Some cool oriental sword images:
Lemuel D. Dobbs
Image by jajacks62
Company C, 9th U. S. C. Infantry
The Chanute Daily Tribune, Tuesday, May 21, 1918
Died: May 20, 1918
He Had Set His Heart on Being
Present Because He Thought
It Would Be His Last.
CAPT. L. D. DOBBS,
GREAT G. A. R. MAN
He Saw Five Years, Ten Months
And Eight Days Continuous
Service in Civil War.
Wounded and Captured Twice,
Esteemed by Foe Because of
Altho he had been ill for a month Capt. L. D. Dobbs of the national military home in Leavenworth, Kas., came here Saturday night to attend the annual state encampment of the Grand Army of the Republic.
“I have never missed one of the state encampments since the first one was held,” he told his comrades, “and I want to do to the thirty-seventh because the sands of my life are running low, and it will probably be the last one I have a chance to attend.
He reported for duty, but was “detailed for service on the other side,” before the session began, dying at 5 o’clock yesterday afternoon at his room in the Oriental Hotel. Death was caused by heart failure, with old age as a contributing cause.
Expected to Get Well
Captain Dobbs was 82 years old. He was taken ill night before last and seemed to be fatally stricken then.
“Don’t worry about me, surgeon,” he told the physician who attended him. “I’m going to get well so I can attend the encampment, for I expect it will be my last.”
Sure enough he rallied, and was able yesterday afternoon to go to the physician’s office. The trip exhausted him, tho, and the physician made him lie down and rest, after cautioning him to conserve his strength. He rested until he thought he was all right, then returned to his hotel. There he was seized by another attack, and expired at 5 o’clock. Members of the Winfield delegation of the Ladies of the Grand Army of the Republic heard his labored breathing and summoned help. He died half an hour afterward.
An Ex-Prisoner of War
Captain Dobbs was for two years senior vice-commander of the National Association of Union Ex-Prisoners of War, and adjutant and quartermaster of the Kansas Association of Union Ex-Prisoners of War, and came here in advance of the encampment to look up ex-prisoners of war in this vicinity.
He was an ex-prisoner of war with an unusual record, displaying so much bravery in the presence of his captors that they held him as a prisoner of honor instead of ordering him executed, according to orders which had been given by the Confederate government.
Subject to Death Sentence
His comrade Captain W. A. Carnahan of the Thirty-Eighth Ohio, gives the following account of the incident as it was told him by an eyewitness—a major in the United States Volunteers:
“Captain Dobbs was a 1st lieutenant in command of the Nineteenth United States Colored Troops. They took part in the blowing up of Petersburg, and he was captured there. The rebel government had issued an order that all captured officers of colored troops should not be treated as prisoners of war, but were to be shot by a firing squad. Because of this such officers usually disguised their ranks when captured.
Refused to Dissemble
“When Captain Dobbs was wounded and saw that capture was inevitable, he made no attempt to disguise his rank. Instead, he retained all of its insignia, including his sword and belt, the same as if he were on duty.
“When he was taken before the brigadier general in charge of the prisoners, the general said to him:
“What is your name and rank?”
“My name is L. D. Dobbs, and I am commander of the Nineteenth Colored Troops,’ the prisoner replied, calmly and without bravado, altho he knew that the order for him to be shot might be given the next minute.
“Bravest I Ever Saw.”
“The brigadier general looked him over and then called his adjutant. Pointing to Captain Dobbs, the general said:
“There’s the bravest Yankee boy I ever saw, and I’ve seen many of them. I am going to turn him over to you as a prisoner of war. I shall hold you personally responsible if so much as a hair of his head is touched, or he is injured in any way.”
In Service Nearly Six Years
Captain Dobbs was taken prisoner twice, both times after having been wounded. He served from April 26, 1861, to March 2, 1867, seeing continuous service for five years, ten months and eight days.
He enlisted at Brookville, Pa., in Company K of the Eleventh Pennsylvania Reserve Volunteers, and was in all its engagements as color guard until June 26, 1862, when he was wounded and taken prisoner at Gaines’ Mill, Va., and confined in Castle Thunder and Belle Isle.
A Recruiting Officer.
