Births which
occurred on a 29 May:
2001 The
Itanium computer chip is introduced by Intel, two years behind
schedule and after 10 years and over $1 billion in development. It is aimed
at the corporate and server markets, as its 64-bit architecture enables
16 terabytes of memory instead of the 4 gigabytes of the 32-bit Pentium
and Celeron. But the Itanium first release is twice as slow as the Pentium,
and therefore will be used mainly for testing.
1957 Jean-Christophe
Yoccoz, French mathematician.
1930 Edward Philip
George Seaga, político jamaicano.
1922 Francisco
Rodriguez Adrados, filólogo español.
1922 Iannis
Xenakis Braila Romania, composer/architect/mathematician.
1920
The Offshore Pirate is published.
^top^
It
is 23 year-old F. Scott Fitzgerald's third Saturday Evening Post
story during the month. It demonstrates his rapid development as a
versatile fiction writer. It is the first story that develops Fitzgerald's
recurrent plot idea of a heroine won by her lover's performance of
an extraordinary deed. The story had originally ended with the weak
explanation that it was all Ardita's dream. Fitzgerald rewrote the
conclusion to emphasize the storyness of the story: "The last line
takes Lorimer [the editor of the Post] at his word. Its one of the
best lines I've ever written." The Offshore Pirate was collected
in Flappers and Philosophers.
It was Fitzgerald's own favorite among his short stories, even more
than A Diamond As Big as the Ritz |
1919 Simone Ortega, escritora española especializada en
materias culinarias.
1917 John Fitzgerald Kennedy
(35th US President, 1961-1963: the youngest person and first Roman Catholic
ever elected to that office, the first to win a Purple Heart and the 4th
US President to be assassinated (22 November 1963); first Pulitzer Prize
winner: Profiles in Courage) The second of the 9 children of Joseph
Patrick Kennedy, 28, and Rose Elizabeth Fitzgerald Kennedy, 26.
1906
Terence Hanbury White, in Bombay, future author of
The Once and Future King. ^top^
His English parents were employed
by the British civil service. White attended Cambridge, where he published
a book of poems. He taught school for six years until his autobiographical
work England Have My Bones (1936) gained critical success.
He quit teaching to write full time and became increasingly reclusive.
He studied medieval history and wrote books about hunting, fishing,
and animals. In 1939, he published the enormously successful The
Sword in the Stone, a retelling of the legends of King Arthur,
which became a US Book-of-the-Month Club selection. He published four
more books in the Arthurian saga during the next several years. In
1958, the volumes were collected in The Once and Future King.
White died aboard a ship in Athens in 1964. After his death, the final
volume of the King Arthur series was found among his papers and published
in 1977 as The Book of Merlyn. |
1903 Leslie Townes (Bob) Hope Kent England, entertainer
(famous profile)
1897 Edward Wolfe, British artist
who died in 1982. — more
with links to images.
1893 Karel
“Charles” Loewner, Jewish Czech US mathematician
who died on 08 January 1968.
1885 Erwin
Findlay Freundlich, German astronomer and mathematician who
died on 24 July 1964. He worked with Einstein on measurements of the orbit
of Mercury to confirm the general theory of relativity.
1882
Harry
Bateman, English mathematician who died on 21 January 1946.
1880 Oswald Spengler Germany, philosopher, author of Die
Untergang des Abendlandes (Decline of the West)
1875
Giovanni Gentile, filósofo fascista italiano.
1874
Gilbert Keith Chesterton
English journalist / novelist / poet
/ critic ^top^
Chesterton created the Father Brown crime- fiction series. He died
on 14 June 1936.
Critic and author
of verse, essays, novels, and short stories, Chesterton was known
also for his exuberant personality and rotund figure. He was educated
at St. Paul's School and later studied art at the Slade School and
literature at University College, London. His writings to 1910 were
of three kinds. First, his social criticism, largely in his voluminous
journalism, was gathered in The Defendant (1901), Twelve
Types (1902), and Heretics (1905). In it he expressed
strongly pro-Boer views in the South African War. Politically, he
began as a Liberal but after a brief radical period became, with his
Christian and medievalist friend Hilaire Belloc, a Distributist, favoring
the distribution of land. This phase of his thinking is exemplified
by What's Wrong with the World (1910).
