Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Encyclopaedia

Friday, June 18th, 2021

ENCYCLOPAEDIA. The Greeks seem to have understood by encyclopaedia (ἐγκυκλοπαιδεία, or ἐγκύκλιος παιδεία) instruction in the whole circle (ἐν κυκλῷ) or complete system of learning—education in arts and sciences. Thus Pliny, in the preface to his Natural History, says that his book treated of all the subjects of the encyclopaedia of the Greeks, “Jam omnia attingenda quae Graeci τῆς ἐγκυκλοπαιδείας vocant.” Quintilian (Inst. Orat. i. 10) directs that before boys are placed under the rhetorician they should be instructed in the other arts, “ut efficiatur orbis ille doctrinae quam Graeci ἐγκυκλοπαιδείαν vocant.” Galen (De victus ratione in morbis acutis, c. 11) speaks of those who are not educated ἐν τῇ ἐγκυκλοπαιδείᾳ. In these passages of Pliny and Quintilian, however, from one or both of which the modern use of the word seems to have been taken, ἐγκύκλιος παιδεία is now read, and this seems to have been the usual expression. Vitruvius (lib. vi. praef.) calls the encyclios or ἐγκύκλιος παιδεία of the Greeks “doctrinarum omnium disciplina,” instruction in all branches of learning. Strabo (lib. iv. cap. 10) speaks of philosophy καὶ τὴν ἄλλην παιδείαν ἐγκύκλιον. Tzetzes (Chiliades, xi. 527), quoting from Porphyry’s Lives of the Philosophers, says that ἐγκύκλια μαθήματα was the circle of grammar, rhetoric, philosophy and the four arts under it, arithmetic, music, geometry and astronomy. Zonaras explains it as grammar, poetry, rhetoric, philosophy, mathematics and simply every art and science (ἁπλῶς πᾶσα τέχνη καὶ ἐπιστήμη), because sophists go through them as through a circle. The idea seems to be a complete course of instruction in all parts of knowledge. An epic poem was called cyclic when it contained the whole mythology; and among physicians κύκλῳ θεραπεύειν, cyclo curare (Vegetius, De arte veterinaria, ii. 5, 6), meant a cure effected by a regular and prescribed course of diet and medicine (see Wower, De polymathia, c. 24, § 14).

The word encyclopaedia was probably first used in English by Sir Thomas Elyot. "In an oratour is required to be a heape of all maner of lernyng: whiche of some is called the worlde of science, of other the circle of doctrine, whiche is in one worde of greke Encyclopedia" (The Governour, bk. i. chap. xiii.). In his Latin dictionary, 1538, he explains "Encyclios et Encyclia, the cykle or course of all doctrines," and "Encyclopedia, that lernynge whiche comprehendeth all lyberall science and studies." The term does not seem to have been used as the title of a book by the ancients or in the middle ages. The edition of the works of Joachimus Fortius Ringelbergius, printed at Basel in 1541, is called on the title-page Lucubrationes vel potius absolutissima KvKXoraulEca. Paulus Scalichius de Lika, an Hungarian count, wrote Encyclopaediae seu orbis disciplinarum epistemon (Basileae, 1599, 4to). Alsted published in 1608 Encyclopaedia cursus philosophici, and afterwards expanded this into his great work, noticed below, calling it without any limitation Encyclopaedia, because it treats of everything that can be learned by man in this life. This is now the most usual sense in which the word encyclopaedia is used - a book treating of all the various kinds of knowledge. The form "cyclopaedia" is not merely without any appearance of classical authority, but is etymologically less definite, complete and correct. For as Cyropaedia means "the instruction of Cyrus," so cyclopaedia may mean "instruction of a circle." Vossius says, "Cyclopaedia is sometimes found, but the best writers say encyclopaedia" (De vitiis sermonis, 16 45, p. 402). Gesner says, "KUKXoS est circulus, quae figura est simplicissima et perfectissima simul: nam incipi potest ubicunque in illa et ubicunque cohaeret. Cyclopaedia itaque significat omnem doctrinarum scientiam inter se cohaerere; Encyclopaedia est institutio in illo circulo." (Isagoge, 1774, i. 40).

In a more restricted sense, encyclopaedia means a system or classification of the various branches of knowledge, a subject on which many books have been published, especially in Germany, as Schmid's Allgemeine Encyklopeidie und Methodologie der Wissenschaften (Jena, 181o, 4to, 241 pages). In this sense the Novum Organum of Bacon has often been called an encyclopaedia. But it is "a grammar only of the sciences: a cyclopaedia is not a grammar, but a dictionary; and to confuse the meanings of grammar and dictionary is to lose the benefit of a distinction which it is fortunate that terms have been coined to convey" (Quarterly Review, cxiii. 354). Fortunius Licetus, an Italian physician, entitled several of his dissertations on Roman altars and other antiquities encyclopaedias (as, for instance, Encyclopaedia ad Aram mysticam Nonarii, Pataviae, 1631, 4to), because in composing them he borrowed the aid of all the sciences. The Encyclopaedia moralis of Marcellinus de Pise (Paris, 1646, fol., 4 vols.) is a series of sermons. Encyclopaedia is often used to mean a book which is, or professes to be, a complete or very full collection or treatise relating to some particular subject, as Blaine's work, The Encyclopaedia of Rural Sports (London, 185 2); The Encyclopaedia of Wit (London, 180 3); The Vocal Encyclopaedia (London, 1807, 16mo), a collection of songs, catches, &c. The word is frequently used for an alphabetical dictionary treating fully of some science or subject, as Murray, Encyclopaedia of Geography (London, 1834); Lefebvre Laboulaye, Encyclopedic technologique: Dictionnaire des arts et manufactures (Paris, 1845-1847). Whether under the name of "dictionary" or "encyclopaedia" large numbers of this class of reference-work have been published. These are essentially encyclopaedic, being subject books and not word-books. The important books of this character are referred to in the articles dealing with the respective subjects, but the following may be mentioned here: the Jewish Encyclopedia, in 12 vols. (1901), a descriptive record of the history, religion, literature and customs of the Jewish people from the earliest times; the Encyclopaedia of Sport, 2 vols. (1897-1898); Holtzendorff's Encyklopddie der Rechtswissenschaft (1870; an edition in 2 vols., 1904); the Dictionary of Political Economy, edited by R. H. Inglis Pal.grave, 3 vols. (1894; reprinted 1901); the Encyclopaedia Biblica, edited by T. K. Cheyne and J. Sutherland Black, 4 vols. (1899-1903); the Dictionary of the Bible, edited by James Hastings, 4 vols., with a supplementary volume (1904); an interesting series is the Repertoire general du commerce, dealing with the foreign trade of France, of which one part, the Encyclopaedia of Trade between the United States of America and France, with a preface by M. Gabriel Hanotaux, appeared, in French and English, in 1904.

The great Chinese encyclopaedias are referred to in the article on Chinese Literature. It will be sufficient to mention here the Wen hien t'ung k'ao, compiled by Ma Twa-lin in the 14th century, the encyclopaedia ordered to be compiled by the Emperor Yung-loh in the 15th century, and the Ku Kin t`u shu thi eh'eng prepared for the Emperor K`ang-hi (d. 1721), in 5020 volumes. A copy of this enormous work, bound in some 700 volumes, is in the British Museum.

The most ancient encyclopaedia extant is Pliny's Natural History in 37 books (including the preface) and 2493 chapters, which may be thus described generally:-book 1, preface; book 2, cosmography, astronomy and meteorology; books 3 to 6, geography; books 7 to zoology, including man, and the invention of the arts; books 12 to 19, botany; books 20 to 32, medicines, vegetable and animal remedies, medical authors and magic; books 33 to 37, metals, fine arts, mineralogy and mineral remedies. Pliny, who died A.D. 79, was not a naturalist, a physician or an artist, and collected his work in his leisure intervals while engaged in public affairs. He says it contains 20,000 facts (too small a number by half, says Lemaire), collected from 2000 books by Ioo authors. Hardouin has given a list of 464 authors quoted by him. His work was a very high authority in the middle ages, and 4.3 editions of it were printed before 1536.

Martianus Minneus Felix Capella, an African, wrote (early in the 5th cent.), in verse and prose, a sort of encyclopaedia, which is important from having been regarded in the middle ages as a model storehouse of learning, and used in the schools, where the scholars had to learn the verses by heart, as a text-book of highclass education in the arts. It is sometimes entitled Satyra, or Satyricon, but is usually known as De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii, though this title is sometimes confined to the first two books, a rather confused allegory ending with the apotheosis of Philologia and the celebration of her marriage in the milky way, where Apollo presents to her the seven liberal arts, who, in the succeeding seven books, describe their respective branches of knowledge, namely, grammar, dialectics (divided into metaphysics and logic), rhetoric, geometry (geography, with some single geometrical propositions), arithmetic (chiefly the properties of numbers), astronomy and music (including poetry). The style is that of an African of the 5th century, full of grandiloquence, metaphors and strange words. He seldom mentions his authorities, and sometimes quotes authors whom he does not even seem to have read. His work was frequently copied in the middle ages by ignorant transcribers, and was eight times printed from 1499 to 1599. The best annotated edition is by Kopp (Frankfort, 1836, 4to), and the most convenient and the best text is that of Eysserhardt (Lipsiae, 1866, 8vo).

Isidore, bishop of Seville from 600 to 630, wrote Etymologiarum libri XX. (often also entitled his Origines) at the request of his friend Braulio, bishop of Saragossa, who after Isidore's death divided the work into books, as it was left unfinished, and divided only into titles.

The tenth book is an alphabet of 625 Latin words, not belonging to his other subjects, with their explanations as known to him, and often with their etymologies, frequently very ,absurd. The other books contain 448 chapters, and are:-I, grammar (Latin); 2, rhetoric and dialectics; 3, the four mathematical disciplinesarithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy; 4, medicine; 5, laws and times (chronology), with a short chronicle ending in 627; 6, ecclesiastical books and offices; 7, God, angels and the orders of the faithful; 8, the church and sects; 9, languages, society and relationships; II, man and portents; 12, animals, in eight classes, namely, pecora et jumenta, beasts, small animals (including spiders, crickets and ants), serpents, worms, fishes, birds and small winged creatures, chiefly insects; 13, the world and its parts; 14, the earth and its parts, containing chapters on Asia, Europe and Libya, that is, Africa; 15, buildings, fields and their measures; 16, stones (of which one is echo) and metals; 17, de rebus rusticis; 18, war and games; 19, ships, buildings and garments; 20, provisions, domestic and rustic instruments.

Isidore appears to have known Hebrew and Greek, and to have been familiar with the Latin classical poets, but he is a mere collector, and his derivations given all through the work are not unfrequently absurd, and, unless when very obvious, will not bear criticism. He seldom mentions his authorities except when he quotes the poets or historians. Yet his work was a great one for the time, and for many centuries was a much valued authority and a rich source of material for other works, and he had a high reputation for learning both in his own time and in subsequent ages. His Etymologies were often imitated, quoted and copied. MSS. are very numerous: Antonio (whose editor, Bayer, saw nearly 4 o) says, "plures passimque reperiuntur in bibliothecarum angulis." This work was printed nine times before 1529.

Hrabanus Maurus, whose family name was Magnentius, was educated in the abbey of Fulda, ordained deacon in 802 ("Annales Francorum" in Bouquet, Historiens de la France, v. 66), sent to the school of St Martin of Tours, then directed by Alcuin, where he seems to have learned Greek, and is said by Trithemius to have been taught Hebrew, Syriac and Chaldee by Theophilus an Ephesian. In his Commentaries on Joshua (lib. ii. c. 5) he speaks of having resided at Sidon. He returned to Fulda and taught the school there. He became abbot of Fulda in 822, resigned in April 842, was ordained archbishop of Mainz on the 26th of July 847, and died on the 4th of February 856. He compiled an encyclopaedia De universo (also called in some MSS. De universals natura, De natura rerum, and De origine rerum) in 22 books and 325 chapters. It is chiefly a rearrangement of Isidore's Etymologies, omitting the first four books, half of the fifth and the tenth (the seven liberal arts, law, medicine and the alphabet of words), and copying the rest, beginning with the seventh book, verbally, though with great omissions, and adding (according to Ritter, Geschichte der Philosophic, vii. 193, from Alcuin, Augustine or some other accessible source) the meanings given in the Bible to the subject matter of the chapter; while things not mentioned in Scripture, especially such as belong to classical antiquity, are omitted, so that his work seems to be formed of two alternating parts. His arrangement of beginning with God and the angels long prevailed in methodical encyclopaedias. His last six books follow very closely the order of the last five of Isidore, from which they are taken. His omissions are characteristic of the diminished literary activity and more contracted knowledge of his time. His work was presented to Louis the German, king of Bavaria, at Hersfeld in October 847, and was printed in 1473, fol., probably at Venice, and again at Strassburg by Mentelin about 1472-1475, fol., 334 pages.

Michael Constantine Psellus, the younger, wrote Oebavica Xia rravTobarrrt, dedicated to the emperor Michael Ducas, who reigned 1071-1078. It was printed by Fabricius in his Bibliotheca Graeca (1712), vol. v., in 186 pages 4to and 193 chapters, each containing a question and answer. Beginning with divinity, it goes on through natural history and astronomy, and ends with chapters on excessive hunger, and why flesh hung from a fig-tree becomes tender. As collation with a Turin MS. showed that 35 chapters were wanting, Harles has omitted the text in his edition of Fabricius, and gives only the titles of the chapters (x. 84-88) .

The author of the most famous encyclopaedia of the middle ages was Vincent of Beauvais (c. 1190- c 1264), whose work Bibliotheca mundi or Speculum majus-divided, as we have it, into four parts, Speculum naturale, Speculum doctrinale, Speculum morale (this part should be ascribed to a later hand), and Speculum historiale-was the great compendium of mid-13th century knowledge. Vincent of Beauvais preserved several works of the middle ages and gives extracts from many lost classics and valuable readings of others, and did more than any other medieval writer to awaken a taste for classical literature. Fabricius (Bibl. Graeca, 1728, xiv. pp. 107-125) has given a list of 328 authors, Hebrew, Arabic, Greek and Latin, quoted in the Speculum naturale. To these should be added about Too more for the doctrinale and historiale. As Vincent did not know Greek or Arabic, he' used Latin translations. This work is dealt with separately in the article on Vincent Of Beauvais.

Brunetto Latini of Florence (born 1230, died 1294), the master of Dante and Guido Cavalcanti, while an exile in France between 1260 and 1267, wrote in French Li Livres dou Tresor, in 3 books and 413 chapters. Book i. contains the origin of the world, the history of the Bible and of the foundation of governments, astronomy, geography, and lastly natural history, taken from Aristotle, Pliny, and the old French Bestiaries. The first part of Book ii., on morality, is from the Ethics of Aristotle, which Brunetto had translated into Italian. The second part is little more than a copy of the well-known collection of extracts from ancient and modern moralists, called the Moralities of the Philosophers, of which there are many MSS. in prose and verse. Book iii., on politics, begins with a treatise on rhetoric, chiefly from Cicero De inventione, with many extracts from other writers and Brunetto's remarks. The last part, the most original and interesting of all, treats of the government of the Italian republics of the time. Like many of his contemporaries, Brunetto revised his work, so that there are two editions, the second made after his return from exile. MSS. are singularly numerous, and exist in all the dialects then used in France. Others were written in Italy. It was translated into Italian in the latter part of the 13th century by Bono Giamboni, and was printed at Trevigi, 1 474, fol., Venice, 1528 and 1533. The Tesoro of Brunetto must not be confounded with his Tesoretto, an Italian poem of 2937 short lines. Napoleon I. had intended to have the French text of the Tesoro printed with commentaries, and appointed a commission for the purpose. It was at last published in the Collection des documents inedits (Paris, 1863, 4to, 772 pages), edited by Chabaille from 42 MSS.

Bartholomew de Glanville, an English Franciscan friar, wrote about 1360 a most popular work, De proprietatibus rerum, in 19 books and 1230 chapters.

Book i relates to God; 2, angels; 3, the soul; 4, the substance of the body; 5, anatomy; 6, ages; 7, diseases; 8, the heavens (astronomy and astrology); 9, time; io, matter and form; 11, air; 12, birds (including insects, 38 names, Aquila to Vespertilio); 13, water (with fishes); 14, the earth (42 mountains, Ararath to Ziph); 15, provinces (171 countries, Asia to Zeugia); 16, precious stones (including coral, pearl, salt, 104 names, Arena to Zinguttes); 17, trees and herbs (197, Arbor to Zucarum); 18, animals (114, Aries to Vipera); 19, colours, scents, flavours and liquors, with a list of 36 eggs (Aspis to Vultur). Some editions add book 20, accidents of things, that is, numbers, measures, weights and sounds. The Paris edition of 1574 has a book on bees.

There were 15 editions before 1500. An English translation was completed filth February 1398 by John Trevisa, and printed by Wynkyn de Worde, Westminster, 1 495 ? fol.; London, 1533, fol.; and with considerable additions by Stephen Batman, a physician, London, 1582, fol. It was translated into French by Jehan Corbichon at the command of Charles V. of France, and printed 14 times from 1482 to 1556. A Dutch translation was printed in 1479, and again at Haarlem, 1485, fol.; and a Spanish translation by Padre Vincente de Burgos, Tholosa, 1494, fol.

