£2000 a year. He retired to his garden at Wimbledon, and appeared no more in public during Oliver Cromwell’s lifetime; but shortly before his death Cromwell sought a reconciliation, and Lambert and his wife visited him at Whitehall.
When Richard Cromwell was proclaimed protector his chief difficulty lay with the army, over which he exercised no effective control. Lambert, though holding no military commission, was the most popular of the old Cromwellian generals with the rank and file of the army, and it was very generally believed that he would instal himself in Oliver’s seat of power. Richard’s adherents tried to conciliate him, and the royalist leaders made overtures to him, even proposing that Charles II. should marry Lambert’s daughter. Lambert at first gave a lukewarm support to Richard Cromwell, and took no part in the intrigues of the officers at Fleetwood’s residence, Wallingford House. He was a member of the parliament which met in January 1659, and when it was dissolved in April under compulsion of Fleetwood and Desborough, he was restored to his commands. He headed the deputation to Lenthall in May inviting the return of the Rump, which led to the tame retirement of Richard Cromwell into obscurity; and he was appointed a member of the committee of safety and of the council of state. When the parliament, desirous of controlling the power of the army, withheld from Fleetwood the right of nominating officers, Lambert was named one of a council of seven charged with this duty. The parliament’s evident distrust of the soldiers caused much discontent in the army; while the entire absence of real authority encouraged the royalists to make overt attempts to restore Charles II., the most serious of which, under Sir George Booth and the earl of Derby, was crushed by Lambert near Chester on the 19th of August. He promoted a petition from his army that Fleetwood might be made lord-general and himself major-general. The republican party in the House took offence. The Commons (October 12th, 1659) cashiered Lambert and other officers, and retained Fleetwood as chief of a military council under the authority of the speaker. On the next day Lambert caused the doors of the House to be shut and the members kept out. On the 26th a “committee of safety” was appointed, of which he was a member. He was also appointed major-general of all the forces in England and Scotland, Fleetwood being general. Lambert was now sent with a large force to meet Monk, who was in command of the English forces in Scotland, and either negotiate with him or force him to terms. Monk, however, set his army in motion southward. Lambert’s army began to melt away, and he was kept in suspense by Monk till his whole army fell from him and he returned to London almost alone. Monk marched to London unopposed. The “excluded” Presbyterian members were recalled. Lambert was sent to the Tower (March 3rd, 1660), from which he escaped a month later. He tried to rekindle the civil war in favour of the Commonwealth, but was speedily recaptured and sent back to the Tower (April 24th). On the Restoration he was exempted from danger of life by an address of both Houses to the king, but the next parliament (1662) charged him with high treason. Thenceforward for the rest of his life Lambert remained in custody in Guernsey. He died in 1694.
Lambert would have left a better name in history if he had been a cavalier. His genial, ardent and excitable nature, easily raised and easily depressed, was more akin to the royalist than to the puritan spirit. Vain and sometimes overbearing, as well as ambitious, he believed that Cromwell could not stand without him; and when Cromwell was dead, he imagined himself entitled and fitted to succeed him. Yet his ambition was less selfish than that of Monk. Lambert is accused of no ill faith, no want of generosity, no cold and calculating policy. As a soldier he was far more than a fighting general and possessed many of the qualities of a great general. He was, moreover, an able writer and speaker, and an accomplished negotiator and took pleasure in quiet and domestic pursuits. He learnt his love of gardening from Lord Fairfax, who was also his master in the art of war. He painted flowers, besides cultivating them, and incurred the blame of Mrs Hutchinson by “dressing his flowers in his garden and working at the needle with his wife and his maids.” He made no special profession of religion; but no imputation is cast upon his moral character by his detractors. It has been said that he became a Roman Catholic before his death.