He was exchanged August 6, 1862, then took part in the battles of Groveon, Bristoe Station, Second Bull Run, South Mountain, Antietam, Fredericksburg, Gettysburg, Williamsburg, Falling Water, Ashby’s Gap, Mine Run, and New Hope Church.
On December 21, 1863, he was commissioned by President Lincoln as second lieutenant of the Nineteenth United States Colored Troops, and recruited more than 600 men in Maryland in the next three months.
A Barefoot Flight
In 1864 he participated in the battle of the Wilderness campaign, Spottsylvania, North Anna, Cold Harbor and in the storming and capture of three largest forts defending Petersburg.
He was on duty in the trenches at Petersburg until the mine explosion on June 30, 1864, when he was again wounded and taken prisoner, being confined at Danville, Va., Salisbury, N. C., and Columbia, S. C. He escaped from the latter jail by tunneling November 21, 1864, and after tramping forty-one nights thru the mountains of western North and South Carolina and Eastern Tennessee, much of the way barefoot in snow six inches deep he reached the Union lines at Knoxville, Tenn., January 1, 1865. There he found he had been promoted to first lieutenant while in prison.
On February 1, 1865, he was detailed by the secretary of war as a member of the staff of Gen. Lew Wallace of Baltimore. In April of 1865 he rejoined his regiment in Richmond and was appointed acting adjutant. In June, 1865, he was present with his regiment to Brownsville, Tex., on July 5, was appointed Fort Brown at Brownsville, Tex., guarding the property of American citizens at Matamoras, Mexico, during the Caraval rebellion.
He was mustered out at Brownsville, January 15, 1867, and finally discharged at Baltimore, Md., March 2, 1867.
A Great Grand Army Man
“In the passing away of Captain Dobbs the Grand Army losses one of the best workers it ever had.” Captain Carnahan declared. “There are few men in Kansas who could go thru the details of the ritual as Captain Dobbs could go. He was noted Grand Army man from start to finish.”
Captain Dobbs was assistant patriotic instructor of the Kansas department five years, and a member of the National Association of Patriotic Inspectors.
Daughter in Nation’s Service
The body was taken to F. S. Wilson’s undertaking parlors where it is being held awaiting the arrival of word from his daughter, who is a stenographer for the government in Washington. He told Dr. J. H. Light, who attended him, that he had eight children. The daughter in Washington is the only one whose whereabouts were known by any of his comrades here.
The Underworld – IV
Image by egisto.sani
The Hades’ Palace
The Palace of Hades, lord of the Underworld, is depicted as a “naiskos”: six ionic columns placed over a basement support the pediment and fix the perimeter of the small temple. Inside, Hades is seating on his throne and wields a bird-tipped staff; beside him a standing Persephone holds a four-headed torch.
To the right side of the temple: Nemesis and the Dioskouroi are represented. Nemesis holds a sword in her right hand; beside her, a star identifies the two figures wearing a typical traveler’s cap , the “petasos”, as the Dioskouroi.
Down, the detail of the Judges of the Hades: Rhadamanthys, son of Zeus and Europa, stands wearing Phrygian cap and robe, is brother Minos sits enthroned beside Aiakos son of Zeus and Aegina.
To the left side of the temple, slightly left of center, Orpheus with a lyre arrives to the palace of Hades and Persephone. He is dressed in the oriental manner, as a Tharcian singer.
Apulian red-figured volute-krater
Attributed to “The Underworld Painter”,
ca. 330 – 310 BC, late classical – early Hellenistic period;
Exhibition “Die Unsterblichen Götter Griechenlands”
The British view of the Romanian Monarchy (a 19th century Wikileak!)
Image by Fergal of Claddagh
This series of six images was taken in the auditorium of the Opera House in Bucharest. They relate the images of Romanian History and the texts I have attached are no specific to the actual paintings as I am not wise enough to recognise the events – the texts come from 19th century writers writing about the Kingdom of Romania.