Pierre Bersuire (Berchorius), a Benedictine, prior of the abbey of St Elco in Paris, where he died in 1362, wrote a kind of encyclopaedia, chiefly relating to divinity, in three parts:- Reductorium morale super totam Bibliam, 428 moralitates in 34 books on the Bible from Genesis to Apocalypse; Reductorium morale de proprietatibus rerum, in 14 books and 958 chapters, a methodical encyclopaedia or system of nature on the plan of Bartholomew de Glanville, and chiefly taken from him (Berchorius places animals next after fishes in books 9 and 10, and adopts as natural classes volatilia, natatilia and gressibilia); Dictionarius, an alphabetical dictionary of 3514 words used in the Bible with moral expositions, occupying in the last edition 1558 folio pages. The first part was printed fi fi times from 1474 to 1515, and the third 4 times. The three parts were printed together as Petri Berchorii opera omnia (an incorrect title, for he wrote much besides), Moguntiae, 1609, fol., 3 vols., 2719 pages; Coloniae Agrippinae, 1631, fol., 3 vols.; ib. 1730-1731, fol., 6 vols., 2570 pages.

A very popular small encyclopaedia, Margarita philosophica, in 12 books, divided into 26 tractates and 573 chapters, was written by Georg Reisch, a German, prior of the Carthusians of Freiburg, and confessor of the emperor Maximilian I. Books 1 -7 treat of the seven liberal arts; 8, 9, principles and origin of natural things; io, 11, the soul, vegetative, sensitive and intellectual; 12, moral philosophy. The first edition, Heidelberg, 1496, 4to, was followed by 8 others to 1535. An Italian translation by the astronomer Giovanno Paolo Gallucci was published at Venice in 1594, 1138 small quarto pages, of which 343 consist of additional tracts appended by the translator.

Raphael Maffei, called Volaterranus, being a native of Volterra, where he was born in 1451 and died 5th January 1522, wrote Commentarii Urbani (Rome, 1506, fol., in 38 books), so called because written at Rome. This encyclopaedia, printed eight times up to 1603, is remarkable for the great importance given to geography, and also to biography, a subject not included in previous encyclopaedias. Indeed, the book is formed of three nearly equal parts,-geographia, 11 books; anthropologia (biography), 11 books; and philologia, 15 books. The books are not divided into short chapters in the ancient manner, like those of its predecessors. The edition of 1603 contains 814 folio pages. The first book consists of the table of contents and a classed index; books 2-12, geography; 13-23, lives of illustrious men, the popes occupying book 22, and the emperors book 23; 24-27, animals and plants; 28, metals, gems, stones, houses and other inanimate things; 34, de scientiis cyclicis (grammar and rhetoric); 35, de scientiis mathematicis, arithmetic, geometry, optica, catoptrica, astronomy and astrology; 36-38, Aristotelica (on the works of Aristotle).

Giorgio Valla, born about 1430 at Placentia, and therefore called Placentinus, died at Venice in 1499 while lecturing on the immortality of the soul. Aldus published his work, edited by his son Giovanni Pietro Valla, De expetendis et fugiendis rebus, Venetiis, 1501, fol. 2 vols.

It contains 49 books and 2119 chapters. Book r is introductory, on knowledge, philosophy and mathematics, considered generally (he divides everything to be sought or avoided into three kindsthose which are in the mind, in the body by nature or habit, and thirdly, external, coming from without); books 2-4, arithmetic; 5-9, music; 10-15, geometry, including Euclid and mechanicsbook 15 being in three long chapters-de spiritualibus, that is, pneumatics and hydraulics, de catoptricis, and de optice; 16-19, astrology (with the structure and use of the astrolabe); 20-23, physics (including metaphysics); 24-30, medicine; 31-34, grammar; 35-37, dialectics; 38, poetry; 39, 40, rhetoric; 41, moral philosophy; 42-44, economics; 45, politics; 46-48, de corporis commodis et incommodis, on the good and evil of the body (and soul); 49, de rebus externis, as glory, grandeur, &c.

Antonio Zara, born 1574, made bishop of Petina in Istria 1600, finished on the 17th of January 1614 a work published as Anatomia ingeniorum et scientiarum, Venetiis, 1615, 4to, 664 pages, in four sections and 54 membra. The first section, on the dignity and excellence of man, in 16 membra, considers him in all his bodily and mental aspects. The first membrum describes his structure and his soul, and in the latter part contains the author's preface, the deeds of his ancestors, an account of himself, and the dedication of his book to Ferdinand, archduke of Austria. Four membra treat of the discovery of character by chiromancy, physiognomy, dreams and astrology. The second section treats of 16 sciences of the imagination-writing, magic, poetry, oratory, courtiership (aulicitas), theoretical and mystic arithmetic, geometry, architecture, optics, cosmography, astrology, practical medicine, war, government. The third section treats of 8 sciences of intellect-logic, physics, metaphysics, theoretical medicine, ethics, practical jurisprudence, judicature, theoretical theology. The fourth section treats of 12 sciences of memory-grammar, practical arithmetic, human history, sacred canons, practical theology, sacred history, and lastly the creation and the final catastrophe. The book, now very rare, is well arranged, with a copious index, and is full of curious learning.

Johann Heinrich Alsted, born 1588, died 1638, published Encyclopaedia septem tomis distincta, Herbornae Nassoviorum, 1630, fol. 7 vols., 2543 pages of very small type. It is in 35 books, divided into 7 classes, preceded by 48 synoptical tables of the whole, and followed by an index of 119 pages.

I. Praecognita disciplinarum, 4 books, hexilogia, technologia, archelogia, didactica, that is, on intellectual habits and on the classification, origin and study of the arts. II. Philology, 6 books, lexica, grammar, rhetoric, logic, oratory and poetry; book 5, lexica, contains dictionaries explained in Latin of 1076 Hebrew, 842 Syriac, 1 934 Arabic, 1923 Greek and 2092 Latin words, and also nomenclator technologiae, &c., a classified vocabulary of terms used in the arts and sciences, in Latin, Greek and Hebrew, filling 34 pages; book 6 contains Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin and German grammars; book 10, poetica, contains a list of 61 Rotwelsch words. III. Theoretic philosophy, io books:-book r1, metaphysics; 12, pneumatics (on spirits); 13, physics; 14, arithmetic; 15, geometry; 16, cosmography; 17, uranometria (astronomy and astrology); 18, geography (with maps of the Old World, eastern Mediterranean, and Palestine under the Old and New Testaments, and a plate of Noah's ark); 19, optics; 20, music. IV. Practical philosophy, 4 books:- 21, ethics; 22, economics (on relationships); 23, politics, with florilegium politicum, 119 pages of extracts from historians, philosophers and orators; 24, scholastics (on education, with a florilegium of 25 pages). V. The three superior faculties:-25, theology; 26, jurisprudence; 27, medicine (ending with the rules of the Salernian school). VI. Mechanical arts in general:-book 28, mathematical mechanical arts; book 29, agriculture, gardening, care of animals, baking, brewing, preparing medicines, metallurgy (with mining); book 30, physical mechanical arts-printing, dialling, &c. Under paedutica (games) is Vida's Latin poem on chess, and one by Leuschner on the ludus Lorzius. VII. Farragines disciplinarum, 5 books:-31, mnemonics; 32, history; 33, chronology; 34, architecture; 35, quodlibetica, miscellaneous arts, as magic, cabbala, alchemy, magnetism, &c., with others apparently distinguished and named by himself, as, paradoxologia, the art of explaining paradoxes; dipnosophistica, the art of philosophizing while feasting; cyclognomica, the art of conversing well de quovis scibili; tabacologia, the nature, use and abuse of tobacco, &c.- in all 35 articles in this book.

Alsted's encyclopaedia was received with very great applause, and was highly valued. Lami (Entretiens, 1684, p. 188) thought it almost the only encyclopaedia which did not deserve to be despised. Alsted's learning was very various, and his reading was very extensive and diversified. He gives few references, and Thomasius charges him with plagiarism, as he often copies literally without any acknowledgment. He wrote not long before the appearance of encyclopaedias in modern languages superseded his own and other Latin books, and but a short time before the alphabetical arrangement began to prevail over the methodical. His book was reprinted, Lugduni, 1649, fol. 4 vols., 2608 pages.

Jean de Magnon, historiographer to the king of France, undertook to write an encyclopaedia in French heroic verse, which was to fill ten volumes of 20,000 lines each, and to render libraries merely a useless ornament. But he did not live to finish it, as he was killed at night by robbers on the Pont Neuf in Paris, in April 1662. The part he left was printed as La Science universelle, Paris, 1663, fol., 348 pages,-10 books containing about 11,000 lines. They begin with the nature of God, and end with the history of the fall of man. His verses, say Chaudon and Delandine, are perhaps the most nerveless, incorrect, obscure and flat in French poetry; yet the author had been the friend of Moliere, and had acted with him in comedy. Louis Moreri(born on the 25th of March 1643 at Bargemont, in the diocese of Frejus, died on the 10th of July 1680 at Paris) wrote a dictionary of history, genealogy and biography, Le Grand Dictionnaire historique, ou le melange curieux de l'histoire sacree et profane, Lyons, 1674, fol. He began a second edition on a larger scale, published at Lyons in 1681, in two volumes folio; the sixth edition was edited by Jean le Clerc, Amsterdam, 1691, fol. 4 vols.; the twentieth and last edition, Paris, 1759, fol. 10 vols. Moreri's dictionary, still very useful, was of great value and importance, although not the first of the kind. It superseded the very inferior compilation of Juigne-Broissinere, Dictionnaire theologique, historique, poetique, cosmographique, et chronologique, Paris, 1644, 4to; Rouen, 1668, &c.,-a translation, with additions, of the Dictionarium historicum, geographicum, et poeticum of Charles Estienne, published in 1553, 4to, and often afterwards. As such a work was much wanted, Juigne's book went through twelve editions in less than thirty years, notwithstanding its want of criticism, errors, anachronisms, defects and inferior style.

Johann Jacob Hofmann (born on the 11th of September 1635, died on the 10th of March 1706), son of a schoolmaster at Basel, which he is said never to have left, and where he was professor of Greek and History, wrote Lexicon universale historicogeographico - chronologico - poetic() - philologicum, Basileae, 1677, fol. 2 vols., 1823 pages, a dictionary of history, biography, geography, genealogies of princely families, chronology, mythology and philology. At the end is Nomenclator MtE6yXcorros, an index of names of places, people, &c., in many languages, carefully collected, and explained in Latin, filling 1 ro pages; with an index of subjects not forming separate articles, occupying 34 pages. In 1683 he published a continuation in 2 vols. fol., 22 93 pages, containing, besides additions to the subjects given in his lexicon, the history of animals, plants, stones, metals, elements, stars, and especially of man and his affairs, arts, honours, laws, magic, music, rites and a vast number of other subjects. In 1698 he published a second edition, Lugduni Batavorum, fol. 4 vols., 3742 pages, incorporating the continuation with additions. From the great extent of his plan, many articles, especially in history, are superficial and faulty.

Etienne Chauvin was born at Nismes on the 18th of April 1640. He fled to Rotterdam on the revocation of the edict of Nantes, and in 1688 supplied Bayle's place in his lectures on philosophy. In 1695 he was invited by the elector of Brandenburg to go as professor of philosophy to Berlin, where he became the representative of the Cartesian philosophy, and died on the -6th of April 1725. He wrote Lexicon rationale, sive thesaurus philosophicus ordine alphabetico digestus, Rotterdami, 1692, fol., 746 pages and 30 plates. An improved and enlarged edition was printed as Lexicon philosophicum secundis curis, Leovardiae, 1713, large folio, 725 pages and 30 plates. This great work may be considered as a dictionary of the Cartesian philosophy, and was very much used by Brucker and other earlier historians of philosophy. It is written in a very dry and scholastic style, and seldom names authorities.

The great dictionary of French, begun by the French Academy on the 7th of February 1639, excluded all words especially belonging to science and the arts. But the success of the rival dictionary of Furetiere, which, as its title-page, as well as that of the Essais published in 1684, conspicuously announced, professed to give "les termes de toutes les Sciences.et des Arts," induced Thomas Corneille, a member of the Academy, to compile Le Dictionnaire des arts et des sciences, which the Academy published with the first edition of their dictionary, Paris, 1694, folio, as a supplement in two volumes containing 1236 pages. It was reprinted at Amsterdam, 1696, fol. 2 vols., and at Paris in 1720, and again in 1732, revised by Fontenelle. A long series of dictionaries of arts and sciences have followed Corneille in placing in their titles the arts before the sciences, which he probably did merely in order to differ from Furetiere. Corneille professed to quote no author whom he had not consulted; to take plants from Dioscorides and Matthiolus, medicine from Ettmuller, chemistry from a MS. of Perrault, and architecture, painting and sculpture from Felibien; and to give an abridged history of animals, birds and fishes, and an account of all religious and military orders and their statutes, heresiarchs and heresies, and dignities and charges ancient and modern.

Pierre Bayle (born on the 18th of November 1647, died on the 28th of December 1706) wrote a very important and valuable work, Dictionnaire historique et critique, Rotterdam, 1697, fol. 2 vols. His design was to make a dictionary of the errors and omissions of Moreri and others, but he was much embarrassed by the numerous editions and supplements of Moreri. A second edition with an additional volume appeared at Amsterdam in 1702, fol. 3 vols. The fourth edition, Rotterdam, 1720, fol. 4 vols., was much enlarged from his manuscripts, and was edited by Prosper Marchand. It contains 3132 pages besides tables, &c. The ninth edition was published at Basel, 1741, fol. 10 vols. It was translated into English from the second edition, London, 1709, fol. 4 vols., with some slight additions and corrections by the author; and again from the fifth edition of 1730 by Birch and Lockman, London, 1734-1740, fol. 5 vols. J. G. de Chaufepie published Nouveau Dictionnaire historique, Amsterdam, 1750-1756, fol. 4 vols., as a supplement to Bayle. It chiefly consists of the articles added by the English translators with many corrections and additions, and about soo new articles added by himself, and contains in all about 1400articles. Prosper Marchand, editor of the fourth edition, left at his death on the 14th of January 1756 materials for a supplementary Dictionnaire historique, La Haye, 1758, fol. 2 vols., 891 pages, 136 articles. It had occupied his leisure moments for forty years. Much of his work was written on small scraps of paper, sometimes 20 in half a page and no larger than a nail, in such small characters that not only the editor but the printer had to use powerful magnifiers. Bayle's dictionary was also translated into German, Leipzig, 1741-1744, fol. 4 vols., with a preface by J. C. Gottsched. It is still a work of great importance and value.

Vincenzo Maria Coronelli, a Franciscan friar, who was born in Venice about 1650, made cosmographer to the republic in 1685, became general of his order in 1702, and was found dead at his study table on the 9th of December 1718, began in 1701 to publish a general alphabetical encyclopaedia, written in Italian, at which he had been working for thirty years, Biblioteca universale sacro-profana. It was to explain more than 300,000 words, to include history and biography as well as all other subjects, and to extend to 45 volumes folio. Volumes 1-39 were to contain the dictionary A to Z; 40, 41, the supplement; 42, retractations and corrections; 43, universal index; 44, index divided into matters; 45, index in various languages. But seven volumes only were published, Venezia, 1701-1706, fol., 5609 pages, A to Caque. The first six volumes have each an index of from 28 to 48 pages (in all 224 pages) of subjects, whether forming articles or incidental. The articles in each are numbered, and amount to 30,269 in the six volumes, which complete the letter B. On an average 3 pages contain 22 articles. Each volume is dedicated to a different patron-the pope, the doge, the king of Spain, &c. This work is remarkable for the extent and completeness of its plan, and for being the first great alphabetical encyclopaedia, as well as for being written in a modern language, but it was hastily written and very incorrect. Never, perhaps, says Tiraboschi (Storia della letteratura italiana, viii. 546), was there so quick a writer; he composed a folio volume as easily as others would a page, but he never perfected his works, and what we have of this book will not induce us to regret the want of the remainder.

The first alphabetical encyclopaedia written in English was the work of a London clergyman, John Harris (born about 1667, elected first secretary of the Royal Society on the 30th of November 1709, died on the 7th of September 1719), Lexicon technicum, or an universal English Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, London, 1704, fol., 1220 pages, 4 plates, with many diagrams and figures printed in the text. Like many subsequent English encyclopaedias the pages are not numbered. It professes not merely to explain the terms used in the arts and sciences, but the arts and sciences themselves. The author complains that he found much less help from previous dictionaries than one would suppose, that Chauvin is full of obsolete school terms, and Corneille gives only bare explanations of terms, which often relate only to simple ideas and common things. He omits theology, antiquity, biography and poetry; gives only technical history, geography and chronology; and in logic, metaphysics, ethics, grammar and rhetoric, merely explains the terms used. In mathematics and anatomy he professes to be very full, but says that the catalogues and places of the stars are very imperfect, as Flamsteed refused to assist him. In botany he gave from Ray, Morrison and Tournefort "a pretty exact botanick lexicon, which was what we really wanted before," with an account of all the "kinds and subalternate species of plants, and their specific differences" on Ray's method. He gave a table of fossils from Dr Woodward, professor of medicine in Gresham College, and took great pains to describe the parts of a ship accurately and particularly, going often on board himself for the purpose. In law he abridged from the best writers what he thought necessary. He meant to have given at the end an alphabet for each art and science, and some more plates of anatomy and ships, "but the undertaker could not afford it at the price." A review of his work, extending to the unusual length of four pages, appeared in the Philosophical Transactions, 1704, p. 1699. This volume was reprinted in 1708. A second volume of 1419 pages and 4 plates appeared in 1710, with a list of about 1300 subscribers. Great part of it consisted of mathematical and astronomical tables, as he intended his work to serve as a small mathematical library. He was allowed by Sir Isaac Newton to print his treatise on acids. He gives a table of logarithms to seven figures of decimals (44 pages), and one of sines, tangents and secants (120 pages), a list of books filling two pages, and an index of the articles in both volumes under 26 heads, filling so pages. The longest lists are law (1700 articles), chyrurgery, anatomy, geometry, fortification, botany and music. The mathematical and physical part is considered very able. He often mentions his authorities, and gives lists of books on particular subjects, as botany and chronology. His dictionary was long very popular. The fifth edition was published in 1736, fol. 2 vols. A supplement, including no new subjects, appeared in 1744, London, fol., 996 pages, 6 plates. It was intended to rival Ephraim Chambers's work (see below), but, being considered a bookseller's speculation, was not well received.