His second preoccupation was literary criticism. Robert Browning
(1903) was followed by Charles Dickens (1906) and Appreciations
and Criticisms of the Works of Charles Dickens (1911), prefaces
to the individual novels, which are among his finest contributions
to criticism. His George Bernard Shaw (1909) and The
Victorian Age in Literature (1913) together with William
Blake (1910) and the later monographs William Cobbett
(1925) and Robert Louis Stevenson (1927) have a spontaneity
that places them above the works of many academic critics.
Chesterton's third major concern was theology and religious argument.
He was converted from Anglicanism to Roman Catholicism in 1922. Although
he had written on Christianity earlier, as in his book Orthodoxy
(1909), his conversion added edge to his controversial writing, notably
The Catholic Church and Conversion (1926), his writings in
G.K.'s Weekly, and Avowals and Denials (1934). Other
works arising from his conversion were St. Francis of Assisi
(1923), the essay in historical theology The Everlasting Man
(1925), and St. Thomas Aquinas (1933).
In his verse Chesterton was a master of ballad forms, as shown in
the stirring “Lepanto” (1911). When it was not uproariously comic,
his verse was frankly partisan and didactic. His essays developed
his shrewd, paradoxical irreverence to its ultimate point of real
seriousness. He is seen at his happiest in such essays as “On Running
After One's Hat” (1908) and “A Defence of Nonsense” (1901), in which
he says that nonsense and faith are “the two supreme symbolic assertions
of truth” and “to draw out the soul of things with a syllogism is
as impossible as to draw out Leviathan with a hook.”
Many readers value Chesterton's fiction most highly. The Napoleon
of Notting Hill (1904), a romance of civil war in suburban London,
was followed by the loosely knit collection of short stories, The
Club of Queer Trades (1905), and the popular allegorical novel
The Man WhoWas Thursday (1908). But the most successful association
of fiction with social judgment is in Chesterton's series on the priest-sleuth
Father Brown: The Innocence of Father Brown (1911), followed
by The Wisdom of Father Brown (1914), The Incredulity
of Father Brown (1926), The Secret of Father Brown (1927),
and The Scandal of Father Brown (1935). Chesterton's friendships
were with men as diverse as H.G. Wells, Shaw, Belloc, and Max Beerbohm.
His Autobiography was published in 1936.
CHESTERTON
ONLINE: |
|
Appreciations and Criticisms of the Works of Charles Dickens
The Ballad of the White Horse
Charles Dickens
Chesterton Day by Day: Selections from the Writings in Prose and
Verse of G. K. Chesterton, with an Extract for every Day of the
Year and for each of the Moveable Feasts
Greybeards at Play: Literature and Art for Old Gentlemen |
The
Innocence of Father Brown
The
Innocence of Father Brown
The
Innocence of Father Brown (PDF)
The
Wisdom of Father Brown
The Man Who Knew Too Much
The
Man Who Was Thursday
The
Man Who Was Thursday
The Man
Who Was Thursday
The
Club of Queer Trades
The
Club of Queer Trades
Trees
of Pride |
Manalive
Manalive
Manalive
A Miscellany of Men
Orthodoxy
Heretics
Heretics
Utopia
of Usurers, and Other Essays
What's
Wrong with the World Today
What's
Wrong With the World
co-author of:
Leo Tolstoy |
1863 Marcelino Peña Muñoz, Spanish painter.
1860
Isaac Albéniz, compositor y pianista español.
1845
Alberto Urdaneta Urdaneta, Colombian painter, engraver, and publicist.
— links to images.
1840 Hans Makart, Austrian academic
painter who died on 03 October 1884. — MORE
ON MAKART AT ART “4” MAY with
links to images.
1838 Gérard-Marie-François
Firmin-Girard, French academic
painter who died on 08 January 1921. — more
with links to images.
