ntorc ?n Clubul Arhitecturii. Dac? un Cenaclu ?Flac?ra“, la ?nceput genial ?n scopuri, a fost mai apoi r?st?lm?cit ideologic ?i impus aproape cu for?a p?n? la implozie, clubul – recte pivni?a – din strada Bl?nari nr. 14 a rezistat peste decenii intrinsec; pe temelia solidificat? de la o zi la alta, de la un artist la altul, de la o bere la alta... Din student ?n student (dar nu numai prin ei), ?tafeta a tot fost preluat? de genera?iile care s-au perindat, iar ast?zi ne-am trezit cu o ?ntreag? istorie care apas? pe funda?iile cl?dirii vechi..., dar f?r? bulin? ro?ie! Nu, Club A nu va c?dea, a?a cum va exista ?n continuare ?i Casa Studen?ilor din Bucure?ti (ca ?i cele din Timi?oara, Ia?i, Cluj...), ?i Radioul, ?i Televiziunea, ?i Electrecordul...Din cuprins: Amintiri ? Clubul de pariuri muzicale sau Cu... v?nt ?nainte... din pupa! ? A fost o dat?... din 1969 ? Primul Festival Na?ional de Muzic? Pop ?Club A“ (16–22 decembrie 1969) ? Ro?u ?i Negru ? Romanticii ? Chromatic Grup ? Sideral (Modal Quartet) ? Olympic ‘64 ? Phoenix ? Coral... ?i Adrian Ivani?chi ? Al doilea Festival Na?ional de Muzic? Pop ?Club A“ (10–17 mai 1971) ? Modern Grup ? Metronom ? Mondial ? Timi?oara, la vest de Rom?nia ? Carusel ? Post-scriptum la al doilea festival ? Folk ?n Club A ? Mihai Munteanu ?Michone“ ? Dorin Liviu Zaharia ?Chubby“ ? Mircea ?Ciocu“ Vintil? ? Florian ?Mo?u“ Pitti? ? Doru St?nculescu ? Sorin Minghiat ? Dan Oprina ?i Mircea Valeriu Popa ? Nicu Vladimir ? Marcela Saftiuc ? Adriana Ausch ? Anda C?lug?reanu ? Zoia Alecu ? Catena ? FFN ? Valeriu Sterian (?i Compania de Sunet) ? Mircea Bodolan ? Curtea Veche nr. 43 ? Al treilea Festival ?Club A“ (5–8 iunie 1979) ? Metropol ? Academica ? Experimental Q ? Modal Q ? Mircea Florian (din Transilvania) ? Al patrulea Festival ?Club A“ (16–19 martie 1981) ? Dan Andrei Aldea ?i Sfinx ? Pro Musica ? Accent ? Redivivus ? Basorelief ? Gramophon/Post Scriptum ?i... Mircea Baniciu ? Semnal M ? Sorin Chifiriuc ?i Domino/Roata ? Grup ‘74 ? Club A – 15 ani (12–17 martie 1984) ? Nicu Alifantis ? Iris ? Liviu Tudan & Ro?u ?i Negru ? Al cincilea Festival ?Club A“ (28 februarie–1 martie 1990) ? Compact ? Holograf ? Celelalte Cuvinte ? Gala ?Club A – 30 de ani“ (18 iunie 1999)?/ ?Club A – 34 de ani“ (4 iunie 2003) ? Sfinx (Experience) ? Alexandru Andrie? ? Cargo ? Timpuri Noi ? Sfatul ?b?tr?nilor“ ? Al ?aptelea Festival ?Club A“ (13–18 mai 2011) ? Imagini ?necenzurate“