Johann Hubner, rector of the Johanneum in Hamburg, born on the 17th of March 1668, wrote prefaces to two dictionaries written in German. which bore his name, and were long popular.

The first was Reales Staats Zeitungsand Conversations-Lexicon, Leipzig, 1704, 8vo; second edition, 1706, 947 pages; at the end a register of arms, and indexes of Latin and French words; fifth edition, 1711; fifteenth edition 1735, 1119 pages. The thirty-first edition was edited and enlarged by F. A. Ruder, and published by Brockhaus, Leipzig, 1824-1828, 8vo, 4 vols., 3088 pages. It was translated into Hungarian by Fejer, Pesten, 1816, 8vo, 5 vols., 2958 pages. The second, published as a supplement, was Curieuses and reales NaturKunstBergGewerband Handlungs-Lexicon, Leipzig, 1712, 8vo, 788 pages, frequently reprinted to 1792. The first relates to the political state of the world, as religion, orders, states, rivers, towns, castles, mountains, genealogy, war, ships; the second to nature, science, art and commerce. They were the work of many authors, of whom Paul Jacob Marpurger, a celebrated and voluminous writer on trade and commerce, born at Nuremberg on the 27th of June 1656, was an extensive contributor, and is the only one named by Hubner.

Johann Theodor Jablonski, who was born at Danzig on the 15th of December 1654, appointed secretary to the newly founded Prussian Academy in 1700, when he went to Berlin, where he died on the 28th of April 1731, published Allgemeines Lexicon der Kiinste and Wissenschaften, Leipzig, 1721, 4to, a short but excellent encyclopaedia still valued in Germany. It does not include theology, history, geography, biography and genealogy. He not only names his authorities, but gives a list of their works. A new edition in 1748 was increased one-third to 1508 pages. An improved edition, Konigsberg and Leipzig, 1767, 4to, 2 vols., 1852 pages, was edited by J. J. Schwabe, public teacher of philosophy at Leipzig.

Ephraim Chambers published his Cyclopaedia; or an Universal Dictionary of Art and Sciences, containing an Explication of the Terms and an Account of the Things Signified thereby in the several Arts, Liberal and Mechanical, and the several Sciences, Human and Divine, London, 1728, fol. 2 vols. The dedication to the king is dated October 15, 1727. Chambers endeavoured to connect the scattered articles relating to each subject by a system of references, and to consider "the several matters, not only in themselves, but relatively, or as they respect each other; both to treat them as so many wholes and as so many parts of some greater whole." Under each article he refers to the subject to which it belongs, and also to its subordinate parts; thus Copyhold has a reference to Tenure, of which it is a particular kind, and other references to Rolls, Custom, Manor,Fine,Charterland and Freehold. In his preface he gives an "analysis of the divisions of knowledge," 47 in number, with classed lists of the articles belonging to each, intended to serve as table of contents and also as a rubric or directory indicating the order in which the articles should be read. But it does so very imperfectly, as the lists are curtailed by many et caeteras; thus 1 9 occur in a list of 119 articles under Anatomy, which has nearly 2200 articles in Rees's index. He omits etymologies unless "they appeared of some significance"; he gives only one grammatical form of each word, unless peculiar ideas are arbitrarily attached to different forms, as precipitate, precipitant, precipitation, when each has an article; and he omits complex ideas generally known, and thus "gets free of a vast load of plebeian words." His work, he says, is a collection, not the produce of one man's wit, for that would go but a little way, but of the whole commonwealth of learning. "Nobody that fell in my way has been spared, antient or modern, foreign nor domestic, Christian or Jew nor heathen." To the subjects given by Harris he adds theology, metaphysics, ethics, politics, logic, grammar, rhetoric and poetry, but excludes history, biography, genealogy, geography and chronology, except their technical parts. A second edition appeared in 1738, fol. 2 vols., 2466 pages, "retouched and amended in a thousand places." A few articles are added and some others enlarged, but he was prevented from doing more because "the booksellers were alarmed with a bill in parliament containing a clause to oblige the publishers of all improved editions of books to print their improvements separately." The bill after passing the Commons was unex pectedly thrown out by the Lords; but fearing that it might be revived, the booksellers thought it best to retreat though more than twenty sheets had been printed. Five other editions were published in London, 1739 to 1751-1752, besides one in Dublin, 1742, all in 2 vols. fol. An Italian translation, Venezia, 1 74 8 - 1 749, 4to, 9 vols., was the first complete Italian encyclopaedia. When Chambers was in France in 1739 he rejected very favourable proposals to publish an edition there dedicated to Louis XV. His work was judiciously, honestly and carefully done, and long maintained its popularity. But it had many defects and omissions, as he was well aware; and at his death, on the 15th of May 1740, he had collected and arranged materials for seven new volumes. John Lewis Scott was employed by the booksellers to select such articles as were fit for the press and to supply others. He is said to have done this very efficiently until appointed sub-preceptor to the prince of Wales and Prince Edward. His task was entrusted to Dr (afterwards called Sir John) Hill, who performed it very hastily, and with characteristic carelessness and self-sufficiency, copying freely from his own writings. The Supplement was published in London, 1753, fol. 2 vols., 3307 pages and 12 plates. As Hill was a botanist, the botanical part, which had been very defective in the Cyclopaedia, was the best.

Abraham Rees (1743-1825), a famous Nonconformist minister, published a revised and enlarged edition, "with the supplement and modern improvements incorporated in one alphabet," London, 1778-1788, fol. 2 vols., 5010 pages (but not paginated), 159 plates. It was published in 418 numbers at 6d. each. Rees says that he has added more than 4400 new articles. At the end he gives an index of articles, classed under loo heads, numbering about 57,000 and filling 80 pages. The heads, with 39 cross references, are arranged alphabetically. Subsequently there were reprints.

One of the largest and most comprehensive encyclopaedias was undertaken and in a great measure completed by Johann Heinrich Zedler, a bookseller of Leipzig, who was born at Breslau 7th January 1706, made a Prussian commerzienrath in 1731, and died at Leipzig in 1760,-Grosses vollstandiges Universal Lexicon Aller Wissenschaften and Kiinste welche bishero durch menschlichen Verstand and Witz erfunden and verbessert worden, Valle and Leipzig, 1732-1750, fol. 64 vols., 64,309 pages; and NOthige Supplemente, ib. 1751-1754, vols. i. to iv., A to Caq, 3016 pages. The columns, two in a page, are numbered, varying from 1356 in vol. li. to 2588 in vol. xlix. Each volume has a dedication, with a portrait. The first nine are the emperor, the kings of Prussia and Poland, the empress of Russia, and the kings of England, France, Poland, Denmark and Sweden. The dedications, of which two are in verse, and all are signed by Zedler, amount to 459 pages. The supplement has no dedications or portraits. The preface to the first volume of the work is by Johann Peter von Ludewig, chancellor of the university of Halle (born 15th August 1690, died 6th September 1743). Nine editors were employed, whom Ludewig compares to the nine muses; and the whole of each subject was entrusted to the same person, that all its parts might be uniformly treated. Carl Gunther Ludovici (born at Leipzig 7th August 1707, public teacher of philosophy there from 1734, died 3rd July 1778) edited the work from vol. xix., beginning the letter M, and published in 1739, to the end, and also the supplement. The work was published by subscription. Johann Heinrich Wolff, an eminent merchant and shopkeeper in Leipzig, born there on the 29th of April 1690, came to Zedler's assistance by advancing the funds for expenses and becoming answerable for the subscriptions, and spared no cost that the work might be complete. Zedler very truly says, in his preface to vol. xviii., that his Universal Lexicon was a work such as no time and no nation could show, and both in its plan and execution it is much more comprehensive and complete than any previous encyclopaedia. Colleges, says Ludewig, where all sciences are taught and studied, are on that account called universities, and their teaching is called studium universale; but the Universal Lexicon contains not only what they teach in theology, jurisprudence, medicine, philosophy, history, mathematics, &c., but also many other things belonging to courts, chanceries, hunting, forests, war and peace, and to artists, artizans, housekeepers and merchants not thought of in colleges. Its plan embraces not only history, geography and biography, but also genealogy, topography, and from vol. xviii., published in 1738, lives of illustrious living persons. Zedler inquires why death alone should make a deserving man capable of having his services and worthy deeds made known to the world in print. The lives of the dead, he says, are to be found in books, but those of the living are not to be met with anywhere, and would often be more useful if known. In consequence of this preface, many lives and genealogies were sent to him for publication. Cross references generally give not only the article referred to, but also the volume and column, and, when necessary, such brief information as may distinguish the word referred to from others similar but of different meaning. Lists of authorities, often long, exact and valuable are frequently appended to the articles. This work, which is well and carefully compiled, and very trustworthy, is still a most valuable book of reference on many subjects, especially topography, genealogy and biography. The genealogies and family histories are excellent, and many particulars are given of the lives and works of authors not easily found elsewhere.

A work on a new plan was published by Dennis de Coetlogon, a Frenchman naturalized in England, who styled himself "Knight of St Lazare, M.D., and member of the Royal Academy of Angers " - An Universal History of Arts and Sciences, London, 1 745, fol. 2 vols., 2529 pages, 33 plates and 161 articles arranged alphabetically. He "endeavours to render each treatise as complete as possible, avoiding above all things needless repetitions, and never puzzling the reader with the least reference." Theology is divided into several treatises; Philosophy into Ethicks, Logick and Metaphysick, each under its letter; and Physick is subdivided into Anatomy, Botany, Geography, Geometry, &c. Military Art is divided into Army, Fortification, Gunnery. The royal licence is dated 13th March 1740-1741, the dedication is to the duke of Gisors, the pages are numbered, there is an appendix of 35 pages of astronomical tables, and the two indexes, one to each volume, fill 69 pages, and contain about 9000 subjects. The type is large and the style diffuse, but the subject matter is sometimes curious. The author says that his work is the only one of the kind, and that he wrote out with his own hand every line, even the index. But notwithstanding the novelty of his plan, his work does not seem ever to have been popular.

Gianfrancesco Pivati, born at Padua in 1689, died at Venice in 1764, secretary of the Academy of Sciences at Venice, who had published in 1744 a 4to volume containing a Dizionario universale, wrote Nuovo dizionario scientifico e curioso sacroprofano, Venezia, 1746-1751, fol. 10 vols., 7791 pages, 597 plates. It is a general encyclopaedia, including geography, but not history or biography. He gives frequent references to his authorities and much curious information. His preliminary discourse (80 pages) contains a history of the several sciences from mathematics to geography. The book was published by subscription, and at the end of the last volume is a Catalogo dei Signori Associati, 252 in number, who took 266 copies. It is also remarkable for the number of its plates, which are engraved on copper. In each volume they are placed together at the end, and are preceded by an explanatory index of subjects referring to the plates and to the articles they illustrate.

One of the greatest and most remarkable literary enterprises of the 18th century, the famous French Encyclopedie, originated in a French translation of Ephraim Chambers's Cyclopaedia, begun in 1743 and finished in 1745 by John Mills, an Englishman resident in France, assisted by Gottfried Sellius, a very learned native of Danzig, who, after being a professor at Halle and Göttingen, and residing in Holland, had settled in Paris. They applied to Lebreton, the king's printer, to publish the work, to fulfil the formalities required by French law, with which, as foreigners, they were not acquainted, and to solicit a royal privilege. This he obtained, but in his own name alone. Mills complained so loudly and bitterly of this deception that Lebreton had to acknowledge formally that the privilege belonged en toute propriete to John Mills. But, as he again took care not to acquaint Mills with the necessary legal formalities, this title soon became invalid. Mills then agreed to grant him part of his privilege, and in May 1745 the work was announced as Encyclopedie ou dictionnaire universel des arts et des sciences, folio, four volumes of 250 to 260 sheets each, with a fifth of at least 120 plates, and a vocabulary or list of articles in French, Latin, German, Italian and Spanish, with other lists for each language explained in French, so that foreigners might easily find any article wanted. It was to be published by subscription at 135 livres, but for large paper copies 200 livres, the first volume to be delivered in June 1746, and the two last at the end of 1748. The subscription list, which was considerable, closed on the 31st of December 1745Mills demanded an account, which Lebreton, who had again omitted certain formalities, insultingly refused. Mills brought an action against him, but before it was decided Lebreton procured the revocation of the privilege as informal, and obtained another for himself dated the 21st of January 1746. Thus, for unwittingly contravening regulations with which his unscrupulous publisher ought to have made him acquainted, Mills was despoiled of the work he had both planned and executed, and had to return to England. Jean Paul de Gua de Malves, professor of philosophy in the college of France (born at Carcassonne in 1713, died on the 15th of June 1785), was then engaged as editor merely to correct errors and add new discoveries. But he proposed a thorough revision, and obtained the assistance of many learned men and artists, among whom Desessarts names Louis, Condillac, d'Alembert and Diderot. But the publishers did not think his reputation high enough to ensure success, withheld their confidence, and often opposed his plans as too expensive. Tired at last of disputes, and too easily offended, de Gua resigned the editorship. The publishers, who had already made heavy advances, offered it to Diderot, who was probably recommended to them by his very well received Dictionnaire universel de medicine, Paris, 1746-1748, fol. 6 vols., published by Briasson, David and Durand, with notes and additions by Julien Busson, doctor regent of the faculty of medicine of Paris. It was a translation, made with the assistance of Eidous and Toussaint, of the celebrated work of Dr Robert James, inventor of the fever powders, A Medicinal Dictionary, London, 1743-1745, fol. 3 vols., 3275 pages and 98 plates, comprising a history of drugs, with chemistry, botany and natural history so far as they relate to medicine, and with an historical preface of 99 pages (in the translation 136). The proposed work was to have been similar in character. De Gua's papers were handed over to Diderot in great confusion. He soon persuaded the publishers to undertake a far more original and comprehensive work. His friend d'Alembert undertook to edit the mathematics. Other subjects were allotted to 21 contributors, each of whom received the articles on this subject in Mills' translation to serve as a basis for his work. But they were in most cases so badly composed and translated, so full of errors and omissions, that they were not used. The contributions were to be finished in three months, but none was ready in time, except Music by Rousseau, which he admits was hastily and badly done. Diderot was imprisoned at Vincennes, on the 29th of July 1749, for his Lettre sur les aveugles. He was closely confined for 28 days, and was then for three months and ten days a prisoner on parole in the castle. This did not stop the printing, though it caused delay. The prospectus by Diderot appeared in November 1750. The work, was to form 8 vols. fol., with at least 600 plates. The first volume was published in July 1751, and delivered to the subscribers in August. The second appeared in January 1752. An arret of the council, 9th of February, suppressed both volumes as injurious to the king's authority and to religion. Malesherbes, director-general of the Librairie, stopped the issue of volume ii., 9th of February, and on the 21st went with a lettre de cachet to Lebreton's to seize the plates and the MSS., but did not find, says Barbier, even those of volume iii., as they had been taken to his own house by Diderot and one of the publishers. The Jesuits tried to continue the work, but in vain. It was less easy, says Grimm, than to ruin philosophers. The Dictionnaire de Trevoux pronounced the completion of the Encyclopedic impossible, and the project ridiculous (5th edition, 1752, iii. 750). The government had to request the editors to resume the work as one honourable to the nation. The marquis d'Argenson writes, 7th of May 1752, that Mme de Pompadour had been urging them to proceed, and at the end of June he reports them as again at work. Volume iii., rather improved by the delay, appeared in October 1753; and volume vii., completing G, in November 1757. The clamours against the work soon recommenced. D'Alembert retired in January 1758, weary of sermons, satires and intolerant and absurd censors. The parlement of Paris, by an arret, 23rd of January 1759, stopped the sale and distribution of the Encyclopedic, Helvetius's De l'Esprit, and six other books; and by an arret, 6th February, ordered them all to be burnt, but referred the Encyclopedic for examination to a commission of nine. An arret du conseil, 7th of March, revoked the privilege of 1746, and stopped the printing. Volume viii. was then in the press. Malesherbes warned Diderot that he would have his papers seized next day; and when Diderot said he could not make a selection, or find a place of safety at such short notice, Malesherbes said, "Send them to me, they will not look for them there." This, according to Mme de Vandeul, Diderot's daughter, was done with perfect success. In the article Pardonner Diderot refers to these persecutions, and says, "In the space of some months we have seen our honour, fortune, liberty and life imperilled." Malesherbes, Choiseul and Mme de Pompadour protected the work; Diderot obtained private permission to go on printing, but with a strict charge not to publish any part until the whole was finished. The Jesuits were condemned by the parlement of Paris in 1762, and by the king in November 1764. Volume i. of plates appeared in 1762, and volumes viii. to xvii., ten volumes of text, 9408 pages, completing the work, with the 4th volume of plates in 1765, when there were 4250 subscribers. The work circulated freely in the provinces and in foreign countries, and was secretly distributed in Paris and Versailles. The general assembly of the clergy, on the 10th of June 1765, approved articles in which it was condemned, and on the 27th of September adopted a memoire to be presented to the king. They were forbidden to publish their acts which favoured the Jesuits, but Lebreton was required to give a list of his subscribers, and was put into the Bastille for eight days in 1766. A royal order was sent to the subscribers to deliver their copies to the lieutenant of police. Voltaire in 1774 relates that, at a petit souper of the king at Trianon, there was a debate on the composition of gunpowder. Mme de Pompadour said she did not know how her rouge or her silk stockings were made. The duc de la Valliere regretted that the king had confiscated their encyclopaedias, which could decide everything. The king said he had been told that the work was most dangerous, but as he wished to judge for himself, he sent for a copy. Three servants with difficulty brought in the 21 volumes. The company found everything they looked for, and the king allowed the confiscated copies to be returned. Mme de Pompadour died on the 15th of April 1764. Lebreton had half of the property in the work, and Durand, David and Briasson had the rest. Lebreton, who had the largest printing office in Paris, employed so workmen in printing the last ten volumes. He had the articles set in type exactly as the authors sent them in, and when Diderot had corrected the last proof of each sheet, he and his foreman, hastily, secretly 'and by night, unknown to his partners in the work, cut out whatever seemed to them daring, or likely to give offence, mutilated most of the best articles without any regard to the consecutiveness of what was left, and burnt the manuscript as they proceeded. The printing of the work was nearly finished when Diderot, having to consult one of his great philosophical articles in the letter S, found it entirely mutilated. He was confounded, says Grimm, at discovering the atrocity of the printer; all the best articles were in the same confusion. This discovery put him into a state of frenzy and despair from rage and grief. His daughter never heard him speak coolly on the subject, and after twenty years it still made him angry. He believed that every one knew as well as he did what was wanting in each article, but in fact the mutilation was not perceived even by the authors, and for many years was known to few persons. Diderot at first refused to correct the remaining proofs, or to do more than write the explanations of the plates. He required, according to Mme de Vandeul, that a copy, now at St Petersburg with his library, should be printed with columns in which all was restored. The mutilations began as far back as the article Intendant. But how far, says Rosenkranz, this murderous, incredible and infamous operation was carried cannot now be exactly ascertained. Diderot's articles, not including those on arts and trades, were reprinted in Naigeon's edition (Paris, 1821, 8vo, 22 vols.). They fill 4132 pages, and number 1139, of which 601 were written for the last ten volumes. They are on very many subjects, but principally on grammar, history, morality, philosophy, literature and metaphysics. As a contributor, his special department of the work was philosophy, and arts and trades. He passed whole days in workshops, and began by examining a machine carefully, then he had it taken to pieces and put together again, then he watched it at work, and lastly worked it himself. He thus learned to use such complicated machines as the stocking and cut velvet looms. He at first received 1200 livres a year as editor, but afterwards 2500 livres a volume, besides a final sum of 20,000 livres. Although after his engagement he did not suffer from poverty as he had done before, he was obliged to sell his library in order to provide for his daughter. De Jaucourt spared neither time, trouble nor expense in perfecting the work, for which he received nothing, and he employed several secretaries at it for ten years. To pay them he had to sell his house in Paris, which Lebreton bought with the profits derived from De Jaucourt's work. All the publishers made large fortunes; their expenses amounted to 1,158,000 livres and their profits to 2,162,000. D'Alembert's "Discours Preliminaire," 45 pages, written in 1750, prefixed to the first volume, and delivered before the French Academy on his reception on the 19th of December 1754, consists of a systematic arrangement of the various branches of knowledge, and an account of their progress since their revival. His system, chiefly taken from Bacon, divides them into three classes, under memory, reason and imagination. Arts and trades are placed under natural history, superstition and magic under science de Dieu, and orthography and heraldry under logic. The literary world is divided into three corresponding classes - erudits, philosophes and beaux esprits. As in Ephraim Chambers's Cyclopaedia, history and biography were excluded, except incidentally; thus Aristotle's life is given in the article Aristotelisme. The science to which an article belongs is generally named at the beginning of it, references are given to other articles, and the authors' names are marked by initials, of which lists are given in the earlier volumes, but sometimes their names are subscribed in full. Articles by Diderot have no mark, and those inserted by him as editor have an asterisk prefixed. Among the contributors were Voltaire, Euler, Marmontel, Montesquieu, D'Anville, D'Holbach and Turgot, the leader of the new school of economists which made its first appearance in the pages of the Encyclopedie. Louis wrote the surgery, Daubenton natural history, Eidous heraldry and art, Toussaint jurisprudence, and Condamine articles on South America.

