Vera Maria Rosenberg a fost, probabil, cea mai important? femeie spion din al Doilea R?zboi Mondial. N?scut? ?n 1908 la Gala?i, a emigrat ?n Marea Britanie ?n 1933, fiind recrutat? ?n tinere?e de serviciile de informa?ii britanice. Ulterior ?i-a schimbat numele, pentru a-?i ascunde originea evreiasc?, iar dup? stabilirea ?n Marea Britanie a participat la nenum?rate misiuni secrete, ajung?nd ?n fruntea SOE, serviciul de opera?iuni speciale creat de Winston Churchill. Agen?ii ei au participat la nenum?rate opera?iuni vitale, inclusiv la preg?tirea debarc?rii ?n Normandia. ?n 1987, Fran?ois Mitterand i-a acordat Legiunea de Onoare, pentru aportul ei la eliberarea Fran?ei. Dup? r?zboi, Vera Atkins s-a retras ?ntr-un sat din Anglia, unde a r?mas p?n? la moarte, ?n 2000. Via?a i-a fost ?nconjurat? de mister, ?i pu?ini au ?tiut cine este cu adev?rat. Biografia lui Sarah Helm dezv?luie secretele celei despre care Ian Fleming, creatorul celebrului James Bond, spunea ??n adev?rata lume a spionilor, Vera Atkins a fost ?eful.“

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!

Societatea deschis? contra societ??ii deschise. Societatea rom?neasc? ?ntre utopie ?i realitate este o carte de analiz? profund? ?i complex?, ce ?i-a ales ca obiect de studiu cea mai important? paradigm? sociopolitic? a postmodernit??ii, ?mpreun? cu realit??ile concrete ce se configureaz? ?n jurul acesteia. O paradigm? care ?i-a propus s? schimbe fa?a lumii, sens ?n care, de mai bine de 25 de ani o putem observa manifest?ndu-se pe multiple coordonate ?i ?n planul realit??ilor sociale ?i politice autohtone, pe care, de altfel, autorul le radiografiaz? extrem de atent, cu ochiul, mintea ?i bagajul de cuno?tin?e proprii specialistului, dar ?i cu sufletul ?i con?tiin?a celui care apar?ine societ??ii rom?ne?ti. Cartea de fa?? este, ?n acela?i timp, ?i despre societatea deschis?, dar ?i despre trecutul, prezentul ?i viitorul prefigurat lumii ?n aceast? paradigm?, c?t ?i despre evolu?ia societ??ii rom?ne?ti ca parte integrant? a acestei lumi. Ea surprinde ?i problematizeaz? o multitudine de aspecte ?in?nd at?t de natura intrinsec? a conceptului de societate deschis?, c?t ?i de schimb?rile pe care implementarea acestui concept ca realitate social? le presupune ?i le antreneaz? ?n societ??ile contemporane. Prin aceasta, ea se recomand? ca o lectur? util?, provocatoare ?i, totodat?, revelatoare tuturor celor preocupa?i de c?mpul ?tiin?elor sociale ?i politice, dar ?i celor interesa?i s? ?n?eleag? ceva ?n plus din sistemul cauzalit??ilor profunde care influen?eaz? mersul lumii, ?n general, ?i al societ??ii rom?ne?ti, ?n particular. (Maria Voinea)