Hard Times – For These Times (commonly known as "Hard Times") is the tenth novel by Charles Dickens, first published in 1854. The book appraises English society and highlights the social and economic pressures of the times. Hard Times is unusual in several respects. It is by far the shortest of Dickens' novels, barely a quarter of the length of those written immediately before and after it. Also, unlike all but one of his other novels, Hard Times has neither a preface nor illustrations. Moreover, it is his only novel not to have scenes set in London. Instead the story is set in the fictitious Victorian industrial Coketown, a generic Northern English mill-town, in some ways similar to Manchester, though smaller. Coketown may be partially based on 19th-century Preston. One of Dickens's reasons for writing Hard Times was that sales of his weekly periodical, Household Words, were low, and it was hoped the novel's publication in instalments would boost circulation – as indeed proved to be the case. Since publication it has received a mixed response from critics. Critics such as George Bernard Shaw and Thomas Macaulay have mainly focused on Dickens's treatment of trade unions and his post–Industrial Revolution pessimism regarding the divide between capitalist mill owners and undervalued workers during the Victorian era. F. R. Leavis, a great admirer of the book, included it—but not Dickens' work as a whole—as part of his Great Tradition of English novels. ***‘Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children, and this is the principle on which I bring up these children. Stick to Facts, sir!’ ? ?The scene was a plain, bare, monotonous vault of a school-room, and the speaker’s square forefinger emphasized his observations by underscoring every sentence with a line on the schoolmaster’s sleeve. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s square wall of a forehead, which had his eyebrows for its base, while his eyes found commodious cellarage in two dark caves, overshadowed by the wall. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s mouth, which was wide, thin, and hard set. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s voice, which was inflexible, dry, and dictatorial. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s hair, which bristled on the skirts of his bald head, a plantation of firs to keep the wind from its shining surface, all covered with knobs, like the crust of a plum pie, as if the head had scarcely warehouse-room for the hard facts stored inside. The speaker’s obstinate carriage, square coat, square legs, square shoulders,—nay, his very neckcloth, trained to take him by the throat with an unaccommodating grasp, like a stubborn fact, as it was,—all helped the emphasis. ‘In this life, we want nothing but Facts, sir; nothing but Facts!’The speaker, and the schoolmaster, and the third grown person present, all backed a little, and swept with their eyes the inclined plane of little vessels then and there arranged in order, ready to have imperial gallons of facts poured into them until they were full to the brim.

1920-ban a magyar t?rténelem egyik legsúlyosabb krízise érkezett el. Nem csupán a t?rténelmi Magyarország és hagyományos vezet? rétegei találtattak k?nny?nek: 1918 és 1919 forradalmaival együtt elbuktak a radikális reformokat szorgalmazó baloldali pártok is. K?zel hat év háborús pusztítás után gazdasági, szociális, külpolitikai és m?vel?dési problémák sokasága halmozódott fel. Ekkor született meg a fiatal értelmiség reform iránt elk?telezett részéb?l a magyar népi mozgalom. Az ? t?rténetükr?l szól ez a k?nyv. A magyar népi mozgalomról meglep?en keveset tud a jelenkor emlékezete, és ismereteink jó része is leginkább félreértésekb?l és el?ítéletekb?l táplálkozik. A népi mozgalom elitjéhez tartozók – Németh Lászlótól és Illyés Gyulától kezdve Veres Péteren és Kovács Imrén át egészen Bibó Istvánig – megpróbáltak választ találni a Trianon utáni Magyarország legéget?bb kérdéseire, méghozzá nem a hagyományos ideológiák mentén, hanem egy általuk ?harmadik útnak” nevezett eszmeiség jegyében. Papp István k?tete – amely harminc év óta az els? modern szemlélet? ?sszefoglalása a témának – els?sorban azt kívánja bemutatni, hogyan és miért született meg a népi mozgalom, illetve hogy legfontosabb tagjai milyen elgondolásokat fogalmaztak meg, és milyen reformokat láttak szükségesnek 1945 el?tt és után.