No encyclopaedia perhaps has been of such political importance, or has occupied so conspicuous a place in the civil and literary history of its century. It sought not only to give information, but to guide opinion. It was, as Rosenkranz says (Diderot, i. 157), theistic and heretical. It was opposed to the church, then all-powerful in France, and it treated dogma historically. It was, as Desnoiresterres says (Voltaire, v. 164), a war machine; as it progressed, its attacks both on the church and the still more despotic government, as well as on Christianity itself, became bolder and more undisguised, and it was met by opposition and persecution unparalleled in the history of encyclopaedias. Its execution is very unequal, and its articles of very different value. It was not constructed on a regular plan, or subjected to sufficient supervision; articles were sent in by the contributors, and not seen by the editors until they were in type. In each subject there are some excellent articles, but others are very inferior or altogether omitted, and references are often given to articles which do not exist. Thus marine is said to be more than three-fourths deficient; and in geography errors and omissions abound-even capitals and sovereign states are overlooked, while villages are given as towns, and towns are described which never existed. The style is too generally loose, digressive and inexact; dates are seldom given; and discursiveness, verbosity and dogmatism are frequent faults. Voltaire was constantly demanding truth, brevity and method, and said it was built half of marble and half of wood. D'Alembert compared it to a harlequin's coat, in which there is some good stuff but too many rags. Diderot was dissatisfied with it as a whole; much of it was compiled in haste; and carelessly written articles and incompetent contributors were admitted for want of money to pay good writers. Zedler's Universal Lexicon is on the whole much more useful for reference than its far more brilliant successor. The permanent value of encyclopaedias depends on the proportion of exact and precise facts they contain and on their systematic regularity.

The first edition of the Encyclopedie, in 17 vols. folio, 16,288 pages, was imitated by a counterfeit edition printed at Geneva as the volumes appeared in Paris. Eleven folio volumes of plates were published at Paris (1762 to 1772), containing 2888 plates and 923 pages of explanation, &c. A supplement was printed at Amsterdam and Paris (1776-1777), fol. 5 vols., 3 8 74 pages, with 224 plates. History was introduced at the wish of the public, but only "the general features which mark epochs in the annals of the world." The astronomy was by Delalande, mathematics by Condorcet, tables by Bernouilli, natural history by Adanson, anatomy and physiology by Haller. Daubenton, Condamine, Marmontel and other old contributors wrote many articles, and several were taken from foreign editions. A very full and elaborate index of the articles and subjects of the 33 volumes was printed at Amsterdam in 1780, fol. 2 vols. 1852 pages. It was made by Pierre Mouchon, who was born at Geneva on the 30th of July 1735, consecrated minister on the 18th of August 1758, pastor of the French church at Basel 1766, elected a pastor in Geneva on the 6th of March 1788, principal of the college there 22nd of April 1791, died on the 10th of August 1797. This Table analytique, which took him five years to make, was undertaken for the publishers Cramer and De Tournes, who gave him 800 louis for it. Though very exact and full, he designedly omits the attacks on Christianity. This index was rendered more useful and indispensable by the very diffuse and digressive style of the work, and by the vast number of its articles. A complete copy of the first edition of the Encyclopedie consists of 35 vols. fol., printed 1751-1780, containing 23,135 pages and 3132 plates. It was written by about 160 contributors. About 1761 Panckoucke and other publishers in Paris proposed a new and revised edition, and bought the plates for 250,000 livres. But, as Diderot indignantly refused to edit what he considered a fraud on the subscribers to the as yet unfinished work, they began simply to reprint the work, promising supplementary volumes. When three volumes were printed the whole was seized in 1770 by the government at the complaint of the clergy, and was lodged in the Bastille. The plan of a second French edition was laid aside then, to be revived twenty years later in a very different form. Foreign editions of the Encyclopedie are numerous, and it is difficult to enumerate them correctly. One, with notes by Ottavio Diodati, Dr Sebastiano Paoli and Carlo Giuliani, appeared at Lucca (1758-1771), fol. 17 vols. of text and 10 of plates. Though it was very much expurgated, all engaged in it were excommunicated by the pope in 1759. An attempt made at Siena to publish an Italian translation failed. An addition by the abbe Serafini and Dr Gonnella (Livourne, 1770), &c., fol. 33 vols., returned a profit of 60,000 piastres, and was protected by Leopold II., who secured the pope's silence. Other editions are Geneve, Cramer (1772-1776), a facsimile reprint. Geneve, Pellet (1777-1779), 4to, 36 vols. of text and 3 of plates, with 6 vols. of Mouchon's index (Lyon, 1780), 4to; Geneve et Neufchatel, Pellet (1778-1779), 4to, 36 vols. of text and 3 of plates; Lausanne (1778-1781), 36 vols. 4to, or 72 octavo, of text and 3 of plates (1779-1780); Lausanne et Bern, chez les Societes Typographiques (1780-1782), 36 vols. 8vo of text and 3 vols. 4to of plates (1782). These four editions have the supplement incorporated. Fortune Barthelemy de Felice, an Italian monk, born at Rome on the 24th of August 1723, who had been professor at Rome and Naples, and had become a Protestant, printed a very incorrect though successful edition (Yverdun, 1770-1780) 4to, 42 vols. of text, 5 of supplement and 10 of plates. It professed to be a new work, standing in the same relationship to the Encyclopedie as that did to Chambers's, which is far from being the case. Sir Joseph Ayloffe issued proposals, 14th December 1751, for an English translation of the Encyclopedie, to be finished by Christmas 1756, in 10 vols. 4to, with at least 600 plates. No. 1 appeared in January 1752, but met with little success. Several selections of articles and extracts have been published under the title of L'Esprit de l'Encyclopedie. The last was by Hennequin (Paris, 1822-1823), 8vo, 15 vols. An English selection is Select Essays from the Encyclopedy (London, 1773), 8vo. The articles of most of the principal contributors have been reprinted in the editions of their respective works. Voltaire wrote 8 vols. 8vo of a kind of fragmentary supplement, Questions sur l'Encyclopedie, frequently printed, and usually included in editions of his works, together with his contributions to the Encyclopedie and his Dictionnaire philosophique. Several special dictionaries have been formed from the Encyclopedie, as the Dictionnaire portatif des arts et metiers (Paris, 1766), 8vo, 2 vols. about 1300 pages, by Philippe Macquer, brother of the author of the Dict. de chimie. An enlarged edition by the abbb Jaubert (Paris, 1 773), 5 vols. 8vo, 3017 pages, was much valued and often reprinted. The books attacking and defending the Encyclopedia are very many. No original work of the 18th century, says Lanfrey, has been more depreciated, ridiculed and calumniated. It has been called chaos, nothingness, the Tower of Babel, a work of disorder and destruction, the gospel of Satan and even the ruins of Palmyra.

The Encyclopaedia Britannica, " by a society of gentlemen in Scotland, printed in Edinburgh for A. Bell and C. Macfarquhar, and sold by Colin Macfarquhar at his printing office in Nicolson Street," was completed in 1771 in 3 volumes 4to, containing 2670 pages, and 160 copperplates engraved by Andrew Bell. It was published in numbers, of which the two first were issued in December 1768, "price 6d. each, or 8d on a finer paper," and was to be completed in loo weekly numbers. It was compiled, as the title-page says, on a new plan. The different sciences and arts were "digested into distinct treatises or systems," of which there are 45 with cross headings, that is, titles printed across the page, and about 3 o other articles more than three pages long. The longest are "Anatomy," 166 pages, and "Surgery," 238 pages. "The various technical terms, &c., are explained as they occur in the order of the alphabet." "Instead of dismembering the sciences, by attempting to treat them intelligibly under a multitude of technical terms, they have digested the principles of every science in the form of systems or distinct treatises, and explained the terms as they occur in the order of the alphabet, with references to the sciences to which they belong." This plan, as the compilers say, differs from that of all the previous dictionaries of arts and sciences. Its merit and novelty consist in the combination of De Coetlogon's plan with that in common use,-on the one hand keeping important subjects together, and on the other facilitating reference by numerous separate articles. It is doubtful to whom the credit of this plan is due. The editor, William Smellie, a printer (born in 1740, died on the 24th of June 1795), afterwards secretary and superintendent of natural history to the Society of Scottish Antiquaries, is said by his biographer to have devised the plan and written or compiled all the chief articles; and he prints, but without date, part of a letter written and signed by Andrew Bell by which he was engaged in the work: "Sir, As we are engaged in publishing a dictionary of the arts and sciences, and as you have informed us that there are fifteen capital sciences which you will undertake for and write up the subdivisions and detached parts of these conform to your plan, and likewise to prepare the whole work for the press, &c., &c., we hereby agree to allow you 200 for your trouble, &c." Prof. Macvey Napier says that Smellie "was more likely to have suggested that great improvement than any of his known coadjutors." Archibald Constable, who was interested in the work from 1788, and was afterwards intimately acquainted with Bell, says Colin Macfarquhar was the actual projector of the Encyclopaedia, and the editor of the two first editions, while Smellie was merely "a contributor for hire" (Memoirs, ii. 311). Dr Gleig, in his preface to the third edition, says: "The idea had been conceived by him (Colin Macfarquhar) and his friend Mr Andrew Bell, engraver. By whom these gentlemen were assisted in digesting the plan which attracted to that work so much public attention, or whether they had any assistance, are questions in which our readers cannot be interested." Macfarquhar, according to Constable, was a person of excellent taste and very general knowledge, though at starting he had little or no capital, and was obliged to associate Bell, then the principal engraver in Edinburgh, as a partner in his undertaking.

The second edition was begun in 1776, and was published in numbers, of which the first was issued on the 21st of June 1777, and the last, No. 181, on the 18th of September 1784, forming io vols. 4to, dated 1778 to 1783, and containing 8595 pages and 340 plates. The pagination is continuous, ending with page 9200, but 295 pages are inserted in various places, and page 7099 is followed by 8000. The number and length of the articles were much increased, 72 have cross headings, and more than 150 others may be classed as long articles. At the end is an appendix ("Abatement" to "Wood") of 200 pages, containing, under the heading Botanical Table, a list of the 931 genera included in the 58 natural orders of Linnaeus, and followed by a list of 526 books, said to have been the principal authorities used. All the maps are placed together under the article "Geography" (195 pages). Most of the long articles have numbered marginal titles; "Scotland," 84 pages, has 837. "Medicine," 309 pages, and "Pharmacy" have each an index. The plan of the work was enlarged by the addition of history and biography, which encyclopaedias in general had long omitted. "From the time of the second edition of this work, every cyclopaedia of note, in England and elsewhere, has been a cyclopaedia, not solely of arts and sciences, but of the whole wide circle of general learning and miscellaneous information" (Quarterly Review, cxiii. 362). Smellie was applied to by Bell to edit the second edition, and to take a share of one-third in the work; but he refused, because the other persons concerned in it, at the suggestion of "a very distinguished nobleman of very high rank" (said by Professor Napier to have been the duke of Buccleuch), insisted upon the introduction of a system of general biography which he considered inconsistent with the character of a dictionary of arts and sciences. James Tytler, M.A., seems to have been selected as the next most eligible compiler. His father, a man of extensive knowledge, was 53 years minister of Fearn in Forfarshire, and died in 1785. Tytler (outlawed by the High Court of Justiciary, 7th of January 1793, buried at Salem in Massachusetts on the 11th of January 1804, aged fifty-eight) "wrote," says Watt, "many of the scientific treatises and histories, and almost all the minor articles" (Bibliotheca Brit.). After about a year's preparation, the third edition was announced in 1787; the first number was published early in 1788, and the first volume in October 1788. There were to be 300 weekly numbers, price is. each, forming 30 parts at Ios. 6d. each, and 15 volumes, with 360 plates. It was completed in 1797 in 18 vols. 4to, containing 14,579 pages and S42 plates. Among the multifarious articles represented in the frontispiece, which was required by the traditional fashion of the period, is a balloon. The maps are, as in subsequent editions, distributed among the articles relating to the respective countries. It was edited by Colin Macfarquhar as far as the article "Mysteries" (by Dr Doig, vol. xii.), when he died, on the 2nd of April 1793, in his forty-eighth year, "worn out," says Constable, "by fatigue and anxiety of mind." His children's trustees and Andrew Bell requested George Gleig of Stirling (consecrated on the 30th of October 1808 assistant and successor to the bishop of Brechin), who had written about twelve articles, to edit the rest of the work; "and for the time, and the limited sum allowed him for the reward of contributors, his part in the work was considered very well done" (Constable, ii. 312). Professor Robison was induced by Gleig to become a contributor. He first revised the article "Optics," and then wrote a series of articles on natural philosophy, which attracted great attention and were long highly esteemed by scientific men. The subeditors were James Walker (Primus Scotiae Episcopus 27th of May 1837, died on the 5th of March 1841, aged seventy) until 1795, then James Thomson, succeeded in November 1796 by his brother Thomas, afterwards professor of chemistry at Glasgow, who remained connected with the Encyclopaedia until 1800. According to Kerr (Smellie's Life, i. 364-365), Io,000 copies were printed, and the profit to the proprietors was £42,000, besides the payments for their respective work in the conduct of the publication as tradesmen, - Bell as engraver of all the plates, and Macfarquhar as sole printer. According to Constable (Memoirs, ii. 312), the impression was begun at 5000 copies, and concluded with a sale of 13,000. James Hunter, "an active bookseller of no character," who had a shop in Middle Row, Holborn, sold the book to the trade, and on his failure Thomson Bonar, a wine merchant, who had married Bell's daughter,. became the seller of the book. He quarrelled with his father-inlaw, who would not see him for ten years before his death in 1809. When the edition was completed, the copyright and remaining books were sold in order to wind up the concern, and "the whole was purchased by Bell, who gave £13 a copy, sold all the complete copies to the trade, printed up the odd volumes, and thus kept the work in the market for several years" (Constable, ii. 312).