Inchizi?ia spaniol?, poate cea mai temut? institu?ie din istoria omenirii, a fost ?nfiin?at? ?n 1478 de Regii Catolici, Ferdinand ?i Isabella, ?i abolit? abia ?n 1834, odat? cu R?zboaiele Napoleoniene. Spre deosebire de Inchizi?ia medieval? din restul Europei, cea din Spania ?i Portugalia s-a r?sp?ndit ?n coloniile iberice din Asia, Africa ?i America de Sud, ajung?nd s? terorizeze, timp de peste trei secole, nu mai pu?in de patru continente.Care au fost ?ns? motivele ?nfiin??rii ei? De ce provoca at?ta team?? Cine erau victimele torturate ?i arse ?n autodafeuri? Toby Green readuce la via?? aceast? perioad? a istoriei cu ajutorul uria?ei arhive inchizitoriale p?strate ?i prezint? nenum?rate cazuri judecate de Sf?ntul Oficiu, de la arhiepiscopi la oameni obi?nui?i, victime inocente ale unui sistem diabolic. De?i ?nsp?im?nt?toare, aceste pove?ti sunt un exemplu al rezisten?ei spiritului uman ?n fa?a absurdului ?i a r?ului. Toby Green ne dezv?luie mecanismele prin care pot ap?rea persecu?ia ?i teroarea, dar ?i felul ?n care pot fi evitate. Inchizi?ia este un avertisment venit din trecut, o lec?ie a istoriei pentru noi to?i!

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.

Volumul lui Leo Butnaru este tot o ncercare de sintez, de a a duce n faa cititorilor texte prea puin sau chiar deloc cunoscute i cred c, doar aa, n dialogul intercultural, se poate nelege i originalitatea avangardei romneti i ce se ntmpl cu ei dup restaurarea comunismului. La Leo Butnaru avem din nou de aface cu o perioad post 1917 i cu transformri.“ – Carmen Muat

"Romeo and Juliet" is a tragic play written early in the career of William Shakespeare about two teenage "star-cross'd lovers" whose untimely deaths ultimately unite their feuding households. It was among Shakespeare's most popular plays during his lifetime and, along with Hamlet, is one of his most frequently performed plays. Today, the title characters are regarded as archetypal "young lovers"??PROLOGUE:?Two households, both alike in dignity,?In fair Verona, where we lay our scene,?From ancient grudge break to new mutiny,?Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.?From forth the fatal loins of these two foes?A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life;?Whole misadventured piteous overthrows?Do with their death bury their parents' strife.?The fearful passage of their death-mark'd love,?And the continuance of their parents' rage,?Which, but their children's end, nought could remove,?Is now the two hours' traffic of our stage;?The which if you with patient ears attend,?What here shall miss, our toil shall strive to mend.

Exila?i este singura pies? scris? de Joyce, unde ??i face manifest?, prin regulile speciei, predilec?ia pentru m??tile puse fiec?rui personaj. Citit? ca o trecere ?n ordine cronologic? de la Portret al artistului ?n tinere?e la Ulise, piesa con?ine m?rci clare ale obsesiilor scriitorului ?i urme vizibile ale experien?ei omului James Joyce. Rela?iile de dragoste, parentale sau de prietenie sunt cele care dezechilibreaz? personajele, exilul temporar ?n Italia fiind doar o alt? form? a ?nstr?in?rii din Irlanda natal?.