Milyen lenyomatot hagyott bennünk 1956? T?rténelem alulnézetb?l, avagy családi emlékek, személyes t?rténetek az ominózus ?szr?l, ami után minden más lett. Hogyan lesz egy 17 éves gyárimunkás fiúból néhány nap leforgása alatt forradalmár? Mi t?rtént Erdélyben 56-ban? Mikor eszmél rá a hatéves kislány, hogy a nagyapja Magyarország legfontosabb embere? Hogyan él tovább az, akinek a menyasszonya ?r?kre elhagyta az országot? Hogyan válik a távoli kultúrából érkez? idegen október 23. szellemiségét átérz? emberré? Ilyen és ezekhez hasonló kérdésekre válaszol t?bbek k?z?tt Horgas Eszter, Varga Miklós, Kiss Zoltán Zéro, Tordai Teri, Vámos Miklós, Bornai Tibor és sokan mások. A kül?n?s, szívszorító vagy kalandos emlékekb?l megismerhetjük az ezerarcú forradalom néhány emberi mozzanatát. Naszvadi Judith családi érintettsége okán is kezdte el feltenni a kérdéseket el?bb sz?kebb, majd tágabb k?rnyezetében. A 60. évfordulóra így, ezekb?l az interjúkból állt ?ssze A mi '56-unk.

A sorozat és ami m?g?tte van I. Szulejmán szultán 1494-ben született, és 1566-ban Szigetvár alatt vesztette életét. 1520-tól haláláig az Oszmán Birodalom ikonikus uralkodójaként hódított. A magyar t?rténelmet ismer?k biztosan nem rajongtak érte soha. Miután 2013-ban az egyik kereskedelmi csatorna megvásárolta az életér?l szóló Szulejmán cím? sorozatot, a szultán negatív megítélése sokat változott. A néz?k megkedvelték a Halit Ergen? által alakított Fényességest. A sorozatban ábrázolt t?rténelmi események, személyek azonban nem minden esetben egyeznek a valósággal. Ezt az alkotók is megjegyzik: a m? t?rténelmi ihletés? - ami nem azonos a t?rténelmi h?séggel. R. Kelényi Angelika tisztázza a valós t?rténelmi eseményeket. ?sszegy?jt?tt érdekességeken keresztül oszlatja el a félreértéseket, mik?zben szórakoztatja az olvasót.

E tündérjátékról úgy tartják, egy f?úri esküv? alkalmából íródott. Err?l szól maga a darab is, a szerelemr?l, a házasságról, a szenvedélyr?l, az akadályok legy?zésér?l. A Szentivánéj egyetlen hatalmas nászéjszaka. Puck, a csúfondáros apród, aki miatt kit?r a háborúság a tündérkirály és tündérkirályn? k?z?tt, minden kerget?z?, egymást ?z? szerelmesnek jelképe lehet, akik szüntelen váltakozásban gerjednek egyért s taszítják el a másikat. Mintha a való életben is Puck gonosz varázslatára fordulna meg minden, majd jótékony varázslatára az éj végére valahogy mégis ?sszerendez?djék. Tündéri álomvilág cívódással, féltéssel, ellenállhatatlan vágyakkal.

William Shakespeare egyik legnagyobb m?ve a Macbeth, a hatalomvágytól megszállott gyenge ember drámája. Macbethnek egyszer azt j?vend?lik, hogy király lesz. Felesége ?szt?nzésére és segítségével, hogy beteljesedjék a jóslat, álmában meg?lik a náluk vendégesked? királyt. Tettüket a leitatott ?r?kre fogják, akiknek nincs is idejük tiltakozásra a hamis vád ellen, mert Macbeth sz?rny? ?felindultságában” meg?li ?ket. A hatalmat, a rangot azonban nem tudják élvezni…