The supplement of the third edition, printed for Thomson Bonar, and edited by Gleig, was published in 180r in 2 vols. 4to, containing 1624 pages and 50 copperplates engraved by D. Lizars. In the dedication to the king, dated Stirling, 10th December 1800, Dr Gleig says: "The French Encyclopedic had been accused, and justly accused, of having disseminated far and wide the seeds of anarchy and atheism. If the Encyclopaedia Britannica shall in any degree counteract the tendency of that pestiferous work, even these two volumes will not be wholly unworthy of your Majesty's attention." Professor Robison added 19 articles to the series he had begun when the third edition was so far advanced. Professor Playf air assisted in "Mathematics." Dr Thomas Thomson wrote "Chemistry,"' "Mineralogy" and other articles, in which the use of symbols was for the first time introduced into chemistry; and these articles formed the first outline of his System of Chemistry, published at Edinburgh in 1802, 8vo, 4 vols.; the sixth edition, 1821.

The fourth edition, printed for Andrew Bell, was begun in 1800 or 1801, and finished in 1810 in 20 vols. 4to, containing 16,033 pages, with 581 plates engraved by Bell. The dedication to the king, signed Andrew Bell, is dated Lauristoun, Edinburgh, 1809. The preface is that of the third edition with the necessary alterations and additions in the latter part. No articles were reprinted from the supplement, as Bell had not the copyright. Professor Wallace's articles on mathematics were much valued, and raised the scientific character of the work. Dr Thomas Thomson declined the editorship, and recommended Dr James Millar, afterwards editor of the Encyclopaedia Edinensis (died on the 13th of July 1827). He was fond of natural history and a good chemist, but, according to Constable, slow and dilatory and not well qualified. Andrew Bell died on the 10th of June 1809, aged eighty-three, "leaving," says Constable, "two sets of trustees, one literary to make the money, the other legal to lay it out after it was made." The edition began with 1250 copies and concluded at 4000, of which two-thirds passed through the hands of Constable's firm. Early in 1804 Andrew Bell had offered Constable and his partner Hunter the copyright of the work, printing materials, &c., and all that was then printed of the fourth edition, for £20,000. This offer was in agitation in March 1804, when the two partners were in London. On the 5th of May 1804, after Lord Jeffrey's arrival in Edinburgh, as he relates to Francis Horner, they entrusted him with a design, on which he found that most of his friends had embarked with great eagerness, "for publishing an entire new encyclopaedia upon an improved plan. Stewart, I understand, is to lend his name, and to write the preliminary discourse, besides other articles. Playfair is to superintend the mathematical department, and Robison the natural philosophy. Thomas Thomson is extremely zealous in the cause. W. Scott has embraced it with great affection.. .. The authors are to be paid at least as well as reviewers, and are to retain the copyright of their articles for separate publication if they think proper" (Cockburn, Life of Lord Jeffrey, 1852, E. 90). It was then, perhaps, that Constable gave £roo to Bonar for the copyright of the supplement.

The fifth edition was begun immediately after the fourth as a mere reprint. "The management of the edition, or rather mismanagement, went on under the lawyer trustees for several years, and at last the whole property was again brought to the market by public sale. There were about 1800 copies printed of the five first volumes, which formed one lot, the copyright formed another lot, and so on. The whole was purchased by myself and in my name for between £13,000 and £14,000, and it was said by the wise booksellers of Edinburgh and others that I had completely ruined myself and all connected with me by a purchase to such an enormous amount; this was early in 1812" (Constable, ii. 314). Bonar, who lived next door to the printing office, thought he could conduct the book, and had resolved on the purchase. Having a good deal of money, he seemed to Constable a formidable rival, whose alliance was to be secured. After "sundry interviews" it was agreed that Constable should buy the copyright in his own name, and that Bonar should have one-third, and also one-third of the copyright of the supplement, for which he gave £200. Dr James Millar corrected and revised the last 15 volumes. The preface is dated the 1st of December 1814. The printing was superintended by Bonar, who died on the 26th of July 1814. His trustees were repaid his advances on the work, about £6000, and the copyright was valued at £11,000, of which they received one-third, Constable adding £500, as the book had been so extremely successful. It was published in 20 vols., 16,017 pages, 582 plates, price £36, and dated 1817.

Soon after the purchase of the copyright, Constable began to prepare for the publication of a supplement, to be of four or, at the very utmost, five volumes. "The first article arranged for was one on ' Chemistry ' by Sir Humphry Davy, but he went abroad [in October 1813] and I released him from his engagement, and employed Mr Brande; the second article was Mr Stewart's Dissertation, for which I agreed to pay him £1000, leaving the extent of it to himself, but with this understanding, that it was not to be under ten sheets, and might extend to twenty" (Constable, ii. 318). Dugald Stewart, in a letter to Constable, the 15th of November 1812, though he declines to engage to execute any of his own suggestions, recommends that four discourses should "stand in front," forming "a general map of the various departments of human knowledge," similar to "the excellent discourse prefixed by D'Alembert to the French Encyclopedic," together with historical sketches of the progress since Bacon's time of modern discoveries in metaphysical, moral and political philosophy, in mathematics and physics, in chemistry, and in zoology, botany and mineralogy. He would only promise to undertake the general map and the first historical sketch, if his health and other engagements permitted, after the second volume of his Philosophy of the Human Mind (published in 1813) had gone to press. For the second he recommended Playfair, for chemistry Sir Humphry Davy. He received £1000 for the first part of his dissertation (166 pages), and £700 for the second (257 pages), the right of publication being limited to the Supplement and Encyclopaedia. Constable next contracted with Professor Playfair for a dissertation "to be equal in length or not to Mr Stewart's, for £250; but a short time afterwards I felt that to pay one eminent individual £1000 because he would not take less would be quite unfair, and I wrote to the worthy Professor that I had fixed his payment at £500." Constable gave him £500 for the first part (127 pages), and would have given as much for the second (90 pages) if it had been as long. His next object was to find out the greatest defects in the book, and he gave Professor Leslie £200 and Graham Dalyell £100 for looking over it. He then wrote out a prospectus and submitted it in print to Stewart, "but the cautious philosopher referred" him to Playfair, who "returned it next day very greatly improved." For this Constable sent him six dozen of very fine old sherry, only feeling regret that he had nothing better to offer. He at first intended to have two editors, "one for the strictly literary and the other for the scientific department." He applied to Dr Thomas Brown, who preferred writing trash of poetry to useful and lucrative employment."At last he fixed on Mr Macvey Napier (born 1777), whom he had known from 1798, and who" had been a hard student, and at college laid a good foundation for his future career, though more perhaps in general information than in what would be, strictly speaking, called scholarship; this, however, does not fit him the less for his present task."Constable, in a letter dated the 11th of June 1813, offered him £300 before the first part went to press, £150 on the completion at press of each of the eight half volumes, £50o if the work was reprinted or extended beyond 7000 copies and £ 200 for incidental expenses." In this way the composition of the four volumes, including the introductory dissertations, will amount to considerably more than £9000."In a postscript the certain payment is characteristically increased to £1575, the contingent to £735, and the allowance for incidental expenses to £300 (Constable, ii. 326). Napier went to London, and obtained the co-operation of many literary men. The supplement was published in half-volume parts from December 1816 to April 1824. It formed six volumes 4to, containing 4933 Pages, 125 plates, 9 maps, three dissertations and 669 articles, of which a list is given at the end. The first dissertation, on the" progress of metaphysical, ethical and political philosophy,"was by Stewart, who completed his plan only in respect to metaphysics. He had thought it would be easy to adapt the intellectual map or general survey of human knowledge, sketched by Bacon and improved by D'Alembert, to the advanced state of the sciences, while its unrivalled authority would have softened criticism. But on closer examination he found the logical views on which this systematic arrangement was based essentially erroneous; and, doubting whether the time had come for a successful repetition of this bold experiment, he forebore to substitute a new scheme of his own. Sir James Mackintosh characterized this discourse as" the most splendid of Mr. Stewart's works, a composition which no other living writer of English prose has equalled "(Edinburgh Review, xxvii. 191, September 1816). The second dissertation," On the progress of mathematics and physics,"was by Playfair, who died 19th July 1819, when he had only finished the period of Newton and Leibnitz. The third, by Professor Brande," On the progress of chemistry from the early middle ages to 1800,"was the only one completed. These historical dissertations were admirable and delightful compositions, and important and interesting additions to the Encyclopaedia; but it is difficult to see why they should form a separate department distinct from the general alphabet. The preface, dated March 1824, begins with an account of the more important previous encyclopaedias, relates the history of this to the sixth edition, describes the preparation for the supplement and gives an" outline of the contents,"and mentions under each great division of knowledge the principal articles and their authors' names, often with remarks on the characters of both. Among the distinguished contributors were Leslie, Playfair, Ivory, Sir John Barrow, Tredgold, Jeffrey, John Bird Sumner, Blanco White, Hamilton Smith and Hazlitt. Sir Walter Scott, to gratify his generous friend Constable, laid aside Waverley, which he was completing for publication, and in April and May 1814 wrote" Chivalry."He also wrote" Drama "in November 1818, and" Romance "in the summer of 1823. As it seemed to the editor that encyclopaedias had previously attended little to political philosophy, he wrote" Balance of Power,"and procured from James Mill" Banks for Savings," Education," Law of Nations," Liberty of the Press,"and other articles, which, reprinted cheaply, had a wide circulation. M'Culloch wrote" Corn Laws," Interest," Money," Political Economy,"&c. Mr Ricardo wrote" Commerce "and" Funding System,"and Professor Malthus, in his article" Population,"gave a comprehensive summary of the facts and reasonings on which his theory rested. In the article" Egypt "Dr Thomas Young" first gave to the public an extended view of the results of his successful interpretation of the hieroglyphic characters on the stone of Rosetta,"with a vocabulary of 221 words in English, Coptic, Hieroglyphic and Enchorial, engraved on four plates. There were about 160 biographies, chiefly of persons who had died within the preceding 30 years. Constable" wished short biographical notices of the first founders of this great work, but they were, in the opinion of my editor, too insignificant to entitle them to the rank which such separate notice, it was supposed, would have given them as literary men, although his own consequence in the world had its origin in their exertions "(Memoirs, ii. 326). It is to be regretted that this wish was not carried out, as was done in the latter volumes of Zedler. Arago wrote" Double Refraction "and" Polarization of Light,"a note to which mentions his name as author. Playfair wrote" Aepinus,"and" Physical Astronomy."Biot wrote" Electricity "and" Pendulum."He" gave his assistance with alacrity,"though his articles had to be translated. Signatures, on the plan of the Encyclopedic, were annexed to each article, the list forming a triple alphabet, A to XXX, with the full names of the 72 contributors arranged apparently in the order of their first occurrence. At the end of vol. vi. are Addenda and Corrigenda, including" Interpolation,"by Leslie, and" Polarization of Light,"by Arago.

The sixth edition," revised, corrected and improved,"appeared in half-volume parts, price 16s. in boards, vol. xx. part ii. completing the work in May 1823. Constable, thinking it not wise to reprint so large a book year after year without correction, in 1820 selected Mr Charles Maclaren (1782-1866), as editor." His attention was chiefly directed to the historical and geographical articles.

He was to keep the press going, and have the whole completed in ,? " " "three years." He wrote America,"Greece," Troy, &c.

Many of the large articles as "Agriculture," "Chemistry," "Conchology," were new or nearly so; and references were given to the supplement. A new edition in 25 vols. was contemplated, not to be announced till a certain time after the supplement was finished; but Constable's house stopped payment on the 19th of January 1826, and his copyrights were sold by auction. Those of the Encyclopaedia were bought by contract, on the 16th of July 1828, for £6150, by Thomas Allan, proprietor of the Caledonian Mercury, Adam Black, Abram Thomson, bookbinder, and Alexander Wight, banker, who, with the trustee of Constable's estate, had previously begun the seventh edition. Not many years later Mr Black purchased all the shares and became sole proprietor.

The seventh edition, 21 vols. 4to (with an index of 187 pages, compiled by Robert Cox), containing 17,101 pages and 506 plates, edited by Macvey Napier, assisted by James Browne, LL.D., was begun in 1827, and published from March 1830 to January 1842. It was reset throughout and stereotyped. Mathematical diagrams were printed in the text from woodcuts. The first half of the preface was nearly that of the supplement. The list of signatures, containing 167 names, consists of four alphabets with additions, and differs altogether from that in the supplement: many names are omitted, the order is changed and 103 are added. A list follows of over 300 articles, without signatures, by 87 writers. The dissertations-1st, Stewart's, 289 pages; 2nd, "Ethics" (136 pages), by Sir James Mackintosh, whose death prevented the addition of "Political Philosophy"; 3rd, Playfair's, 139 pages; 4th, its continuation by Sir John Leslie, loo pages - and their index of 30 pages, fill vol. i. As they did not include Greek philosophy, "Aristotle," "Plato" and "Socrates" were supplied by Dr Hampden, afterwards bishop of Hereford. Among the numerous contributors of eminence, mention may be made of Sir David Brewster, Prof. Phillips, Prof. Spalding, John Hill Burton, Thomas De Quincey, Patrick Fraser Tytler, Capt. Basil Hall, Sir Thomas Dick Lauder, Antonio Panizzi, John Scott Russell and Robert Stephenson. Zoology was divided into I I chief articles, "Mammalia," "Ornithology," "Reptilia," "Ichthyology," "Mollusca," "Crustacea," "Arachnides," "Entomology," "Helminthology," "Zoophytes," and "Animalcule"-all by James Wilson.

The eighth edition, 1853-1860, 4to, 21 vols. (and index of 239 pages, 1861), containing 17,957 pages and 402 plates, with many woodcuts, was edited by Dr Thomas Stewart Traill, professor of medical jurisprudence in Edinburgh University. The dissertations were reprinted, with one on the "Rise, Progress and Corruptions of Christianity" (97 pages), by Archbishop Whately, and a continuation of Leslie's to 1850, by Professor James David Forbes, 198 pages, the work of nearly three years, called by himself his "magnum opus" (Life, pp. 361, 366). Lord Macaulay, Charles Kingsley, Isaac Taylor, Hepworth Dixon, Robert Chambers, Rev. Charles Merivale, Rev. F. W. Farrar, Sir John Richardson, Dr Scoresby, Dr Hooker, Henry Austin Layard, Edw. B. Eastwick, John Crawfurd, Augustus Petermann, Baron Bunsen, Sir John Herschel, Dr Lankester, Professors Owen, Rankine, William Thomson, Aytoun, Blackie, Daniel Wilson and Jukes, were some of the many eminent new contributors found among the 344 authors, of whom an alphabetical list is given, with a key to the signatures. In the preface a list of 279 articles by 189 writers, classed under 15 heads, is given. This edition was not wholly reset like the seventh, but many long articles were retained almost or entirely intact.

The publication of the ninth edition (A. & C. Black) was commenced in January 1875, under the editorship of Thomas Spencer Baynes until 1880, and subsequently of W. Robertson Smith, and completed in 1889, 24 vols., with index. This great edition retained a certain amount of the valuable material in the eighth, but was substantially a new work; and it was universally acknowledged to stand in the forefront of the scholarship of its time. Its contributors included the most distinguished men of letters and of science. In 1898 a reprint, sold at about half the original price, and on the plan of payment by instalments, was issued by The Times of London; and in 1902, under the joint editorship of Sir Donald Mackenzie Wallace, President Arthur T. Hadley of Yale University, and Hugh Chisholm, eleven supplementary volumes were published, forming, with the 24 vols. of the ninth edition, a tenth edition of 35 volumes. These included a volume of maps, and an elaborate index (vol. 35) to the whole edition, comprising some 600,000 entries. In May 1903 a start was made with the preparation of the 11th edition, under the general editorship of Hugh Chisholm, with W. Alison Phillips as chief assistant-editor, and a staff of editorial assistants, the whole work of organization being conducted up to December 1909 from The Times office. Arrangements were then made, as described in the Prefatory Note to the present work, by which the copyright and control of the Encyclopaedia Britannica passed to Cambridge University, for the publication at the University Press in 1910-1911 of the 29 volumes (one being Index) of the Irth edition, a distinctive feature of this issue being the appearance of the whole series of volumes practically at the same time.