 ^
1830 Clémence-Louise
Michel,
{1878 photo by “Nadar”
[05 Apr 1820 – 21 Mar 1910] >},
French anarchist who died on 10 January 1905. She fervently preached
revolutionary socialist themes. Rejecting parliamentary reform, she
believed in sensational acts of violence and advocated class war.
Liberally educated and trained as a
teacher, Michel developed her revolutionary ideas while teaching (1866–1870)
at Montmartre, in Paris. During the German siege of Paris (19 Sep
1870 – 28 Jan 1871), she worked in the ambulance service and in May
1871 fought zealously with the National Guard defending the Paris
Commune against the Versailles troops. After the 28
May 1871 defeat of the Commune she was court-martialed and sentenced
to prison.
Freed by the amnesty
of 1880, Michel renewed her revolutionary campaign and lectured throughout
France, but she was imprisoned for three years for inciting a riot.
From 1886 to 1896 she lived in London, always keeping in touch with
revolutionary developments on the Continent. In 1896 she returned
to France and lectured on revolutionary themes until her death. Her
writings reveal a strong sense of social consciousness. Besides her
Mémoires (1886), she published both poetry and prose. |
1801 Pedro Santana, militar y político dominicano.
 1736
(17 May Julian) Patrick
Henry ^top^
American revolutionary patriot:
who on his twenty-ninth birthday, nine days a member of the Virginia
House of Burgesses, would present a series of resolutions opposing
the British Stamp Act, and conclude his introduction of the Virginia
Resolutions with the fiery words “Caesar had his Brutus, Charles
the First his Cromwell, and George the Third — ” when, it
is reported, voices cried out, "Treason! treason!" He continued, "
— and George the Third may profit by their example! If this be
treason make the most of it."
Then,
on 23 March 1775, before the second Virginia Convention, Patrick Henry
would voice American opposition to the increasingly oppressive British
rule over the American colonies with his “...give me
liberty, or give me death!” speech.
[There seems to be more people who say: "Give me liberty
or give me wealth!". What I would say is: "Give me liberty
or give me freedom!” or “Give me liberty or I'll give you
death!” or “Give me liberty or I'll take it by force!”]
Following the signing of
the American Declaration of Independence on 04 July 1776, Patrick
Henry was appointed governor of Virginia by the Continental Congress.
The first major American opposition to British policy came in 1765
after Parliament passed the Stamp Act, a taxation measure to raise
revenues for a standing British army in America. Under the banner
of "no taxation without representation," colonists convened the Stamp
Act Congress in October 1765 to vocalize their opposition to the tax.
With its enactment on01 November 1765, most colonists called for a
boycott of British goods and some organized attacks on the customhouses
and homes of tax collectors. After months of protest, Parliament voted
to repeal the Stamp Act in March 1765, and most colonists quietly
accepted British rule until Parliament’s enactment of the Tea Act
in 1773, which granted the East India Company a monopoly on the American
tea trade. Viewed as another example of taxation without representation,
militant Patriots in Massachusetts organized the "Boston Tea Party,"
which saw British tea valued at some ten thousand pounds dumped into
Boston harbor. Parliament, outraged by the Boston Tea Party and other
blatant destruction of British property, enacted the Coercive Acts,
also known as the Intolerable Acts, in the following year. The colonists
subsequently called the first Continental Congress to consider a united
American resistance against the British. With the other colonies watching
intently, Massachusetts led the resistance to the British, forming
a shadow revolutionary government and establishing militias to resist
the increasing British military presence across the colony. In April
1775, Thomas Gage, the British governor of Massachusetts, ordered
British troops to march to Concord, Massachusetts, where a Patriot
arsenal was known to exist. On 19 April 1775, the British regulars
encountered a group of American militiamen at Lexington and the first
volleys of the American Revolutionary War were fired.
Introductory Note: In March of 1770, the English, had, in fact, abolished
all the duties it had imposed, except that on tea. Quite aside from
the rumblings coming from the colonies, these duties were being felt
at home. The Townsend duties had an impact on the British commercial
classes, for, there was a decline in exports. Even the tax on tea
was reduced so as to cure the smuggling problem. At these lower rates,
this tea tax would likely have been tolerable in the colonies, except
for this: in May of 1773 the East India Company had been given authority
to sell its tea free of duty except that which was to be sold in North
America. In December of 1773, there then occurred the Boston Tea Party.