Rejtély, amelyet másfél száz éve próbálnak írók, irodalomt?rténészek, színházi szakemberek, esztéták, filozófusok megfejteni. Mese? ?rgirus királyfi és Tündér Ilona csodásan valószer?tlen t?rténete számtalan változatban létezik a magyar népmesekincsben, s olasz k?zvetít? forrásokon át g?r?g, s?t egyiptomi gy?kerekig nyúlik vissza az aranyalmát term? fa s a két szerelmes t?rténete. Szerelmi románc? Nem fontos a kor, a táj, a t?rténelmi háttér, csak az érzelmeiben egymásba gabalyodott két ember – itt és most: Csongor és Tünde – lángolása, viharzása, minden eléjük tornyosuló akadályt leromboló akarása, szerelmi szárnyalása. Színdarab? Karakteres, jó szerepek – ?rd?g?k, boszorkányok, b?lcsek, ledérek – forgataga zegzugos cselekmény, váratlan fordulatok, lehet?ség mindenféle színpadi csoda semmi nem korlátozva megvalósítására: sok alakra bomló, egy személybe olvadó boszorkány, leveg?ben r?pk?d?, láthatatlanná váló ?rd?gfiak, f?ld mélyér?l szemünk láttára kiemelked?, fényárban úszó tündérpalota. Minden pillanatban tátva maradhat a szánk. Filozófiai traktátus? ?letutak: Kalmáré a kincs, Fejedelemé a hatalom, Tudósé a b?lcsesség; Csongoré a szerelem. A kincs elpereg, a hatalom elkopik, a tudás semmivé porlad. A szerelem ?r?k. Drámai k?ltemény? ?jfélt?l éjfélig élünk: hajnalodik, felragyog az ég, dél van, alkonyodik, beesteledik, már f?lénk borul az éjszaka. Reményekkel telten, harcra készen kezdjük hajnalban, küszk?dünk reggel, boldogok vagyunk délben, szorongunk alkonyatkor, s?tétedéskor belenyugszunk az elmúlásba. De másnap újra f?lkel a nap. V?r?smarty Mihály 1830-ban fejezte be m?vét, a cím alá azt írta: színjáték ?t felvonásban. Már csak boldogan sajgó, rejtve rejtett szomorú emlék szívében reménytelen szerelme, Perczel Etelka. Mindennapi életében legf?képpen arra büszke, hogy sok kínnal keletkezett nagy m?vét, a Zalán futását a várva várt nemzeti eposzként ünneplik. Tagja az éppen szület? Magyar Tudományos Akadémiának, a legismertebb, legfontosabb szépirodalmi és m?vészeti lapok ?dolgozótársa”, szívét melenget? jóérzés: Széchenyi István a barátja. Igaz, a pénztárcája t?bbnyire lapos, gyakran kínosan lapos, de ismert és népszer? ember. Harminc éves. Férfi. Kincse nincs, hatalomra nem vágyik, a tudásról azt gondolja: valójában senki nem tudja, mennyit ér s mire jó. De Csongor boldog, amikor megpillantja Tündét, boldog, amikor át?leli, boldog, amikor elveszíti, mert hiszi, tudja: nem ?r?kre veszítette el. Küzd, harcol, verekszik: keresi a boldogságot. S boldog, amikor embert próbáló kalandok után végre megtalálja Tündét, s f?ldi létükben ?r?kre ?sszeforrnak. Csongor és Tünde számára a szerelem a kincs, a hatalom, a tudás. El nem veszíthet? kincs, ?r?kre er?t adó hatalom, b?lcsességgé párlódott tudás. ?gy lesznek halandók halhatatlanok. ?s másnap újra f?lkel a nap.

sszevissza csereberéldik egy ikerpár, lóvátesznek egy felfuvalkodott trtett, tmérdek móka, dal, vidámság szvi át két, nagy nehezen egymásra találó szerelmespár trténetét. Oly' darab ez, amint a kznség szeret, kíván, óhajt – ami nektek kell”, mondta Szász Károly errl a vígjátékról, amelynek már a címe is jókedvre derít.

A Hamlet (1601), talán legismertebb, legt?bbet játszott m?ve Shakespeare-nek. K?zéppontjában az élet kínálta, s mindenkiben f?lmerül? kérdés áll: "Lenni vagy - nem lenni?", és ha lenni - hogyan? Mi az emberi cselekvés végs? határa a vélt vagy valós hiba, netán b?n helyrehozatalához? Egyáltalán van-e igazi létezés, s ha van, az mennyire lehet veszélyes a létez?re? Vívódó, t?preng? alkotás a dráma, miként a f?szerepl? maga. Hamlet késleltetett bosszúját hosszas ?nmarcangoló kérdéselvetések, bizonyságkéresésék el?zik meg. Végül igazságot szolgáltat, de ? is belepusztul. T?rni vagy ellenszegülni? A reneszánsz ember dilemmája ?r?kérvény?! Mert a cselekvés erk?lcsileg legvitathatóbb pontja az emberi élet kioltása. Van-e joga valakinek - ha oka van is - ?lni? K?vetkezmények nélkül semmi sem vállalható, kül?n?sen nem a pusztítás. De van-e joga az embernek vélt vagy valós igaza tudatában nem cselekedni, nem vállalni a tett kockázatát? Mennyire tartozunk felel?sséggel a külvilág és saját lelkiismeretünk el?tt? Hamlet tettével válaszol a kérdésekre, ám az egész dráma nem ad egyértelm? feleletet. Nem is adhat. Remekm?vek; géniuszok és a természet sajátossága a talányosság... Nem beszélve arról, hogy a mindennapok kisebb-nagyobb d?ntéseit mindenkinek magának kell meghoznia.