LAMBERT OF HERSFELD (d. c. 1088), German chronicler,
was probably a Thuringian by birth and became a monk in the
Benedictine abbey of Hersfeld in 1058. As he was ordained
priest at Aschaffenburg he is sometimes called Lambert of
Aschaffenburg, or Schafnaburg. He made a pilgrimage to the
Holy Land, and visited various monasteries of his order; but
he is famous as the author of some Annales. From the creation
of the world until about 1040 these Annales are a jejune copy
of other annals, but from 1040 to their conclusion in 1077 they
are interesting for the history of Germany and the papacy.
The important events during the earlier part of the reign of
the emperor Henry IV., including the visit to Canossa and the
battle of Hohenburg, are vividly described. Their tone is
hostile to Henry IV. and friendly to the papacy; their Latin
style is excellent. The Annales were first published in 1525
and are printed in the Monumenta Germaniae historica, Bände
iii. and v. (Hanover and Berlin, 1826 fol.). Formerly Lambert’s
reputation for accuracy and impartiality was very high, but
both qualities have been somewhat discredited.
Lambert is also regarded as the author of the Historia Hersfeldensis, the extant fragments of which are published in Band v. of the Monumenta of a Vita Lulli, Lullus, archbishop of Mainz, being the founder of the abbey of Hersfeld; and of a Carmen de bello Saxonico. His Opera have been edited with an introduction by O. Holder-Egger (Hanover, 1894).
See H. Delbrück, Über die Glaubwürdigkeit Lamberts von Hersfeld (Bonn, 1873); A. Eigenbrodt, Lampert von Hersfeld und die neuere Quellenforschung (Cassel, 1896); L. von Ranke, Zur Kritik frankisch-deutscher Reichsannalisten (Berlin, 1854); W. Wattenbach, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen Band ii. (Berlin, 1906) and A. Potthast, Bibliotheca Historica (Berlin, 1896).
LAMBESSA, the ancient Lambaesa, a village of Algeria, in
the arrondissement of Batna and department of Constantine,
7 m. S.E. of Batna and 17 W. of Timgad. The modern village,
the centre of an agricultural colony founded in 1848, is noteworthy
for its great convict establishment (built about 1850). The
remains of the Roman town, and more especially of the Roman
camp, in spite of wanton vandalism, are among the most interesting
ruins in northern Africa. They are now preserved by the
Service des Monuments historiques and excavations have resulted
in many interesting discoveries. The ruins are situated on the
lower terraces of the Jebel Aures, and consist of triumphal
arches (one to Septimius Severus, another to Commodus),
temples, aqueducts, vestiges of an amphitheatre, baths and
an immense quantity of masonry belonging to private houses.
To the north and east lie extensive cemeteries with the stones
standing in their original alignments; to the west is a similar
area, from which, however, the stones have been largely removed
for building the modern village. Of the temple of Aesculapius
only one column is standing, though in the middle of the 19th
century its façade was entire. The capitol or temple dedicated
to Jupiter, Juno and Minerva, which has been cleared of débris,
has a portico with eight columns. On level ground about two-thirds
of a mile from the centre of the ancient town stands the
camp, its site now partly occupied by the penitentiary and its
gardens. It measures 1640 ft. N. to S. by 1476 ft. E. to W., and
in the middle rise the ruins of a building commonly called, but
incorrectly, the praetorium. This noble building, which dates
from A.D 268, is 92 ft. long by 66 ft. broad and 49 ft. high;
its southern façade has a splendid peristyle half the height
of the wall, consisting of a front row of massive Ionic columns
and an engaged row of Corinthian pilasters. Behind this
building (which was roofed), is a large court giving access to
other buildings, one being the arsenal. In it have been found
many thousands of projectiles. To the S.E. are the remains of
the baths. The ruins of both city and camp have yielded many
inscriptions (Renier edited 1500, and there are 4185 in the Corpus
Inscr. Lat. vol. viii.); and, though a very large proportion are
epitaphs of the barest kind, the more important pieces supply
an outline of the history of the place. Over 2500 inscriptions
relating to the camp have been deciphered. In a museum in
the village are objects of antiquity discovered in the vicinity.
Besides inscriptions, statues, &c., are some fine mosaics found
in 1905 near the arch of Septimius Severus. The statues include