A new and enlarged edition of the Encyclopedie arranged as a system of separate dictionaries, and entitled Encyclopedie methodique ou par ordre de matieres, was undertaken by Charles Joseph Panckoucke, a publisher of Paris (born at Lille on the 26th of November 1736, died on the 19th of December 1798). His privilege was dated the 10th of June 1780. The articles belonging to different subjects would readily form distinct dictionaries, although, having been constructed for an alphabetical plan, they seemed unsuited for any system wholly methodical. Two copies of the book and its supplement were cut up into articles, which were sorted into subjects. The division adopted was: 1, mathematics; 2 physics; 3, medicine; 4, anatomy and physiology; 5, surgery; 6, chemistry, metallurgy and pharmacy; 7, agriculture; 8, natural history of animals, in six parts; 9, botany; ro, minerals; 11, physical geography; 12, ancient and modern geography; 13, antiquities; 14, history; 15, theology; 16, philosophy; 17, metaphysics, logic and morality; 18, grammar and literature; 19, law; 20, finance; 21, political economy; 22, commerce; 23, marine; 24, art militaire; 25, beaux arts; 26, arts et metiers-all forming distinct dictionaries entrusted to different editors. The first object of each editor was to exclude all articles belonging to other subjects, and to take care that those of a doubtful nature should not be omitted by all. In some words (such as air, which belonged equally to chemistry, physics and medicine) the methodical arrangement has the unexpected effect of breaking up the single article into several widely separated. Each dictionary was to have an introduction and a classified table of the principal articles. History and its minor parts, as inscriptions, fables, medals, were to be included. Theology, which was neither complete, exact nor orthodox, was to be by the abbe Bergier, confessor to Monsieur. The whole work was to be completed and connected together by a Vocabulaire Universel, r vol. 4to, with references to all the places where each word occurred, and a very exact history of the Encyclopedie and its editions by Panckoucke. The prospectus, issued early in 1782, proposed three editions-84 vols. 8vo, 43 vols. 4to with 3 columns to a page, and 53 vols. 4to of about loo sheets with 2 columns to a page, each edition having 7 vols. 4to of 250 to 300 plates each. The subscription was to be 672 livres from the 15th of March to July 1782, then 751, and 888 after April 1783. It was to be issued in livraisons of 2 vols. each, the first (jurisprudence, vol. i., literature, vol. i.) to appear in July 1782, and the whole to be finished in 1787. The number of subscribers, 4072, was so great that the subscription list of 672 livres was closed on the 30th of April. Twenty-five printing offices were employed, and in November 1782 the 1st livraison (jurisprudence, vol. i.,. and half vol. each of arts et métiers and histoire naturelle) was issued. A Spanish prospectus was sent out, and obtained 330 Spanish subscribers, with the inquisitor-general at their head. The complaints of the subscribers and his own heavy advances, over 150,000 livres, induced Panckoucke, in November 1788, to appeal to the authors to finish the work. Those en retard made new contracts, giving their word of honour to put their parts to press in 1788, and to continue them without interruption, so that Panckoucke hoped to finish the whole, including the vocabulary (4 or 5 vols.), in 1792. Whole sciences, as architecture, engineering, hunting, police, games, &c., had been overlooked in the prospectus; a new division was made in 44 parts, to contain 51 dictionaries and about 124 vols. Permission was obtained on the 27th of February 1789, to receive subscriptions for the separate dictionaries. Two thousand subscribers were lost by the Revolution. The Soth livraison appeared on the 23rd of July 1792, when all the dictionaries eventually published had been begun except seven-jeux familiers and mathematiques, physics, art oratoire, physical geography, chasses and peches; and 18 were finished,-mathematics, games, surgery, ancient and modern geography, history, theology, logic, grammar, jurisprudence, finance, political economy, commerce, marine, arts militaires, arts academiques, arts et metiers, encyclopediana. Supplements were added to military art in 1797, and to history in 1807, but not to any of the other 16, though required for most long before 1832. The publication was continued by Henri Agasse, Panckoucke's son-in-law, from 1794 to 1813, and then by Mme Agasse, his widow, to 1832, when it was completed in 102 livraisons or 337 parts, forming 1662 vols. of text, and 51 parts containing 6439 plates. The letterpress issued with the plates amounts to 5458 pages, making with the text 124,210 pages. To save expense the plates belonging to architecture were not published. Pharmacy (separated from chemistry), minerals, education, ponts et chaussees had been announced but were not published, neither was the Vocabulaire Universel, the key and index to the whole work, so that it is difficult to carry out any research or to find all the articles on any subject. The original parts have been so often subdivided, and have been so added to by other dictionaries, supplements and appendices, that, without going into great detail, an exact account cannot be given of the work, which contains 88 alphabets, with 83 indexes, and 166 introductions, discourses, prefaces, &c. Many dictionaries have a classed index of articles; that of economie politique is very excellent, giving the contents of each article, so that any passage can be found easily. The' largest dictionaries are medicine, 13 vols., 10,330 pages; zoology, 7 dictionaries, 13,645 pages, 1206 plates; botany, 12,002 pages, r000 plates (34 only of cryptogamic plants); geography, 3 dictionaries and 2 atlases, 9090 pages, 193 maps and plates; jurisprudence (with police and municipalities), to vols., 7607 pages. Anatomy, 4 vols., 2866 pages, is not a dictionary but a series of systematic treatises. Assemblee Nationale was to be in three parts,-(1) the history of the Revolution, (2) debates, and (3) laws and decrees. Only vol. ii., debates, appeared, 1792, 804 pages, Absens to Aurillac. Ten volumes of a Spanish translation with a vol. of plates were published at Madrid to 1806-viz. historia natural, i. ii.; grammatica, i.; arte militar, i., ii.; geografia, i.-iii.; fabricas, i., ii., plates, vol. i. A French edition was printed at Padua, with the plates, says Peignot, very carefully engraved. Probably no more unmanageable body of dictionaries has ever been published except Migne's Encyclopedic theologique, Paris, 1844-1875, 4to, 168 vols., 101 dictionaries, 119,059 pages.

No work of reference has been more useful and successful, or more frequently copied, imitated and translated, than that known as the Conversations Lexikon of Brockhaus. It was begun as Conversations Lexikon mit vorziiglicher Riicksicht auf die gegenwiirtigen Zeiten, Leipzig, 1796 to 1808, 8vo, 6 vols., 2762 pages, by Dr Gotthelf Renatus Lobel (born on the 1st of April 1767 at Thalwitz near Wurzen in Saxony, died on the 14th of February 1799), who intended to supersede Hubner, and included geography, history, and in part biography, besides mythology, philosophy, natural history, &c. Vols. i.-iv. (A to R) appeared 1796 to 1 Soo, vol. v. in 1806. Friedrich Arnold Brockhaus bought the work with its copyright on the 25th of October 1808, for 1800 thalers from the printer, who seems to have got it in payment of his bill. The editor, Christian Wilhelm Franke, by contract dated the 16th of November, was to finish vol. vi. by the 5th of December, and the already projected supplement, 2 vols., by Michaelmas 1809, for 8 thalers a printed sheet. No penalty was specified, but, says his grandson, Brockhaus was to learn that such contracts, whether under penalty or not, are not kept, for the supplement was finished only in 1811. Brockhaus issued a new impression as Conversations Lexikon oder kurzgefasstes Handworterbuch, &c., 1809-1811, and on removing to Altenburg in 1811 began himself to edit the 2nd edition (1812-1819, 10 vols.), and, when vol. iv. was published, the 3rd (1814-1819). He carried on both editions together until 1817, when he removed to Leipzig, and began the 4th edition as Allgemeine deutsche Realencyclopddie fiir die gebildeten Steinde. Conversations Lexikon. This title was, in the 14th edition, changed to that of Brockhaus' Konversations Lexicon. The 5th edition was at once begun, and was finished in eighteen months. Dr Ludwig Hain assisted in editing the 4th and 5th editions until he left Leipzig in April 1820, when Professor F. C. Hasse took his place. The 12,000 copies of the 5th edition being exhausted while vol. x. was at press, a 2nd unaltered impression of 10,000 was required in 1820 and a 3rd of io,000 in 1822. The 6th edition, to vols., was begun in September 1822. Brockhaus died in 1823, and his two eldest sons, Friedrich and Heinrich, who carried on the business for the heirs and became sole possessors in 1829, finished the edition with Hasse's assistance in September 1823. The 7th edition (1827-1829, 12 vols., 10,489 pages, 13,000 copies, 2nd impression 14,000) was edited by Hasse. The 8th edition (1833-1836, 12 vols., 10,689 pages, 31,000 copies to 1842), begun in the autumn of 1832, ended May 1837, was edited by Dr Karl August Espe (born February 1804, died in the Irrenanstalt at Stotteritz near Leipzig on the 24th of November 1850) with the aid of many learned and distinguished writers. A general index, Universal Register, 242 pages, was added in 1839. The 9th edition (1843-1847, 15 vols., 11,470 pages, over 30,000 copies) was edited by Dr Espe. The 10th edition (1851-1855, 12,564 pages) was also in 15 vols., for convenience in reference, and was edited by Dr August Kurtzel aided by Oskar Pilz. Friedrich Brockhaus had retired in 1849; Dr Heinrich Edward, the elder son of Heinrich, made partner in 1854, assisted in this edition, and Heinrich Rudolf, the younger son, partner since 1863, in the 11th (1864-1868, 15 vols. of 60 sheets, 13,366 pages).

Kurtzel died on the 24th of April 1871, and Pilz was sole editor until March 1872, when Dr Gustav Stockmann joined, who was alone from April until joined by Dr Karl Wippermann in October. Besides the Universal Register of 136 pages and about 50,000 articles, each volume has an index. The supplement, 2 vols, 1764 pages, was begun in February 1871, and finished in April 1873. The 12th edition, begun in 1875, was completed in 1879 in 15 vols., the 13th edition (1882-1887), in 16 vols., and the 14th (1901-1903) in 16 vols. with a supplementary volume in 1904. The Conversations Lexicon is intended, not for scientific use, but to promote general mental improvement by giving the results of research and discovery in a simple and popular form without extended details. The articles, often too brief, are very excellent and trustworthy, especially on German subjects, give references to the best books, and include biographies of living men.

One of the best German encyclopaedias is that of Meyer, Neues Konversations-Lexicon. The first edition, in 37 vols., was published in 1839-1852. The later editions, following closely the arrangement of Brockhaus, are the 4th (1885-1890, 17 vols.), the 5th (1894-1898, 18 vols.), and the 6th (begun in 1902).

The most copious German encyclopaedia is Ersch and Gruber's Allgemeine Encyklopiidie der Wissenschaften and Kiinste, Leipzig. It was designed and begun in 1813 by Professor Johann Samuel Ersch (born at Gross Glogau on the 23rd of June 1766, chief librarian at Halle, died on the 16th of January 1828) to satisfy the wants of Germans, only in part supplied by foreign works. It was stopped by the war until 1816, when Professor Hufeland (born at Danzig on the 19th of October 1760) joined, but he died on the 25th of November 1817 while the specimen part was at press. The editors of the different sections at various times have been some of the best-known men of learning in Germany, including J. G. Gruber, M. H. E. Meier, Hermann Brockhaus,, W. Muller and A. G. Hoffmann of Jena.

The work is divided into three sections (I) A-G, of which 99 vols. had appeared by 1905, (2) H-N, 43 vols., (3) O-Z, 25 vols. All articles bear the authors' names, and those not ready in time were placed at the end of their letter. The longest in the work is Griechenland, vols. 80-87, 3668 pages, with a table of contents. It began to appear after vol. 73 (Gotze to Gondouin), and hence does not come in its proper place, which is in vol. 91. Gross Britannien contains 700 pages, and Indien by Benfey 356.

The Encyclopaedia Metropolitana (London, 1845, 4to, 28 vols., issued in 59 parts in 1817-1845, 22,426 pages, 565 plates) professed to give sciences and systematic arts entire and in their natural sequence, as shown in the introductory treatise on method by S. T. Coleridge. "The plan was the proposal of the poet Coleridge, and it had at least enough of a poetical character to be eminently unpractical" (Quarterly Review, cxiii., 379). However defective the plan, the excellence of many of the treatises by Archbishop Whately, Sir John Herschel, Professors Barlow, Peacock, de Morgan, &c., is undoubted. It is in four divisions, the last only being alphabetical:-I. Pure Sciences, 2 vols., 1813 pages, 16 plates, 28 treatises, includes grammar, law and theology; II. Mixed and Applied Sciences, 8 vols., 5391 pages, 437 plates, 42 treatises, including fine arts, useful arts, natural history and its "application," the medical sciences; III. History and Biography, 5 vols., 4458 pages, 7 maps, containing biography (135 essays) chronologically arranged (ta Thomas Aquinas in vol. 3), and interspersed with (210) chapters on history (to 1815), as the most philosophical, interesting and natural form (but modern lives were so many that the plan broke down, and a division of biography, to be in 2 vols., was announced but not published); IV. Miscellaneous, 12 vols., 10,338 pages, 105 plates, including geography, a dictionary of English (the first form of Richardson's) and descriptive natural history. The index, 364 pages, contains about 9000 articles. A re-issue in 38 vols. 4to, was announced in 1849. Of a second edition 42 vols. 8vo, 14,744 pages, belonging to divisions i. to iii. were published in 1849-1858.

The very excellent and useful English Cyclopaedia (London, 1854-1862, 4to, 23 vols., 12,117 pages; supplements, 1869-1873, 4 vols., 2858 pages), conducted by Charles Knight, based on the Penny Cyclopaedia (London, 1833-1846, 4to, 29 vols., 15,625 pages), of which he had the copyright, is in four divisions all alphabetical, and evidently very unequal as classes:-1, geography; 2, natural history; 3, biography (with 703 lives of living persons); 4, arts and sciences. The synoptical index, 168 pages, has four columns on a page, one for each division, sa that the order is alphabetical and yet the words are classed.

Chambers's Encyclopaedia (Edinburgh, W. & R. Chambers), 1860-1868, 8vo, 10 vols., 8283 pages, edited in part by the publishers, but under the charge of Dr Andrew Findlater as "acting editor" throughout,was founded on the 10th edition of Brockhaus. A revised edition appeared in 1874, 8320 pages. In the list of 126 contributors were J.H. Burton, Emmanuel Deutsch, Professor Goldstiicker, &c. The index of matters not having special articles contained about 150o headings. The articles were generally excellent, more especially on Jewish literature, folk-lore and practical science; but, as in Brockhaus, the scope of the work did not allow extended treatment. A further revision took place, and in 1888-1892 an entirely new edition was published, in io vols., still further new editions being issued in 1895 and in 1901.

An excellent brief compilation, the Harmsworth Encyclopaedia (1905), was published in 40 fortnightly parts (sevenpence each) in England, and as Nelson's Encyclopaedia (revised) in 12 vols. (1906) in America. It was originally prepared for Messrs Nelson of Edinburgh and for the Carmelite Press, London.

In the United States various encyclopaedias have been published, but without rivalling there the Encyclopedia Britannica, the 9th edition of which was extensively pirated. Several American Supplements were also issued.

The New American Cyclopaedia, New York (Appleton & Co.), 1858-1863, 16 vols., 12,752 pages, was the work of the editors, George Ripley and Charles Anderson Dana, and 364 contributors, chiefly American. A supplementary work, the American Annual Cyclopaedia, a yearly 8vo vol. of about Boo pages and 250 articles, was started in 1861, but ceased in 1902. In a new edition, the American Cyclopaedia, 1873-1876, 8vo, 16 vols., 13,484 pages, by the same editors, 4 associate editors, 31 revisers and a librarian, each article passed through the hands of 6 or 8 revisers.

Other American encyclopaedias are Alvin J. Johnson's New Universal Cyclopaedia, 1875-1877, in 4 vols., a new edition of which (excellently planned) was published in 8 vols., 1893-1895, under the name of Johnson's Universal Cyclopaedia; the Encyclopaedia Americana, edited by Francis Lieber, which appeared in 1839-1847 in 14 vols.; a new work under the same title, published in 1903-1904 in 16 vols.; the International Cyclopaedia, first published in 1884 (revised in 1891, 1894 and 1898), and superseded in 1902 (revised, 1906) by the New International Encyclopaedia in 17 vols.

In Europe a great impetus was given to the compilation of encyclopaedias by the appearance of Brockhaus' Conversations-Lexicon (see above), which, as a begetter of these works, must rank, in the 19th century, with the Cyclopaedia of Ephraim Chambers in the 18th. The following, although in no sense an exhaustive list, may be here mentioned. In France, Le Grand Dictionnaire universel du XIXe siecle, of Pierre Larousse (15 vols., 1866-1876), with supplementary volumes in 1877, 1887 and 1890; the Nouveau Larousse illustre, dictionnaire universel encyclopedique (7 vols., 1901-1904), (this is in no way a re-issue or an abridgment of Le Grand Dictionnaire of Pierre Larousse); La Grande Encyclopedie, inventaire raisonne des sciences, des lettres, et des arts, in 31 vols. (1886-1903). In Italy, the Nuova Enciclopedia Italiana (14 vols., 1841-1851, and in 25 vols., 1875-1888). In Spain, the Diccionario enciclopedico HispanoAmericano de litteratura, ciencias y artes, published at Barcelona (25 vols., 1877-1899). The Russian encyclopaedia, Russkiy Entsiklopedicheskiy Slovar (41 vols., 1905, 2 supplementary vols., 1908) was begun in 1890 as a Russian version of Brockhaus' ConversationsLexicon, but has become a monumental encyclopaedia, to which all the best Russian men of science and letters have contributed. Elaborate encyclopaedias have also appeared in the Polish, Hungarian, Bohemian and Rumanian languages. Of Scandinavian encyclopaedias there have been re-issues of the Nordesk Conversations-Lexicon, first published in 1858-1863, and of the Svenskt Conversations-Lexicon, first published in 1845-1851.

Alcibiades

Friday, June 18th, 2021

ALCIBIADES (c. 450-404 B.C.), Athenian general and politician, was born at Athens. He was the son of Cleinias and Deinomache, who belonged to the family of the Alcmaeonidae. He was a near relative of Pericles, who, after the death of Cleinias at the battle of Coroneia (447), became his guardian. Thus early deprived of his father's control, possessed of great personal beauty and the heir to great wealth, which was increased by his marriage, he showed himself self-willed, capricious and passionate, and indulged in the wildest freaks and most insolent behaviour. Nor did the instructors of his early manhood supply the corrective which his boyhood lacked. From Protagoras, Prodicus and others he learnt to laugh at the common ideas of justice, temperance, holiness and patriotism. The laborious thought, the ascetic life of his master Socrates, he was able to admire, but not to imitate or practise. On the contrary, his ostentatious vanity, his amours, his debaucheries and his impious revels became notorious. But great as were his vices, his abilities were even greater.