(Below there is an account of how the British perceived the Romanian Leadership in the early 19th century – I think of Julian Assange here; this document has similar comments to those leaked to Wikileaks by Bradley Manning on how the World Policeman of this era sees the rest of the world. It is not so different from the emerging British Empire)
PRESENT ROMANIAN LEADERS AND THEIR POLICY
WE have passed in hasty and imperfect review those features in the national life of Romania which we believed would be of interest to our readers, and will now endeavour to present to them sketches of a few of the persons of distinction who are forming public opinion, and are the leaders of progress in the country, premising, however, that there are many omissions, due partly to our own ignorance, and partly to the fact that the discussion of the merits and demerits of some of the public men would not have been fitting in this treatise.
By his rank and patriotism, and not least by his extensive knowledge, his Majesty King Charles is entitled to our first consideration. Of his political career we have spoken in our historical summary, and little more need be added. He was born on April 20, 1839, and is therefore about forty-three years of age. On November 15, 1869, he married Pauline Elisabeth, Princess of Wied, who was then about twenty-six years old; but, unfortunately, the sole offspring of their union, a little girl, lies interred in the grounds of the Asyle Helene. The King is a handsome man, rather above the average height, and, so far as his regularly formed features are concerned, he might belong to any nationality of Western Europe. He usually wears a somewhat severe expression, but the moment he begins to converse this at once disappears. His manner is quiet and earnest, although he often warms into enthusiasm, and he has the happy faculty of placing all with whom he comes into contact at perfect ease. He possesses a wide range of information, and speaks with evident knowledge on all matters of interest to his subjects or to civilisation. Of course he is well acquainted with his adopted country and its resources, takes a lively interest in its trade and capabilities; and so far as the geographical configuration of Romania is concerned, he not only knows all about the level country, but has either ridden or walked through every part of the Carpathians. His scientific knowledge is such as one might expect in an educated German, and is chiefly of a practical kind. He is deeply interested in arboriculture, about which he knows more than many who are entrusted with the care and fate of the vast woods that clothe the mountain districts, and he has often pointed out to such persons errors in their mode of felling timber. In private life the King is hospitable, genial, and very regular in his habits; he is a devout Catholic, but a constant attendant upon the services of the Greek Church.
But of course our interest in him is necessarily rather of a public than of a private character. Is he constitutional or is Europe likely some day to be favoured with a Romanian coup d’etat? The answer to these questions is clear and emphatic. Although a Hohenzollern, he is a Constitutional Liberal, we should say of an advanced type. We spoke before of his misunderstandings with his ministers; but even those who were originally opposed to him, and who watched his every act with suspicion, state that he has managed with great tact to steer clear of unconstitutional courses; indeed, from their own admissions and the facts of history, it is clear that he must have served a very trying apprenticeship in the art of constitutional rule. His demeanour towards his subjects and that of his queen, of whom we shall speak presently, is everything tbat can be desired, and both are winning their affections more completely year by year.
When the court is at Bucharest a great portion of the king’s time is devoted to giving audiences, not only to officials, but to all who desire to know their sovereign, and even to seek his counsel or that of his amiable consort. Two books are kept at the palace, one for callers only, and the other for persons who desire to see and speak with the king or queen, for they give audiences apart. Those who enter their names in the second book must give notice to the ‘ Hofmarschall,’ and they are then sent for in turn, and punctuality above all things is insisted upon. The king gives audiences from 1 to 3 or 4 p.m.; the queen for a longer time, and young as she is, for she has not yet attained her fortieth year, she is regarded as the mother of her people, and many there are who come to her for advice or consolation. But we are digressing. If the king interests himself in the civil affairs of Romania, he is a soldier before everything else. The virtual as well as the nominal head of the army, he always wears uniform, and nothing is too unimportant for his consideration in the organisation of his army. Those who have been in the field with him and much about his person extol his coolness, bravery, and endurance. He has often, risked his life in battle, was always to the fore visiting outposts and bivouacs in the most inclement weather, and there can be no doubt that it is to his bravery as a general, and to his tact and patience as a statesman, that Romania is largely indebted for her independence and her promise in the future.