In response, England, in 1774, passed a number of acts including The
Boston Port Act, The Quartering Act and The
Massachusetts Government Act. The effect of these acts was
to close Boston to foreign traffic, change the government and the
courts of justice of Massachusetts and to legalized the quartering
of British troops in colonial homes. The aim of these measures was
to curb rebellion. In return the civilian leaders of the colonies
met at Philadelphia, on 05 September 1774: The first Continental
Congress. It passed five measures affecting the relations of the colonies
with the mother-country. It forbade the import of English wares and
ordered the cessation of all exports to Great Britain, unless they
were to be given redress of the colonial grievances prior. Further,
it approved of the opposition offered to the late acts of Parliament
by the people of Massachusetts Bay. It then issued proclamations to
the colonies, both north and south, which called for their support.
Thus, it was, that on 23 March 1775, at Virginia, the largest
colony in America, and with the greatest ties and more English-like
then any of the other colonies, a meeting of its delegates took place
in St. John's church in Richmond. A number of the delegates were abhorred
by the notion that they should take steps which might lead to war
with the mother-country. The resolution was presented by Patrick Henry.
Before the vote was taken, he delivered a speech in support. He stood;
silent at first, then spoke quietly and proceeded gradually to increase
his speech in force and in loudness reaching at the end a crescendo
that still echoes and will likely always echo in the hearts of men.
- No man thinks
more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities,
of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House.
But different men often see the same subject in different lights;
and, therefore, I hope that it will not be thought disrespectful
to those gentlemen, if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character
very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely
and without reserve.
This is no time
for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment
to this country. For my own part I consider it as nothing less
than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the
magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate.
It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and
fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our
country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through
fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of
treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty towards
the majesty of heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it
is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are
apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the
song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this
the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle
for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who,
having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which
so nearly concern their temporal salvation?
For my part, whatever
anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole
truth — to know the worst and to provide for it. I have but
one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of
experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the
past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been
in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years,
to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased
to solace themselves and the House?
Is it that insidious
smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust
it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves
to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception
of our petition comports with these warlike preparations which
cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary
to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves
so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to
win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are
the implements of war and subjugation — the last arguments
to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial
array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen
assign any other possible motives for it? Has Great Britain any
enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation
of navies and armies?
No, sir, she has
none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They
are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the
British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to
oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying
that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer on
the subject? Nothing.
We have held the
subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been
all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication?
What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted?
Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer.
Sir, we have done
everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now
coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated;
we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored
its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry
and Parliament.
Our petitions have
been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence
and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have
been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain,
after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and
reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope.
If we wish to be
free — if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable
privileges for which we have been so long contending — if
we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have
been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never
to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained,
we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms
and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir,
that we are weak — unable to cope with so formidable an adversary.
But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the
next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a
British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather
strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means
of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging
the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound
us hand and foot?
Sir, we are not
weak, if we make a proper use of the means which the God of nature
hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the
holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we
possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send
against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone.
There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations,
and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.
The battle, sir,
is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active,
the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base
enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest.
There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains
are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston!
The war is inevitable — and let it come! I repeat it, sir,
let it come!
It is in vain, sir,
to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, "Peace! Peace!" —
but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale
that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of
resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand
we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they
have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at
the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know
not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!
The vote of the Virginia delegates barely passed, but it passed; and
the movement we have come to know as the American Revolution was to
receive the support which it needed. Fighting erupted on 19 April
1775, at Lexington and Concord, and was followed that year by the
capture of Fort Ticonderoga from the British, the battle of Bunker
Hill (June), and the unsuccessful colonial assault on Quebec. Patrick
Henry died on 06 June 1799. |
1630 (Julian date: go
to 08 Jun Gregorian) Charles II, king of England.
|
On
a 29 May: 