He took part in the battle of Potidaea (432), where his life was saved by Socrates, a service which he repaid at the battle of Delium (424). As the reward of his bravery, the wealthy Hipponicus bestowed upon him the hand of his daughter. From this time he took a prominent part in Athenian politics during the Peloponnesian war. Originally friendly to Sparta, he subsequently became the leader of the war party in opposition to Nicias, and after the peace of 421 he succeeded by an unscrupulous trick in duping the Spartan ambassadors, and persuading the Athenians to conclude an alliance (420) with Argos, Elis and Mantineia (Thuc. v. 56, 76). On the failure of Nicias in Thrace (418-417) he became the chief advocate of the Sicilian expedition, seeing an opportunity for the realization of his ambitious projects, which included the conquest of Sicily, to be followed by that of Peloponnesus and possibly of Carthage (though this seems to have been an afterthought). The expedition was decided upon with great enthusiasm, and Alcibiades, Nicias and Lamachus were appointed joint commanders. But, on the day before the expedition sailed, there occurred the mysterious multilation of the Hermae, and Alcibiades was accused not only of being the originator of the crime, but also of having profaned the Eleusinian mysteries. His request for an immediate investigation being refused, he was obliged to set sail with the charge still hanging over him. Almost as soon as he reached Sicily he was recalled to stand his trial, but he escaped on the journey home and made his way to Sparta. Learning that he had been condemned to death in his absence and his property confiscated, he openly joined the Spartans, and persuaded them to send Gylippus to assist the Syracusans and to fortify Decelea in Attica. He then passed over to Asia Minor, prevailed upon many of the Ionic allies of Athens to revolt, and concluded an alliance with the Persian satrap Tissaphernes. But in a few months he had lost the confidence of the Spartans, and at the instigation of Agis II., whose personal hostility he had excited, an order was sent for his execution. Receiving timely information of this order he crossed over to Tissaphernes (412), and persuaded him to adopt the negative policy of leaving Athens and Sparta to wear themselves out by their mutual struggles. Alcibiades was now bent on returning to Athens, and he used his supposed influence with Tissaphernes to effect his purpose. He entered into negotiations with the oligarch Peisander, but when these led to no result he attached himself to the fleet at Samos which remained loyal to the democracy, and was subsequently recalled by Thrasybulus, although he did not at once return to Athens. Being appointed commander in the neighbourhood of the Hellespont, he defeated the Spartan fleet at Abydos (411) and Cyzicus (410), and recovered Chalcedon and Byzantium. On his return to Athens after these successes he was welcomed with unexpected enthusiasm (407); all the proceedings against him were cancelled, and he was appointed general with full powers. His ill success, however, at Andros, and the defeat at Notium (407) of his lieutenant Antiochus, led the Athenians to dismiss him from his command. He thereupon retired to the Thracian Chersonesus. After the battle of Aegospotami, and the final defeat of Athens, he crossed the Hellespont and took refuge with Pharnabazus in Phrygia, with the object of securing the aid of Artaxerxes against Sparta. But the Spartans induced Pharnabazus to put him out of the way; as he was about to set out for the Persian court his residence was set on fire, and on rushing out on his assassins, dagger in hand, he was killed by a shower of arrows (404). There can be no doubt that his advice to Sparta in connexion with Syracuse and the fortification of Decelea was the real cause of his country's downfall, though it is only fair to him to add that had he been allowed to continue in command of the Sicilian expedition he would undoubtedly have overruled the fatal policy of Nicias and prevented the catastrophe of 413. His belated attempt to repair his fatal treachery only exposed the essential selfishness of his character. Though he must have known that his influence over the Persian satraps was slender in the extreme, he used it with the most flagrant dishonesty as a bait first to Sparta, then to the Athenian oligarchs, and finally to the democracy. Superficial and opportunist to the last, he owed the successes of his meteoric career purely to personal magnetism and an almost incredible capacity for deception.

There are lives of Alcibiades by Plutarch and Cornelius Nepos, and monographs by Hertzberg, A. der Staatsmann and Feldherr (1853), and Houssaye, Histoire d'Alcibiade (1873); but the best accounts will be found in the histories of Greece by G. Grote (also notes in abridged ed., 1907), Ed. Meyer, and works quoted under Greece, Ancient History, sect. "Authorities"; also Peloponnesian War.

Democracy

Friday, June 18th, 2021

DEMOCRACY(Gr. δημοκρατία, from δῆμος, the people, i.e. the commons, and κράτος, rule), in political science, that form of government in which the people rules itself, either directly, as in the small city-states of Greece, or through representatives. According to Aristotle, democracy is the perverted form of the 2third form of government, which he called πολιτεία, “polity” or “constitutional government,” the rule of the majority of the free and equal citizens, as opposed to monarchy and aristocracy, the rule respectively of an individual and of a minority consisting of the best citizens (see Government and Aristocracy). Aristotle’s restriction of “democracy” to bad popular government, i.e. mob-rule, or, as it has sometimes been called, “ochlocracy” (ὂχλος, mob), was due to the fact that the Athenian democracy had in his day degenerated far below the ideals of the 5th century, when it reached its zenith under Pericles. Since Aristotle’s day the word has resumed its natural meaning, but democracy in modern times is a very different thing from what it was in its best days in Greece and Rome. The Greek states were what are known as “city-states,” the characteristic of which was that all the citizens could assemble together in the city at regular intervals for legislative and other purposes. This sovereign assembly of the people was known at Athens as the Ecclesia (q.v.), at Sparta as the Apella (q.v.), at Rome variously as the Comitia Centuriata or the Concilium Plebis (see Comitia). Of representative government in the modern sense there is practically no trace in Athenian history, though certain of the magistrates (see Strategus) had a quasi-representative character. Direct democracy is impossible except in small states. In the second place the qualification for citizenship was rigorous; thus Pericles restricted citizenship to those who were the sons of an Athenian father, himself a citizen, and an Athenian mother (ἐξ ἀμφόῖν ἀστοῖν). This system excluded not only all the slaves, who were more numerous than the free population, but also resident aliens, subject allies, and those Athenians whose descent did not satisfy this criterion (τῷ γένει μὴ καθαροί). The Athenian democracy, which was typical in ancient Greece, was a highly exclusive form of government.

With the growth of empire and nation states this narrow parochial type of democracy became impossible. The population became too large and the distance too great for regular assemblies of qualified citizens. The rigid distinction of citizens and non-citizens was progressively more difficult to maintain, and new criteria of citizenship came into force. The first difficulty has been met by various forms of representative government. The second problem has been solved in various ways in different countries; moderate democracies have adopted a low property qualification, while extreme democracy is based on the extension of citizenship to all adult persons with or without distinction of sex. The essence of modern representative government is that the people does not govern itself, but periodically elects those who shall govern on its behalf (see Government; Representation).

Empire

Friday, June 18th, 2021

EMPIRE, a term now used to denote a state of large size and also (as a rule) of composite character, often, but not necessarily, ruled by an emperor - a state which may be a federation, like the German empire, or a unitary state, like the Russian, or even, like the British empire, a loose commonwealth of free states united to a number of subordinate dependencies. For many centuries the writers of the Church, basing themselves on the Apocalyptic writings, conceived of a cycle of four empires, generally explained - though there was no absolute unanimity with regard to the members of the cycle - as the Assyrian, the Persian, the Macedonian and the Roman. But in reality the conception of Empire, like the term itself (Lat. imperium), is of Roman origin. The empire of Alexander had indeed in some ways anticipated the empire of Rome. " In his later years," Professor Bury writes, " Alexander formed the notion of an empire, both European and Asiatic, in which the Asiatics should not be dominated by the European invaders, but Europeans and Asiatics alike should be ruled on an equality by a monarch, indifferent to the distinction of Greek and barbarian, and looked upon as their own king by Persians as well as by Macedonians." The contemporary Cynic philosophy of cosmopolitanism harmonized with this notion, as Stoicism did later with the practice of the Roman empire; and Alexander, like Diocletian and Constantine, accustomed a Western people to the forms of an Oriental court, while, like the earlier Caesars, he claimed and received the recognition of his own divinity. But when he died in 323, his empire, which had barely lasted ten years, died with him; and it was divided among Diadochi who, if in some other respects (for instance, the Hellenization of the East) they were heirs of their master's policy, were destitute of the imperial conception. The work of Alexander was rather that of the forerunner than the founder. He prepared the way for the world-empire of Rome; he made possible the rise of a universal religion. And these are the two factors which, throughout the middle ages, went together to make the thing which men called Empire.

At Rome the term imperium signified generally, in its earlier use, the sovereignty of the state over the individual, a sovereignty which the Romans had disengaged with singular The clearness from all other kinds of authority. Each of t he higher magistrates of the Roman people was g g P P vested, by a lex curiata (for power was distinctly conceived as resident in, and delegated by, the community), with an imperium both civil and military, which varied in degree with the magnitude of his office. In the later days of the Republic such imperium was enjoyed, partly in Rome by the resident consuls and praetors, partly in the provinces by the various proconsuls or propraetors. There was thus a certain morcellement of imperium, delegated as it was by the people to a number of magistrates: the coming of the Empire meant the reintegration of this imperium, and its unification, by a gradual process, in the hands of the princeps, or emperor. The means by which this process was achieved had already been anticipated under the Republic. Already in the days of Pompey it had been found convenient to grant to an extraordinary officer an imperium aequum or majus over a large area, and that officer thus received powers, within that area, equal to, or greater than, the powers of the provincial governors. This precedent was followed by Augustus in the year 27 B.e., when he acquired for himself sole imperium in a certain number of provinces (the imperial provinces), and an infinitum imperium majus in the remaining provinces (which were termed senatorial). As a result, Augustus enjoyed an imperium coextensive indeed with the whole of the Roman world, but concurrent, in part of that world, with the imperium of the senatorial proconsuls; and the early Empire may thus be described as a dyarchy. But the distinction between imperial and senatorial provinces finally disappeared; by the time of Constantine the emperor enjoyed sole imperium, and an absolute monarchy had been established. We shall not, however, fully understand the significance of the Roman empire, unless we realize the impgrtance of its military aspect. All the soldiers of Rome had from the first to swear in verba Caesaris Augusti; and thus the whole of the Roman army was his army, regiments of which he might indeed lend, but of which he was sole Imperator (see under Emperor). Thus regarded as a permanent commander-in-chief, the emperor enjoyed the privileges, and suffered from the weaknesses, of his position. He had the power of the sword behind him; but he became more and more liable to be deposed, and to be replaced by a new commander, at the will of those who bore the sword in his service.

The period which is marked by the reigns of Diocletian and Constantine (A.D. 284-337) marks a great transformation in the character of the Empire. The old dyarchy, under which the emperor might still be regarded as an official of the respublica Romana, passed into a new monarchy, in which all political power became, as it were, the private property of the monarch. There was now no distinction of provinces; and the old public aerarium became merely a municipal treasury, while the fiscus of the emperor became the exchequer of the Empire. The officers of the imperial praetorium, or bodyguard, are now the great officers of state; his private council becomes the public consistory, or supreme court of appeal; and the comites of his court are the administrators of his empire. " All is in him, and all comes from him," as our own year-books say of the medieval king; his household, for instance, is not only a household, but also an administration. On the other hand, this unification seems to be accompanied by a new bifurcation. The exigencies of frontier defence had long been drawing the Empire towards the troubled East; and this tendency reached its culmination when a new Rome arose by the Bosporus, and Constantinople became the centre of what seemed a second Empire in the East (A.D. 32 4). Particularly after the division of the Empire between inexact. The Roman empire was, and always continued to be, ideally one and indivisible. There were two emperors, but one Empire - two persons, but one power. The point is of great importance for the understanding of the whole of the middle ages: there only is, and can be, one Empire, which may indeed, for convenience, be ruled conjointly by two emperors, resident, again for convenience, in two separate capitals. And, as a matter of fact, not only did the residence of an emperor in the East not spell bifurcation, it actually fostered the tendency towards unification. It helped forward the transformation of the Empire into an absolute and quasi-Asiatic monarchy, under which all its subjects fell into a single level of loyal submission: it helped to give the emperor a gorgeous court, marked by all the ceremony and the servility of the East.' The deification of the emperor himself dates from the days of Augustus; by the time of Constantine it has infected the court and the government. Each emperor, again, had from the first enjoyed the sacrosanct position which was attached to the tribunate; but now his palace, his chamber, his charities, his letters, are all " sacred," and one might almost speak in advance of a " Holy Roman Empire." But there is one factor, the greatest of all, which still remains to be added, before we have counted the sum of the forces that made the world think in terms of empire for centuries ... to come; and that is the reception of Christianity into the Roman empire by Constantine. That reception anity. added a new sanction to the existence of the Empire and the position of the emperor. The Empire, already one and indivisible in its aspect of a political society, was welded still more firmly together when it was informed and permeated by a common Christianity, and unified by the force of a spiritual bond. The Empire was now the Church; it was now indeed indestructible, for, if it perished as an empire, it would live as a church. But the Church made it certain that it would not perish, even as an empire, for many centuries to come. On the one hand the Church thought in terms of empire and taught the millions of its disciples (including the barbarians themselves) to think in the same terms. No other political conception - no conception of a 7r6Xts or of a nation - was any longer possible. When the Church gained its hold of the Roman world, the Empire, as it has been well said, was already " not only a government, but a fashion of conceiving the world ": it had stood for three centuries, and no man could think of any other form of political association. Moreover, the gospel of St Paul - that there is one Church, whereof Christ is the Head, and we are all members - could not but reinforce for the Christian the conception of a necessary political unity of all the world under a single head. Una Chiesa in uno Stato - such, then, was the theory of the Church. But not only did the Church perpetuate the conception of empire by making it a part of its own theory of the world: it perpetuated that conception equally by materializing it in its own organization of itself. Growing up under the shadow of the Empire, the Church too became an empire, as the Empire had become a church. As it took over something of the old pagan ceremonial, so it took over much of the old secular organization. The pope borrowed his title of ponti f ex maximus from the emperor: what is far more, he made himself gradually, and in the course of centuries, the Caesar and Imperator of the Church. The offices and the dioceses of the Church are parallel to the offices and dioceses of the Diocletian empire: the whole spirit of orderly hierarchy and regular organization, which breathes in the Roman Church, is the heritage of ancient Rome. The Donation of Constantine is a forgery; but it expresses a great truth when it represents Constantine as giving to the pope the imperial palace and insignia, and to the clergy the ornaments of the imperial army (see Donation Of Constantine).

1 Bryce points out, with much subtlety and truth, that the rise of a second Rome in the East not only helped to perpetuate the Empire by providing a new centre which would take the place of Rome when Rome fell, but also tended to make it more universal; " for, having lost its local centre, it subsisted no longer by historic right only, but, so to speak, naturally, as a part of an order of things which a change in external conditions seemed incapable of disturbing " (Holy Roman Empire, p. 8 of the edition of 1904).

A r cadius and Honorius in does this bifurcation Empire. 3 9 5 appear to be marked; and one naturally speaks of the two Empires of the West and the East. Yet it cannot be too much emphasized that in reality such language is utterly and with it the conception of empire. With that conception, indeed, the barbarians had already been for centuries familiar: 'service in Roman armies, and settlement in Roman territories, had made the Roman empire for them, as much as for the civilized provincial, part of the order of the world. One of the barbarian invaders, Odoacer (Odovakar), might seem, in 476, to have swept away the Empire from the West, when he commanded the abdication of Romulus Augustulus; and the date 476 has indeed been generally emphasized as marking " the fall of the Western empire." Other invaders, again, men like the Frank Clovis or the great Ostrogoth Theodoric, might seem, in succeeding years, to have completed the work of Odoacer, and to have shattered the sorry scheme of the later Empire, by remoulding it into national kingdoms. De facto, there is some truth in such a view: de jure, there is none.' All that Odoacer did was to abolish one of the two joint rulers of the indivisible Empire, and to make the remaining ruler at Constantinople sole emperor from the Bosporus to the pillars of Hercules. He abolished the dual sovereignty which had been inaugurated by Diocletian, and returned to the unity of the Empire in the days of Marcus Aurelius. He did not abolish the Roman empire in the West: he only abolished its separate jruler, and, leaving the Empire itself subsisting, under the sway (nominal, it is true, but none the less acknowledged) of the emperor resident at Constantinople, he claimed to act as his vicar, under the name of patrician, in the administration of the Italian provinces.2 As Odoacer thus fitted himself into the scheme of empire, so did both Clovis and Theodoric. They do not claim to be emperors (that was reserved for Charlemagne): they claim to be the vicars and lieutenants of the Empire. Theodoric spoke of himself to Zeno as imperio vestro famulans; he left justice and administration in Roman hands, and maintained two annual consuls in Rome. Clovis received the title of consul from Anastasius; the Visigothic kings of Spain (like the kings of the savage Lombards) styled themselves Flavii, and permitted the cities of their eastern coast to send tribute to Constantinople. Yet it must be admitted that, as a matter of fact, this adhesion of the new barbaric kings to the Empire was little more than a form. The Empire maintained its ideal unity by treating them as its vicars; but they themselves were forming separate and independent 'kingdoms within its borders. The Italy of the Ostrogoths cannot have belonged, in any real sense, to the Empire; otherwise Justinian would never have needed to attempt its reconquest. And in the 7th and 8th centuries the form of adhesion itself decayed: the emperor was retiring upon the Greek world of the East, and the German conquerors, settled within their kingdoms, lost the width of outlook of their old migratory days.