„Într-o pres? care nu prea mai pune pre? pe reportaje, Liliana Nicolae persevereaz? cu inteligen?? ?i har. La radio ?i în Dilema veche, subiectele ?i cuvintele ei bine m?surate reconstituie lumea din frînturi, în toat? normalitatea ei. Ascultate sau citite, reportajele sale ne pun pe gînduri în fa?a Vie?ii pe care, gr?bi?i, uit?m uneori s-o contempl?m ori s-o în?elegem.“ – Mircea Vasilescu (Dilema veche)

A meg?zvegyült Szilvai professzornak az a terve, hogy a gyámsága alá tartozó unoka?ccséhez feleségül adja titokban nevelt gyámleányát, Mariskát. A fiú k?zben a professzor tudta nélkül Liliomfi néven vándorszínésznek áll, és meghódítja Mariska szívét. A professzor ellenzi a házasságot, éppen attól a férfit?l félti a lányt, akihez egyébként feleségül szeretné adni. Liliomfi pedig azt hiszi, hogy a nagybátyja hitvesének akarja Mariskát. A h? barát és színésztárs, Szellemfi segít Szilvai megtévesztésében, Liliomfinak adva ki magát. Egy másik - társadalmi kül?nbségek miatti - reménytelennek látszó szerelem (Gyuri, a pincér és Erzsi, a gazdag Kányai fogadós uram lánya) t?rténete ?sszefonódik Liliomfi és Mariska sorsával.

Hamlet is commonly regarded as one of the greatest plays ever written. Drawing on Danish chronicles and the Elizabethan vogue for revenge tragedy, Shakespeare created a play that is at once a philosophic treatise, a family drama, and a supernatural thriller. In the wake of his father’s death, Prince Hamlet finds that his Uncle Claudius has swiftly taken the throne and married his mother, Queen Gertrude. The ghost of the dead king then appears and charges Claudius with ‘murder most foul.’ Hamlet is called to revenge his father’s death: but will he be able to act before it is too late?

The Future Revisited examines Hollywood adaptations of Jules Verne stories and is an interdisciplinary study that offers a fresh perspective on film history, French literature, science fiction and America in the 1950s. It is a fascinating and authoritative account of how the stories of Jules Verne, a distinguished French novelist better known around the world as the father of science fiction and an accurate predictor of much of the twentieth century, found particular resonance with US filmmakers in the 1950s. Schiltz looks at four of the most popular films - Around the World in 80 Days, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Journey to the Center of the Earth and Mysterious Island - and argues that there were many parallels between Verne's technological adventures and postwar America, with its themeparks, shopping malls, Levittowns and plethora of consumer goods. Just as nineteenth-century readers of Verne's books could experience travel from the comfort of their seats, viewers of these films could be swept away on an imaginary flight, a voyage in a submarine, or a trek to the earth's core, all in spectacular widescreen and with ground-breaking special effects. Yet the pleasures offered were ambivalent: encounters with exotic places and cultures might have led the audience to question common assumptions such as gender roles; seeing futuristic domestic spaces could highlight the confusion of attitudes to private and public life in suburbia, and the films' blending of nostalgia and progress might draw attention to society's tug-of-war between innovation and conformity.