The Queen of Romania is almost too well known in Europe, through her literary attainments, to need any description here; still a few particulars concerning her may be of interest to our readers. She is of the middle height, has an amiable face and still more affable manner. She, too, might pass for a lady of any western country, having very little to indicate her German nationality. Her voice is soft arid melodious, and although she can speak well on literary and scientific subjects, there is not the slightest pedantry or affectation of learning in her discourse. She is said to speak six languages, and she certainly speaks Romanian, French, German, and English. We do not know what the other two may be, but if she speaks the four languages here named as fluently and with as little foreign accent as she does our own, she may fairly claim to be an accomplished linguist. All educated Romanians speak French, and most of them German, besides their own tongue; indeed French is almost the universal language of the middle classes, whilst those who have been educated here, especially the younger men, naturally speak English well, and therefore the Queen is in this respect only somewhat ahead of her more accomplished subjects. But, as we have already stated, she is a poetess, and her verses are often marked by great depth of feeling. She possesses, too, considerable scientific knowledge and great taste in art, and one of her chief desires is to promote national industry. She sets the example by wearing the national costume (in which her portrait is usually taken) whilst in the country, and requires it to be worn on State occasions, her main object being, we were told, to encourage the peasant women who make these costumes in their own homes. But whilst in these matters, as in her devotion to public duty, the Queen identifies herself with the Romanian people and their interests, she would not be a German if she had forgotten the ‘ Fatherland.’
But her Majesty, who is a Protestant, is not the only lady now living who has made her mark in Romanian history. There is another of whom we are sure our readers will be glad to hear something, for she is an accomplished Englishwoman, and it is very questionable whether, after all, the Romanians do not owe their independence as much to her energy and devotion as to any other cause; we mean Madame Rosetti, the wife of the Home Secretary. It was mentioned in our historical summary that the patriots of 1848 made their escape to France in that year, and that they returned after the Crimean war in 1856. That is a long story told in a couple of sentences, and but for Madame Rosetti it is probable they would never have escaped, but would have languished and died in a Turkish prison in Bosnia, whilst Romania might have been at this day a Turkish pashalik or a Russian province. The fact is that all the leaders of the revolution, fifteen in number, were arrested and conveyed on board a Turkish man-of-war lying in the Danube; and Madame Rosetti, whose heroic adventures have formed the theme of a work by Michelet, helped them to escape from their captors. As we have already said,
Carmen Sylva (the Queen’s nom deplume), Leipzig, W. Friedrich, 1881. Lest our halting verse should prejudice the illustrious authoress, we append the original for those who know German: she is an Englishwoman, whose maiden name was Grant, and she had only been married about a year when the revolution broke out. Her first child was born a day or two before her husband and his comrades were arrested, but she at once left her bed, and, taking her infant in her arms, prepared to follow them. First she managed to obtain an interview with the patriots on board the Turkish vessel to which they had been conveyed, and there plans were formed which she skilfully and courageously executed. Disguising herself as a peasant, and carrying her child, she followed them up the Danube to Orsova, communicating with her friends from time to time by signals. At Orsova the prisoners were landed, and whilst they were on shore she succeeded in making their guards intoxicated, and, with the connivance of the authorities, prepared suitable conveyances, in which the patriots made their escape. First they passed through Servia, and reaching Vienna in safety they entered that city the day after the bombardment, and subsequently they made their way through Germany, accompanied by their deliverer, and found a hospitable asylum in Paris. Since her return Madame Rosetti has been as valuable a coadjutor to her husband in his prosperity as she was in his adversity, and she is also a useful and willing adviser to any of her countrymen who, visiting Rouinania, may stand in need of her assistance.
Her husband, his Excellency Constantin A. Rosetti, has also reaped the reward of his devotion to his country’s welfare. He is of an old boyard family of Italian origin, and in his early youth he was not only a soldier in the national army, but his pen also gained for him a considerable reputation, for he composed and published many interesting Roumanian poems. At the age of about thirty-two years he married the English lady to whom he owes so much, and of his adventures in 1848 we have already twice spoken. Before he permanently took up his residence in Paris after his escape, we believe he spent some time in Constantinople. In Paris he was the companion of Michelet, Quinet, and other leading writers, and with them and his countrymen the brothers Bratiano and Golesco he managed by his patriotic publications to keep the lamp of liberty burning in his own country. Here, too, he is said to have enjoyed the support of our own distinguished statesman, William Ewart Gladstone, who was subsequently made a Romanian citizen by an Act of the legislature about the year 1861, and whom the
Romanians still regard with feelings of great respect and admiration. On the return of M. Rosetti to Rou mania after the Crimean war he founded the ‘ Roman ul,’ a daily paper which still occupies a high position amongst the journals of the capital, and which remains his property. He took a conspicuous part in the union of the Principalities under Prince Couza, and supported that prince whilst his proceedings were constitutional, but he was one of the most active agents in his deposition, and the only serious objection that has been taken to his acts and those of his colleagues on that occasion is that he employed the army to bring about the prince’s overthrow. To this matter, however, we have already referred in our historical summary. In 1866 he was one of the provisional government, and was at first by no means favourably disposed towards the present king, who was, we believe, recommended to the Romanians by the Emperor Napoleon III. In later times, however, he became one of his Majesty’s most faithful advisers.