Az álomszer?en meseszép hangulat hirtelen féltékenységi dührohammá változik, rémálommá: a szicíliai király barátját, Polixenést és feleségét (Hermione) házasságt?réssel vádolva küldi a halálba, el?bbi csupán Camillo h?ségének k?sz?nhet?en menekülhet el. Apollo jóslata sem tudja meggy?zni Leontest képzetei hamisságáról, csupán a sz?rny? látvány – szerettei holtteste – ébreszti fel zavaros állapotából. Már kés?, egyetlen utódját, a fattyúnak vélt csecsem?t távoli partokon hagyta sorsára. A t?rténetbe sok év múltán kapcsolódunk bele újra, Perdita – a csecsem?, akit megtalált fiával együtt (Mufurc) nevelt egy pásztor – felcseperedett, és mindenkit elámít vélt származását meghazudtoló szépsége, nemessége. Florizel királyfi beleszeret, és elhagyja érte apja, Polixenes királyi udvarát. A király, a h? Camillóval együtt, álruhában meglesi a pásztorok ünnepét, és haraggal veszi tudomásul fia vonzódását egy egyszer? pásztorlány iránt. Camillo, aki ráj?n Perdita kilétére, a fiatalokat Szicíliába küldi, ahol Leontes tárt karokkal fogadja elveszettnek hitt lányát, és Hermione szobra életre kel. A megbocsájtás, a feloldás pillanata lehetne ez, ha a t?rténetet mindvégig mozgató figura nem g?rdítené a néz?tér és a színpad k?zé az áttetsz?ség, a látomás, az álomszer?ség tüllfügg?nyét. ?s számunkra nem marad más, csupán a feloldatlanság feszültsége.

Drag? cititorule,Dac? te-ai uitat ieri mai mult de dou? ore la televizor ?i nu po?i f?r? asta, las? cartea asta jos.Dac? vrei s? fii de acord cu cineva, cu oricine, nu e?ti omul meu.Dac? m? ?tii din tinere?e ?i crezi c? sunt b?iatul care se b?lb?ia la prompter, dai banii degeaba.Dac? vrei s? dai cadou cartea asta unui prieten, nu mai bine ?i iei o sticl? de vin? Eu nu ?tiu s? ame?esc a?a bine.?n general, recomand cartea doar c?torva oameni.Cei care vor s? afle cum am ajuns s? tr?im, iubim, alegem ?n social media.Dar mai ales celor care cred c? a scrie poate schimba ceva.P.S. Poate.Doar c? trebuie s? scriem cu to?ii ?n acela?i timp.Despre asta e Share! Despre for?a social media, cel mai bun amplificator de idei pe care ?l ?tiu.?ntr-un fel, dac? stai s? te g?nde?ti, ?i tu ai scris-o.

A Midsummer Night's Dream is a romantic comedy by William Shakespeare, suggested by "The Knight's Tale" from Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales, written around 1594 to 1596. It portrays the adventures of four young Athenian lovers and a group of amateur actors, their interactions with the Duke and Duchess of Athens, Theseus and Hippolyta, and with the fairies who inhabit a moonlit forest. The play is one of Shakespeare's most popular works for the stage and is widely performed across the world.

Lord Ronald Gower (1845 ù1916) was a British aristocrat, Liberal politician, sculptor and writer. Besides being a sculpture he wrote biographies of Marie Antoinette and Joan of Arc, and a history of the Tower of London. Joan of Arc was a15th century French heroine. She was born a peasant girl in eastern France who grew up to lead the French army to several important victories during the Hundred Years' War. She was captured by the Burgundians, sold to the English, tried by an ecclesiastical court, and burned at the stake when she was nineteen years old.