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“

Antológiánk magyar zsidó t?rténelemr?l szóló tanulmányok gy?jteménye. ?sszeállításunk azonban mind témájában, mind módszertanában kül?nb?zik az eddig megszokott ábrázolástól. A magyar (azaz a t?rténelmi Magyar Királyság területén él?) zsidóságot a t?rténetírók leginkább a modern eszmékhez lelkesen csatlakozó és asszimilációra t?rekv? k?z?sségként ábrázolták, amelyet csupán az antiszemitizmus id?szakos fellángolásai akadályoztak meg végs? céljuk elérésében. Sokszor még az is el?fordult, hogy a magyar zsidókat a legsikeresebben asszimilálódott európai zsidóságként jellemezték, ami már nyilvánvaló túlzás. Valójában a magyar zsidóság sajátos jellege sokkal inkább a jelent?s létszámú ortodox réteg határozott asszimiláció-ellenességéb?l fakadt. Az itt k?tetbe gy?jt?tt ?t tanulmány a magyar ortodoxia t?rténetével, ezzel a mostanáig igen kevés figyelemre méltatott területtel foglalkozik.

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.

To present at a single glance a comprehensive view of the History of English Church Architecture from the Heptarchy to the Reformation, and to do this in a manner, which, without taxing too seriously the memory of the student, may enable him to fix in his mind the limits, and the general outline of the inquiry he is about to enter upon, is the object of the present treatise.? Instead therefore of entering, as is usual in elementary works of this nature, into a detailed account of all the parts of an Ecclesiastical structure, a certain portion only of such a building has for this purpose been selected, and so exhibited in the garb in which it appeared at successive intervals of time, as to present to the reader a means of comparison that will enable him readily to apprehend the gradual change of form through which it passed from the Eleventh to the Sixteenth Centuries, and at once to recognise the leading characteristics of the several Periods into which it is here proposed to divide the History of our National Architecture. Having thus fixed these leading characteristics in his mind, he will then be in a condition to follow us hereafter, if he pleases, into the detail of the whole subject, and to become familiar with those niceties of distinction, the detection of which—escaping, as they do, the eye of the general observer—contributes so materially to the enjoyment of the study, and a perfect acquaintance with which is so absolutely essential to a correct understanding of the true History of the Art.?That this mode of approaching the study of this subject is a convenient one, will probably be admitted by those who may remember the difficulties they encoun-tered, in their early attempts to acquire a general conception of the scheme of the History of Church Architecture, as given in most of the manuals now in use; and the complexity of detail in which they found themselves immediately involved on the very threshold of their inquiry.? It has been the practice in most elementary works on Church Architecture to derive the illustrations of the subject, indifferently from the smaller and the larger buildings of the Kingdom; and by implication to assign an equal authority to both. It will be readily admitted, however, that the History of an Art is to be gathered from its principal Monuments, and not from those the design or execution of which may have been entrusted to other than the ablest masters of the Period: in the choice, therefore, of the examples which have been selected to illustrate the series of changes which are described in the following pages, reference has been made principally to the great Cathedral, Abbey, and Collegiate Churches of the Kingdom, and occasionally only to some of the larger Parish Churches whose size or importance would seem to bring them under the above denomination.??Church Architecture in England, from its earliest existence down to the Sixteenth Century, was in a state of constant progress, or transition, and this progress appears to have been carried on, with certain exceptions in different parts of the country, very nearly simultaneously. It follows from this circumstance, first, That it is impossible to divide our National Architecture correctly into any number of distinct Orders or Styles; and secondly, That any Division of its History into a given number of Periods, must necessarily be an arbitrary one. It is nevertheless absolutely essential for the purpose of conveniently describing the long series of noble monuments which remain to us, that we should adopt some system of chronological arrangement, which may enable us to group, and to classify them in a distinct and intelligible manner: and although no broad lines of demarcation in this connected series are discernible—so gradual was the change—yet so rapid and so complete was it also, that a period of fifty years did not elapse without a material alteration in the form and fashion of every detail of a building. ?