M. Rosetti is about sixty-seven years of age, full of life and energy. His career of hardship has somewhat bowed his physical frame, but it has in no way interfered with his cheerful and kindly disposition. In appearance he is an Italian, has very prominent but mild eyes, and a most thoughtful, somewhat careworn countenance. He is vif, hot and excitable, and not unfrequently lets his voice be heard if anything is going wrong in public affairs, and something is very often going wrong in Romania. He speaks Romanian, French, and German, and can write English (of which he is fond of interjecting an expressive word now and then when he is speaking in French) fairly well. Unfortunately for scandalmongers, of whom there are a good many in the capital and elsewhere, M. Rosetti lives with great simplicity on the premises of the ‘ Rornanul,’ and upon the profits of his paper and his salary; so they, are unable to charge him with peculation, which they would certainly do if he gave them the slightest justification. He is a Radical, and an uncompromising enemy of coups d’etat, and of despotism or unconstitutional proceedings in any form, a man of unflinching honesty and the leader of political thought in his country. In fact, he is a patriot, and his countrymen know and appreciate the fact.
They usually couple his name with that of M. Bratiano, who is President of the Council and Minister of Finance, and, so far as temperament is concerned, the very opposite of his colleague. M. Bratiano is a quiet, courteous gentleman, somewhat younger than M. Rosetti. His features are regular and handsome, his beard and hair iron-grey, and his voice even and melodious. He is full of pleasant humour, and has the bearing and manner of an English gentleman; but although an excellent debater, he is not a good linguist. In Romania they say, ‘ Rosetti thinks and Bratiano speaks,’ but Bratiano thinks as well as speaks. So completely at one are the two statesmen that many of the uninformed poorer classes who have not seen them believe them to be one person, whom they call ( Bratiano-Rosetti,’ and whilst we were in Bucarest we saw a caricature (an art in which the Romanians take great delight) where the two statesmen were depicted as the Siamese twins.
The aim and policy of M. Bratia.no are well expressed in one of his despatches on the question of the Danube, which were made public by that diplomatic phenomenon M. Callimaki-Catargi. * Our attitude,’ he says, ‘ like the whole policy of the ministry to which I belong, has always been, and ever should be, defensive, not offensive.’
Amongst the other leaders of political thought in Roumania is Prince Demeter Ghika, President of the Senate, a fine burly good-natured gentleman of the old school; Prince Jon Ghika, at present the Romanian Ambassador in London, a patriot and a savant, whose sons were educated in England; M. Statesco, the Foreign Minister, a young and promising statesman; M. Stourdza, the director of the National Credit Association; and there are doubtless many others of whom we do not like to speak without a nearer acquaintance, or better information than we possess. One of these is M. Cogalniceanu, a deputy, who has written a good history of Romania, was a minister under Prince Couza, and we believe the author of the celebrated Act of 18G4 which created the peasant proprietary of the country.