Alessandro di Mariano di Vanni Filipepi, better known as Sandro Botticelli ( 1445 – 1510), was an Italian painter of the Early Renaissance. He belonged to the Florentine school under the patronage of Lorenzo de' Medici, a movement that Giorgio Vasari would characterize less than a hundred years later as a "golden age", a thought, suitably enough, he expressed at the head of his Vita of Botticelli. Botticelli's posthumous reputation suffered until the late 19th century; since then his work has been seen to represent the linear grace of Early Renaissance painting. Among his best known works are The Birth of Venus and Primavera. In 1481, Pope Sixtus IV summoned Botticelli and other prominent Florentine and Umbrian artists to fresco the walls of the Sistine Chapel. The iconological program was the supremacy of the Papacy. Sandro's contribution included the Temptations of Christ, the Punishment of the Rebels and Trial of Moses. He returned to Florence, and "being of a sophistical turn of mind, he there wrote a commentary on a portion of Dante and illustrated the Inferno which he printed, spending much time over it, and this abstention from work led to serious disorders in his living." Thus Vasari characterized the first printed Dante (1481) with Botticelli's decorations; he could not imagine that the new art of printing might occupy an artist. The masterpieces Primavera (c. 1482) and The Birth of Venus (c. 1485) were both seen by Vasari at the villa of Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de' Medici at Castello in the mid-16th century, and until recently, it was assumed that both works were painted specifically for the villa. Recent scholarship suggests otherwise: the Primavera was painted for Lorenzo's townhouse in Florence, and The Birth of Venus was commissioned by someone else for a different site. By 1499, both had been installed at Castello. In these works, the influence of Gothic realism is tempered by Botticelli's study of the antique. But if the painterly means may be understood, the subjects themselves remain fascinating for their ambiguity. The complex meanings of these paintings continue to receive widespread scholarly attention, mainly focusing on the poetry and philosophy of humanists who were the artist's contemporaries. The works do not illustrate particular texts; rather, each relies upon several texts for its significance. Of their beauty, characterized by Vasari as exemplifying "grace" and by John Ruskin as possessing linear rhythm, there can be no doubt. In the mid-1480s, Botticelli worked on a major fresco cycle with Perugino, Domenico Ghirlandaio and Filippino Lippi, for Lorenzo the Magnificent's villa near Volterra; in addition he painted many frescoes in Florentine churches. In 1491 he served on a committee to decide upon a fa?ade for the Cathedral of Florence.

RUINS OF ANCIENT CITIES, WITH GENERAL AND PARTICULAR ACCOUNTS OF THEIR RISE, FALL, AND PRESENT CONDITION. - BY CHARLES BUCKE This Volume contain these cities;Messene, Mycen?, Miletus, Nauplia, Nemea, Nineveh, The Destruction of Sennacherib, Numantia, Olympia, Puteoli, Palmyra (Tadmor), Patr?, Pella, Pergamus, Persepolis, Petra (Wady Mousa), Phigalia, Plat?a, P?stum, Pompeii, Rama, Rome, Saguntum, Hannibal’s Speech to His Soldiers, Sais, Samaria, Sapphura, Sardis, Seleucia, Selinus, Or Selinuntum, Sicyon, Sidon, Smyrna, Spalatro, Stratonice, Susa, Sybaris, Syene, Syracuse, Thebes, Troja, And Other Cities of the Troas, Tyre, Veii Fallen, fallen, a silent heap; their heroes allSunk in their urns:—Behold the pride of pomp,The throne of nations fallen; obscured in dustEven yet majestical.—The solemn sceneElates the soul! ? ?{DYER} The reader is requested to observe, that, though the plan of this work is entirely his own, the compiler of it does not put it forth as in any way original in respect to language or description. It is, in fact, a much better book, than if it had been what is strictly called original, (which, indeed, must have involved an utter impossibility:) for it is a selection of some of the best materials the British Museum could furnish; sometimes worked up in his own language; and sometimes—and, indeed, very frequently—in that of others: the compiler having, at an humble distance and with unequal steps, followed the plan which M. Rollin proposed to himself, when he composed his celebrated history of ancient times.—"To adorn and enrich my own," says that celebrated writer, "I will be so ingenuous as to confess, that I do not scruple, nor am ashamed, to rifle whereever I come; and that I often do not cite the authors from whom I transcribe, because of the liberty I take to make some slight alterations. I have made the best use in my power of the solid reflections that occur in the Bishop of Meaux's Universal History, which is one of the most beautiful and most useful books in our language. I have also received great assistance from the learned Dean Prideaux's 'Connexion of the Old and New Testament,' in which he has traced and cleared up, in an admirable manner, the particulars relating to ancient history. I shall take the same liberty with whatever comes in my way, that may suit my design, and contribute to its perfection. I am very sensible, that it is not so much for a person's reputation to make use of other men's labours, and that it is in a manner renouncing the name and quality of author. But I am not over-fond of that title, and shall be extremely well pleased, and think myself very happy, if I can but deserve the name of a good compiler; and supply my readers with a tolerable history, who will not be over-solicitous to inquire what hand it comes from, provided they are but pleased with it."Having followed this example,—the compiler wishes he could say with equal effect,—he will be fully satisfied, should judicious readers feel inclined to concede, that he has shown some judgment in selecting his materials, and some taste in binding "the beads of the chain," that connects them together. He disclaims, in fact, (as, in the present instance, he is bound to do), all the "divine honours" of authorship; satisfied with those of a selecter, adapter, and compiler; and happy in the hope that he has here, by means of the superior writers, whose labours he has used, furnished his readers with an useful, accurate, and amusing work.? ? ? ? ? C. B.

