hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
Charles Sumner 1,590 8 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 850 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 692 0 Browse Search
Kansas (Kansas, United States) 400 0 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 360 0 Browse Search
Europe 232 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 206 0 Browse Search
John Lothrop Motley 200 0 Browse Search
Mexico (Mexico, Mexico) 188 0 Browse Search
Missouri (Missouri, United States) 188 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of C. Edwards Lester, Life and public services of Charles Sumner: Born Jan. 6, 1811. Died March 11, 1874.. Search the whole document.

Found 8 total hits in 7 results.

Paradise Lost (search for this): chapter 283
for doing his best through a lifetime at anything else. Love is exacting; and the instances are very rare in which women have been willing to waive devotion to themselves, that their husbands might accomplish some great purpose. And therefore the mystery all vanishes, which has been supposed to hang over the infelicities of married life, among men of genius. It ought to be a matter of no surprise that Socrates had his Xantippe; that Milton had no sympathizer in his own family with Paradise Lost; that Columbus should have had a discontented wife; or that the thousand and one great men who have done the hardest and the best work yet accomplished on the earth, should have found their home-gardens pretty much overrun with weeds. This implies nothing in derogation of the charms of woman, for such marriages might be expected to be unhappy. It is well for men gifted in so extraordinary a degree, not to marry. Lord Coke said, Law is a jealous mistress; and for that matter, so is eve
Livingstone (search for this): chapter 283
Such power to work, such breadth of comprehension of things possible to be done, such acquisition of strength in geometrical ratio, by unbroken continuity, of dedication to a grand thought—this is not often coincident with the distracting cares of married life. It may be urged that celibacy fosters egotism and selfishness—and in many cases it does. It need not be so, nor will it if the person, be it man or woman, is dedicated to the service of humanity. Women like Florence Nightingale, and a myriad of bright names that have adorned the single life of convent, and the active duties of charity, have not made hard-hearted women. Such lives as Howard and Livingstone led, did not make hard-hearted men. In the prosecution of such pursuits, very little food is found for nurturing egotism and selfishness. It was fortunate for humanity, and fortunate beyond estimate for the colored race, that Charles Sumner had but one all-engrossing love, and that this love was for his brother m
Charles Sumner (search for this): chapter 283
Vii It would be difficult to conceive of circumstances more auspicious for intellectual culture, than those which surrounded the life of Charles Sumner. I have elsewhere spoken of some of them; but the enumeration would be far from complete if I omitted the most important one, perhaps, of all—personal social freedom: for, with a brief interval, all through life he was master of his own time, and of his own mind. However much we may praise marriage,—however sacred it may be as a divine and a myriad of bright names that have adorned the single life of convent, and the active duties of charity, have not made hard-hearted women. Such lives as Howard and Livingstone led, did not make hard-hearted men. In the prosecution of such pursuits, very little food is found for nurturing egotism and selfishness. It was fortunate for humanity, and fortunate beyond estimate for the colored race, that Charles Sumner had but one all-engrossing love, and that this love was for his brother m
John Milton (search for this): chapter 283
l its duties completely, and generously,—to find time for doing his best through a lifetime at anything else. Love is exacting; and the instances are very rare in which women have been willing to waive devotion to themselves, that their husbands might accomplish some great purpose. And therefore the mystery all vanishes, which has been supposed to hang over the infelicities of married life, among men of genius. It ought to be a matter of no surprise that Socrates had his Xantippe; that Milton had no sympathizer in his own family with Paradise Lost; that Columbus should have had a discontented wife; or that the thousand and one great men who have done the hardest and the best work yet accomplished on the earth, should have found their home-gardens pretty much overrun with weeds. This implies nothing in derogation of the charms of woman, for such marriages might be expected to be unhappy. It is well for men gifted in so extraordinary a degree, not to marry. Lord Coke said, Law i
Such power to work, such breadth of comprehension of things possible to be done, such acquisition of strength in geometrical ratio, by unbroken continuity, of dedication to a grand thought—this is not often coincident with the distracting cares of married life. It may be urged that celibacy fosters egotism and selfishness—and in many cases it does. It need not be so, nor will it if the person, be it man or woman, is dedicated to the service of humanity. Women like Florence Nightingale, and a myriad of bright names that have adorned the single life of convent, and the active duties of charity, have not made hard-hearted women. Such lives as Howard and Livingstone led, did not make hard-hearted men. In the prosecution of such pursuits, very little food is found for nurturing egotism and selfishness. It was fortunate for humanity, and fortunate beyond estimate for the colored race, that Charles Sumner had but one all-engrossing love, and that this love was for his brother m
res of married life,—filling all its duties completely, and generously,—to find time for doing his best through a lifetime at anything else. Love is exacting; and the instances are very rare in which women have been willing to waive devotion to themselves, that their husbands might accomplish some great purpose. And therefore the mystery all vanishes, which has been supposed to hang over the infelicities of married life, among men of genius. It ought to be a matter of no surprise that Socrates had his Xantippe; that Milton had no sympathizer in his own family with Paradise Lost; that Columbus should have had a discontented wife; or that the thousand and one great men who have done the hardest and the best work yet accomplished on the earth, should have found their home-gardens pretty much overrun with weeds. This implies nothing in derogation of the charms of woman, for such marriages might be expected to be unhappy. It is well for men gifted in so extraordinary a degree, not t
Florence Nightingale (search for this): chapter 283
to madness. Such power to work, such breadth of comprehension of things possible to be done, such acquisition of strength in geometrical ratio, by unbroken continuity, of dedication to a grand thought—this is not often coincident with the distracting cares of married life. It may be urged that celibacy fosters egotism and selfishness—and in many cases it does. It need not be so, nor will it if the person, be it man or woman, is dedicated to the service of humanity. Women like Florence Nightingale, and a myriad of bright names that have adorned the single life of convent, and the active duties of charity, have not made hard-hearted women. Such lives as Howard and Livingstone led, did not make hard-hearted men. In the prosecution of such pursuits, very little food is found for nurturing egotism and selfishness. It was fortunate for humanity, and fortunate beyond estimate for the colored race, that Charles Sumner had but one all-engrossing love, and that this love was for his b