From men to measures is a natural transition in politics. Although we have endeavoured to show, and do not hesitate to repeat here, that some of the great principles laid down in the Constitution of Romania are only beginning to be carried out in practice, it is but just to add that the vigour and energy with which the party of progress has of late years developed the resources of the country is a matter of surprise and admiration even to foreigners resident there who are acquainted with our Western methods. The present regime began, as we have already said, in 1875, and since that time the foreign policy of the party in power first liberated the nation from the last vestige of foreign despotism; then firmly established it as a European kingdom. That they occasionally make mistakes no one can deny. For. example, the recent announcement in the speech from the throne, that Romania was prepared in the present and future for every sacrifice which it might be necessary to make to ensure in all respects absolute facility of navigation of the Danube, appears to an outsider to have been an error in judgment, if the government were not prepared to hear with equanimity of the threatened departure of the ambassador of a neighbouring State which had put the cap upon its head, and against whose unwarrantable pretensions the remark was directed. But it is easy to be wise after the event, and we admit that it is presumptuous for anyone to criticise hastily any matter that is being tossed about on the troubled sea of Oriental politics. Living as we do on a sea-girt isle which is practically unapproachable to an external foe, and having for centuries enjoyed the blessings of freedom, we can have no conception of the difficult cards which Romanian statesmen have to play in the political game in which they are often compelled, much against their desire, to participate. From time to time they hear great international theories propounded for the benefit of their powerful neighbours, to which they are compelled to close their ears, however nearly those principles may apply to their own condition. Suppose, for example, some European Power claims new territory on the ground of geographical position. Why, ask the Romanians, should we be hemmed in as we are on every side? Why should not the plains on both sides of the Danube guarded by the Balkans and the Carpathians constitute a strong realm, one and indivisible, with the great river flowing as an artery through its centre? The answer is, Russia! If any of the Great Powers had insisted upon such a readjustment in the East, she would have opposed it, for is not Bulgaria her last stepping-stone to Constantinople? ‘ Skobeleff the First, King of Bulgaria ‘ would suit her aims far better. This reminds one of Pan-Slavism.’ Who will deny the right of adjacent branches of the same race to live under one government? Admitted; but then why not also Pan-Romanism? In that case considerable portions of Austro-Hungary, Bessarabia, Bulgaria, Serbia, would have to be added to the present dominions of King Charles of Romania; for there are almost as many Romanians in those countries as there are within the present boundaries of the kingdom.
But if Romanian statesmen are permitted to enjoy their reflections on these interesting political topics, they know that it would be unsafe to publish them, for, as we have seen, if they venture even to cry too loudly ‘Romania for the Romanians,’ some hectoring neighbour instantly takes the alarm and threatens to withdraw its ambassador; and in case of a fracas between any two such neighbouring States, even the rights which she at present enjoys would hardly be respected. Her policy is therefore tolerably well defined, and it was ably set forth in the royal speech which contained that dangerous reference to Austrian pretensions. Peace is requisite for her, in order that her Parliament may occupy itself in developing the riches of the soil and the economic interests of the country; but the organisation of a strong defensive army is equally necessary to protect those interests from grasping and despotic States in her vicinity, and because, ‘ by the development of all the forces of the nation, Romania will become an element of order, peace, and progress in Eastern Europe.’ In fact, she must make herself, by peaceful measures, what Michael the Brave succeeded for a very short time, and from motives of personal ambition, in making her by the sword in his day, the arbiter of surrounding nations, the Belgium of the East, which no aggressive despot would dare to assail; and she must become sufficiently strong to resist not only inimical but friendly foreign occupations, which have such a demoralising effect upon her people.
On this undertaking her Government has already for some years past been embarked. It has secured railway property for the State which was in the hands of aliens, has begun to improve watercourses, created national credit institutions, reduced the interest upon the national debt, increased the value of Romanian securities, and has generally followed, as it still pursues, the ways of ‘peace, retrenchment, and reform.’ l
We have no wish to patronise Romania even in words, for her best friend is he who tells her to depend entirely on her own resources and develop those herself; to carve her fortunes, and to shape her ends. But when we look upon her sufferings, reflecting how for ages she has lain beneath the claws of savage enemies, quailed under despots who sucked the lifeblood of the nation, and then compare her constitutional democracy with ours nay, if alone from a material point of view we weigh the interest we have in her prosperity, we cannot fail to see that in the East is rising up a Power, in part of our creation, young and weak as yet, but full of hope and promise; and therefore, in concluding this imperfect record of her ‘ past and present,’ we heartily commend her future to the earnest watchfulness of every English friend of liberty.
ROMANIA PAST AND PRESENT