IT is much easier to understand and remember a thing when a reason is given for it, than when we are merely shown how to do it without being told why it is so done; for in the latter case, instead of being assisted by reason, our real help in all study, we have to rely upon memory or our power of imitation, and to do simply as we are told without thinking about it. The consequence is that at the very first difficulty we are left to flounder about in the dark, or to remain inactive till the master comes to our assistance.? Now in this book it is proposed to enlist the reasoning faculty from the very first: to let one problem grow out of another and to be dependent on the foregoing, as in geometry, and so to explain each thing we do that there shall be no doubt in the mind as to the correctness of the proceeding. The student will thus gain the power of finding out any new problem for himself, and will therefore acquire a true knowledge of perspective.?? George Adolphus Storey??Book First?The Necessity of the Study of Perspective to Painters, Sculptors, and Architects?LEONARDO DA VINCI tells us in his celebrated Treatise on Painting that the young artist should first of all learn perspective, that is to say, he should first of all learn that he has to depict on a flat surface objects which are in relief or distant one from the other; for this is the simple art of painting. Objects appear smaller at a distance than near to us, so by drawing them thus we give depth to our canvas. The outline of a ball is a mere flat circle, but with proper shading we make it appear round, and this is the perspective of light and shade.? ‘The next thing to be considered is the effect of the atmosphere and light. If two figures are in the same coloured dress, and are standing one behind the other, then they should be of slightly different tone, so as to separate them. And in like manner, according to the distance of the mountains in a landscape and the greater or less density of the air, so do we depict space between them, not only making them smaller in outline, but less distinct.’?Sir Edwin Landseer used to say that in looking at a figure in a picture he liked to feel that he could walk round it, and this exactly expresses the impression that the true art of painting should make upon the spectator.??There is another observation of Leonardo’s that it is well I should here transcribe; he says: ‘Many are desirous of learning to draw, and are very fond of it, who are notwithstanding void of a proper disposition for it. This may be known by their want of perseverance; like boys who draw everything in a hurry, never finishing or shadowing.’ This shows they do not care for their work, and all instruction is thrown away upon them. At the present time there is too much of this ‘everything in a hurry’, and beginning in this way leads only to failure and disappointment. These observations apply equally to perspective as to drawing and painting.? Unfortunately, this study is too often neglected by our painters, some of them even complacently confessing their ignorance of it; while the ordinary student either turns from it with distaste, or only endures going through it with a view to passing an examination, little thinking of what value it will be to him in working out his pictures. Whether the manner of teaching perspective is the cause of this dislike for it, I cannot say; but certainly most of our English books on the subject are anything but attractive.??All the great masters of painting have also been masters of perspective, for they knew that without it, it would be impossible to carry out their grand compositions. In many cases they were even inspired by it in choosing their subjects. When one looks at those sunny interiors, those corridors and courtyards by De Hooghe, with their figures far off and near, one feels that their charm consists greatly in their perspective, as well as in their light and tone and colour... ?

The excellence of the following Treatise is so well known to all in any tolerable degree conversant with the Art of Painting, that it would be almost superfluous to say any thing respecting it, were it not that it here appears under the form of a new translation, of which fome account may be expected. Of the original Work, which is in reality a selection from the voluminous manuscript collections of the Author, both in Solio and Quarto, of all such passages as related to Painting, no edition appeared in print till 1651. Though its Author died so long before as the year 1519; and it is owing to the circumstance of a manuscript copy of these extracts in the original Italian, having fallen into the hands of “Raphael” that in the former of these years it was published at Paris in a thin folio volume in that language, accompanied with a set of cuts from the drawings of Niccolo Pouissin, and Alberti, the former having designed and defined the human figures, the latter the geometrical and other representations.. The first translation of this Treatise into English, appeared in the year 1721. It does not declare by whom it was made; but though it prosesses to have been done from the original Italian, it is evident, upon a comparison, that more use was made of the revised edition of the French translation. Indifferent, however, as it is, it had become fo scarce, and risen to a price fo extravagant, that, to supply the demand, it was found necessary, in the year 1796, to reprint it as it stood, with all its errors on its head, no opportunity then offering of procuring a french translation. This last impression, however, being now alfo disposed of, and a new one again called for, the present Translator was induced to step forward, and undertake the office of frenh translating it, on finding, by comparing the former versions both in French and English with the original, many passages which he thought might at once be more concisely and more faithfully rendered. ABOUT AUTHOR: Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci (15 April 1452 – 2 May 1519) was an Italian painter, sculptor, architect, musician, mathematician, engineer, inventor, anatomist, geologist, cartographer, botanist, and writer. He is widely considered to be one of the greatest polymaths of all time and perhaps the most diversely talented person ever to have lived. His genius, perhaps more than that of any other figure, epitomized the Renaissance humanist ideal. Leonardo has often been described as the archetype of the Renaissance Man, a man of "unquenchable curiosity" and "feverishly inventive imagination". Marco Rosci states that while there is much speculation about Leonardo, his vision of the world is essentially logical rather than mysterious, and that the empirical methods he employed were unusual for his time. Born out of wedlock to a notary, Piero da Vinci, and a peasant woman, Caterina, in Vinci in the region of Florence, Leonardo was educated in the studio of the renowned Florentine painter Verrocchio. Much of his earlier working life was spent in the service of Ludovico il Moro in Milan. He later worked in Rome, Bologna and Venice, and he spent his last years in France at the home awarded him by Francis I. Leonardo was, and is, renowned as one of the greatest painters of all time. Among his works, the Mona Lisa is the most famous and most parodied portrait and The Last Supper the most reproduced religious painting of all time, with their fame approached only by Michelangelo's The Creation of Adam. Leonardo's drawing of the Vitruvian Man is also regarded as a cultural icon, being reproduced on items as varied as the euro coin, textbooks, and T-shirts. Perhaps fifteen of his paintings have survived, the small number because of his constant, and frequently disastrous, experimentation with new techniques, and his chronic procrastination. Nevertheless, these few works, together with his notebooks, which contain drawings, scientific diagrams, and his thoughts on the nature of painting, compose a contribution to later generations of artists rivalled only by that of his contemporary, Michelangelo. Leonardo is revered for his technological ingenuity. He conceptualised flying machines, an armoured vehicle, concentrated solar power, an adding machine, and the double hull, also outlining a rudimentary theory of plate tectonics.