It is here that the action of the Church becomes of supreme importance. The Church had not ceased to believe in the continuous life of the Empire. The Fathers had Church taught that when the cycle of empires was finally ended by the disappearance of the empire of Rome, the days of Antichrist would dawn; and, since Antichrist was not yet come, the Church believed that the Empire still lived, and would continue to live till his coming. Mean s The de facto importance of the event of 476 can only be seen in the light of later events, and it was not therefore noticed by contemporaries. Marcellinus is the only contemporary who remarks on its importance, cf. Marcellini Chronicon (Mon. Germ. Hist., Chronica minora, ii. 91), Hesperium Romanae geniis imperium ... cum hoc Augustulo per22t ... Gothorum dehinc regibus Romam tenentibus. 2 A passage in Malchus, a Byzantine historian (quoted by Bryce, Holy Roman Empire, p. 25, note u, in the edition of 1904), expresses this truth exactly. The envoys sent to Zeno by Odoacer urge cos Was i itiv auTois, acrLXEias Ou &oc 6.7roxpi 7 vec µovos by abTOxparwp aµcoTipocs 7rEpaiL. The envoys then suggest the name of Odoacer, as one able to manage their affairs, and ask Zeno to give him, as an officer of the Empire, the title of Patricius and the administration of Italy.

while the Eastern emperor, ever since Justinian's reconquest of Italy, had been able to maintain his hold on the centre of Italy; and Rome itself, the seat of the head of the Church, still ranked as one of the cities under his sway. The imperialist theory of the Church found its satisfaction in this connexion of its head with Constantinople; and as long as this connexion continued to satisfy the Church, there was little prospect of any change. For many years after their invasion of 568, the pressure which the Lombards maintained on central Italy, from their kingdom in the valley of the Po, kept the popes steadily faithful to the emperor of the East and his representative in Italy, the exarch of Ravenna. But it was not in the nature of things that such fidelity should continue unimpaired. The development of the East and the West could not but proceed along ce constantly diverging lines, until the point was reached when their connexion must snap. On the one hand, the development of the West set towards the increase of the West. powers of the bishop of Rome until he reached a height at which subjection to the emperor at Constantinople became impossible. Residence in Rome, the old seat of empire, had in itself given him a great prestige; and to this prestige St Gregory (pope from 590 to 604) had added in a number of ways. He was one of the Fathers of the Church, and turned its theology into the channels in which it was to flow for centuries; he had acquired for his church the great spiritual colony of England by the mission of St Augustine; he had been the protector of Italy against the Lombards. As the popes thus became more and more spiritual emperors of the West, they found themselves less and less able to remain the subjects of the lay emperor of the East. Meanwhile the emperors of the East were led to interfere in ecclesiastical affairs in a manner which the popes and the Western Church refused to tolerate. Brought into contact with the pure monotheism of Mahommedanism, Leo the Isaurian (718-741) was stimulated into a crusade against image-worship, in order to remove from the Christian Church the charge of idolatry. The West clung to its images: the popes revolted against his decrees; and the breach rapidly became irreparable. As the hold of the Eastern emperor on central Italy began to be shaken, the popes may have begun to cherish the hope of becoming their successors and of founding a temporal dominion; and that hope can only have contributed to the final dissolution of their connexion with the Eastern empire.

Thus, in the course of the 8th century, the Empire, as represented by the emperors at Constantinople, had begun to fade utterly out of the West. It had been forgotten by lay sovereigns; it was being abandoned by the pope, who had been its chosen apostle. But it did not follow that, because the Eastern emperor ceased to be the representative of the Empire for the West, the conception of Empire itself therefore perished. The popes only abandoned the representative; they did not abandon the conception. If they had abandoned the conception, they would have abandoned the idea that there was an order of the world; they would have committed themselves to a belief in the coming of Antichrist. The conception of the world as a single Empire-Church remained: what had to be discovered was a new representative of one of the two sides of that conception. For a brief time, it would seem, the pope himself cherished the idea of becoming, in his own person, the successor of the ancient Caesars in their own old capital. By the aid of the Frankish kings, he had been able to stop the Lombards from acquiring the succession to the derelict territories of the Eastern emperor in Italy (from which their last exarch had fled overseas in 752), and he had become the temporal sovereign of those territories. Successor to the Eastern emperor in central Italy, why should he not also become his successor as representative of the Empire - all the more, since he was the head of the Church,. which was coextensive with the Empire? Some such hope seems to inspire the Donation of Constantine, a document forged between 754 and 774, in which Constantine is represented as having conferred on Silvester I. the imperial palace and insignia, and therewith omnes Italiae seu occidentalium regionum provincias loca et civitates. But the hope, if it ever was cherished, Upon this world, informed by these ideas, there finally descended, in the 5th century, the avalanche of barbaric invasion. Its!impact seemed to split the Empire into fragmentary k i ngdoms; yet it left the universal Church intact, proved to be futile. The popes had not the material force at their command which would have made them adequate to the position. The strong arm of the Frankish kings had alone Corona delivered them from the Lombards: the same strong tion of arm, they found, was needed to deliver them from Charie- the wild nobility of their own city. So they turned magne as to the power which was strong enough to undertake "' Pero ' . the task which they could not themselves attempt, the West. and they invited the Frankish king to become the representative of the imperial conception they cherished.' In the year 800 central Italy ceased to date its documents by the regnal years of the Eastern emperors; for Charlemagne was crowned emperor in their stead.

The king of the Franks was well fitted for the position which he was chosen to fill. He was king of a stock which had been from the first Athanasian, and had never been tainted, like most of the Germanic tribes, by the adoption of Arian tenets. His grandfather, Charles Martel, had saved Europe from the danger of a Mahommedan conquest by his victory at Poitiers (732); his father, Pippin the Short, had helped the English missionary Boniface to achieve the conversion of Germany. The popes themselves had turned to the Frankish kings for support again and again in the course of the 8th century. Gregory III., involved in bitter hostilities with the iconoclastic reformers of the East, appealed to Charles Martel for aid, and even offered the king, it is said, the titles of consul and patrician. Zacharias pronounced the deposition of the last of the Merovingians, and gave to Pippin the title of king (751); while his successor, Stephen II., hard pressed by the Lombards, who were eager to replace the Eastern emperors in the possession of central Italy, not only asked and received the aid of the new king, but also acquired, in virtue of Pippin's donation (754), the disputed exarchate itself. Thus was laid the foundation of the States of the Church; and the grateful pope rewarded the donation by the gift of the title of patricius Romanorum, which conferred on its recipient the duty and the privilege of protecting the Roman Church, along with some undefined measure of authority in Rome itself.' Finally, in 773, Pope Adrian I. had to appeal to Charles, the successor of Pippin, against the aggressions of the last of the Lombard kings; and in 774 Charles conquered the Lombard kingdom, and himself assumed its iron crown. Thus by the end of the 8th century the Frankish king stood on the very steps of the imperial throne. He ruled a realm which extended from the Pyrenees to the Harz, and from Hamburg to Rome - a realm which might be regarded as in itself a de facto empire. He bore the title of patricius, and he had shown that he did not bear it in vain by his vigorous defence of the papacy in 774. Here there stood, ready to hand, a natural representative of the conception of Empire; and Leo III., finding that he needed the aid of Charlemagne to maintain himself against his own Romans, finally took the decisive step of crowning him emperor, as he knelt in prayer at St Peter's, on Christmas Day, 800.

The coronation of Charlemagne in 800 marks the coalescence into a single unity of two facts, or rather, more strictly speaking, of a fact and a theory. The fact is German and secular: it is the wide de facto empire, which the Frankish sword had conquered, and Frankish policy had organized as a single whole. The theory is Latin and ecclesiastical: it -is a theory of the 1 According to the view here followed, the Church was the ark in which the conception of Empire was saved during the dark ages between 600 and 800. Some influence should perhaps also be assigned to Roman law, which continued to be administered during these centuries, especially in the towns, and maintained the imperial tradition. But the influence of the Church is the essential fact.

In the 5th century the title patricius came to attach particularly to the head of the Roman army (magister utriusque militiae) to men like Aetius and Ricimer, who made and unmade emperors (cf. Mommsen, Gesammelte Schriften, iv. 537, 545 sqq.). Later it had been borne by the Greek exarchs of Ravenna. The concession to Pippin of this great title makes him military head of the Western empire, in the sense in which the title was used in the 5th century; it makes him representative of the Empire for Italy, in the sense in which it had been used of the exarchs.

necessary political unity of the world, and its necessary representation in the person of an emperor - a theory half springing from the unity of the old Roman empire, and half Theory of derived from the unity of the Christian Church as the Caro= conceived in the New Testament. If we seek for lingian the force which caused this fact and this theory to empire. coalesce in the Carolingian empire, we can only answer - the papacy. The idea of Empire was in the Church; and the head of the Church translated this idea into fact. If, however, we seek to conceive the event of 800 from a political or legal point of view, and to determine the residence of the right of constituting an emperor, we at once drift into the fogs of centuries of controversy. Three answers are possible from three points of view; and all have their truth, according to the point of view. From the ecclesiastical point of view, the right resides with the pope. This theory was not promulgated (indeed no theory was promulgated) until the struggles of Papacy and Empire in the course of the middle ages; but by the time of Innocent III. it is becoming an established doctrine that a translatio Imperii took place in 800, whereby the pope transferred the Roman empire from the Greeks to the Germans in the person of the magnificent Charles. 3 One can only say that, as a matter of fact, the popes ceased to recognize the Eastern emperors, and recognized Charles instead, in the year 800; that, again, this recognition alone made Charles emperor, as nothing else could have done; but that no question arose, at the time, of any right of the pope to give the Empire to Charlemagne, for the simple reason that neither of the actors was acting or thinking in a legal spirit. If we now turn to study the point of view of the civil lawyer, animated by such a spirit, and basing himself on the code of Justinian, we shall find that an emperor must derive his institution and power from a lex regia passed by the populus Romanus; and such a view, strictly interpreted, will lead us to the conclusion that the citizens of Rome had given the crown to Charlemagne in 800, and continued to bestow it on successive emperors afterwards. There is indeed some speech, in the contemporary accounts of Charlemagne's coronation, of the presence of " ancients among the Romans " and of " the faithful people "; but they are merely present to witness or applaud, and the conception of the Roman people as the source of Empire is one that was only championed, at a far later date, by antiquarian idealists like Arnold of Brescia and Cola di Rienzi. The faex Romuli, a population of lodging-house keepers, living upon pilgrims to the papal court, could hardly be conceived, except by an ardent imagination, as heir to the Quirites of the past. Finally, from the point of view of the German tribesman, we must admit that the Empire was something which, once received by his king (no matter how), descended in the royal family as an heirloom; or to which (when the kingship became elective) a title was conferred, along with the kingship, by the vote of electors.' But apart from these questions of origin, two difficulties have still to be faced with regard to the nature and position of the Carolingian empire. Did Charlemagne and his successors enter into a new relation with their subjects, in virtue of their coronation ? And what was the nature of the relation between the new emperor now established in the West and the old emperor still reigning in the East? It is true that Charlemagne exacted a new oath of allegiance from his subjects after his coronation, and again that he had a revision of all the laws of his dominions made in 802. But the revision did not amount to much in bulk: what there was contained little that was Roman; and, on the whole, it hardly seems probable that Charlemagne entered into any new relation with his subjects. The relation of his empire to the empire in the East is a more difficult and important problem. In 797 the empress Irene had deposed and blinded her son, Constantine VI., and usurped his throne. Now it would seem that Charlemagne, whose thoughts See the famous bull Venerabilem (Corp. Jur. Canon. Decr. Greg. i. 6, c. 34).

4 Even on this view, an imperial coronation at the hands of the pope was necessary to complete the title; but this was regarded by the Germans (though not by the pope) as a form which necessarily' followed.

left him representative of the Empire for the West only, confronting another representative in the East. Such a position he did not desire: there had been a single Empire vested in a single person since 476, and he desired that there should still continue to be a single Empire, vested only in his own person. He now sought to achieve this unity by a proposal of marriage to Irene. The proposal failed, and he had to content himself with a recognition of his imperial title by the two successors of the empress. This did not, however, mean (at any rate in the issue) that henceforth there were to be two conjoint rulers, amicably ruling as colleagues a single Empire, in the manner of Arcadius and Honorius. The dual government of a single Empire established by Diocletian had finally vanished in 476; and the unity of the Empire was now conceived, as it had been conceived before the days of Diocletian, to demand a single representative. Henceforth there were two rulers, one at Aix-la-Chapelle and one at Constantinople, each claiming, whatever temporary concessions he might make, to be the sole ruler and representative of the Roman empire. On the one hand, the Western emperors held that, upon the deposition of Constantine VI., Charlemagne had succeeded him, after a slight interval, in the government of the whole Empire, both in the East and in the West; on the other hand, the Eastern emperors, in spite of their grudging recognition of Charlemagne at the moment, regarded themselves as the only lawful successors of Constantine VI., and viewed the Carolings and their later successors as upstarts and usurpers, with no right to their imperial pretensions. Henceforth two halves confronted one another, each claiming to be the whole; two finite bodies touched, and each yet claimed to be infinite.

If, as has been suggested, Charlemagne did not enter into any fundamentally new relations with his subjects after his coronation, it follows that the results of his coronation, Character of the in the sphere of policy and administration, cannot Carol- have been considerable. The Empire added a new inglan sanction to a policy and administration already empire. developed. Charlemagne had already showed himself episcopus episcoporum, anxious not only to suppress heresy and supervise the clergy within his borders, but also to extend true Christianity without them even before the year when his imperial coronation gave him a new title to supreme governorship in all cases ecclesiastical. He had already organized his empire on a new uniform system of counties, and the missi dominici were already at work to superintend the action of the counts, even before the renovatio intperii Romani came to suggest such uniformity and centralization. Charlemagne had a new title; but his subjects still obeyed the king of the Franks, and lived by Frankish law, in the old fashion. In their eyes, and in the eyes of Charlemagne's own descendants, the Empire was something appendant to the kingship of the Franks, which made that kingship unique among others, but did not radically alter its character. True, the kingship might be divided among brothers by the old Germanic custom of partition, while the Empire must inhere in one person; but that was the one difference, and the one difficulty, which might easily be solved by attaching the name of emperor to the eldest brother. Such was the conception of the Carolings: such was not, however, the conception of the Church. To the popes the Empire was a solemn office, to which the kings of the Franks might most naturally be called, in view of their power and the traditions of their house, but which by no means remained in their hands as a personal property. By thus seeking to dissociate the Empire from any indissoluble connexion with the Carolingian house, the popes were able to save it. Civil wars raged among the descendants of Charlemagne: partitions recurred: the Empire was finally dissolved, in the sense that the old realm of Charlemagne fell asunder, in 888. But the Empire, as an office, did not perish. During the 9th century the popes had insisted, as each emperor died, that the new emperor needed coronation at their hands; eae ' 'of th-up hands; and they had thus kept alive the conception of the Carol- Empire as an office to which they invited, if they did 111gian not appoint, each successive emperor. The quarrels empire. of the Carolingian house helped them to make good their claim. John VIII. was able to select Charles the Bald in preference to other claimants in 875; and before the end of his pontificate he could write that " he who is to be Attitude ordained by us to the Empire must be by us first and papeoy, foremost invited and elected." Thus was the unity of the Empire preserved, and the conception of a united Empire continued, in spite of the eventual dissolution of the realm of Charlemagne. When the Carolingian emperors disappeared, Benedict IV. could crown Louis of Provence (901) and John X. could invite to the vacant throne an Italian potentate like Berengar of Friuli (915); and even when Berengar died in 924, and the Empire was vacant of an emperor, they could hold, and hold with truth, that the Empire was not dead, but only suspended, until such time as they should invite a new ruler to assume the office.

Various causes had contributed to the dissolution of the realm of Charlemagne. Partitions had split it; feudalism had begun to honeycomb it; incessant wars had destroyed its core, the fighting Franks of Austrasia. But, above all, the rise of divisions within the realm, which, whether animated by the spirit of nationality or no, were ultimately destined to develop into nations, had silently undermined the structure of Pippin and Charlemagne. Already in 842 the oath of Strassburg shows. us one Caroling king swearing in French and another in German: already in 870 the partition of Mersen shows us the kings of France and Germany dividing the middle kingdom which lay between the two countries by the linguistic frontier of the Meuse and Moselle. The year 888 is the birth-year of modern Europe. France, Germany, Italy, stood distinct as three separate units, with Burgundy and Lorraine as debatable lands, as they were destined to remain for centuries to come. If the conception of Empire was still to survive, the pope must ultimately invite the ruler of the strongest of these three units to assume the imperial crown; and this was what happened when in 962 Pope John XII. invited Otto I. of Germany to renew once more the Roman Empire. As the imperial strength of the whole Frankish tribe had given them the Empire in Boo, so did the national strength of the East Frankish kingdom, now resting indeed on a Saxon rather than a Frankish basis, bring the Empire to its ruler in 962. The centre of political gravity had already been shifting, to the east of the Rhine in the course of the 9th century. While the Northmen had carried their arms along the rivers and into the heart of France, Louis the German had consolidated his kingdom in a long reign of sixty years (817-876); and at the end of the 9th century two kings of Germany had already worn the imperial crown. Early in the 10th century the kingship of Germany had come to the vigorous Saxon dukes (919); and strong in their Saxon basis Henry I. and his son Otto had built. a realm which, disunited as it was, was far more compact than that which the Carolings of the West ruled from Laon. Henry I. had thought in his later years of going to Rome for the imperial crown: under Otto I. the imperial idea becomes manifest. On the one hand, he established a semi-imperial position in the West: by 946 Louis IV. d'Outremer is his protege, and it is his arms which maintain the young Conrad of Burgundy on his throne. On the other hand, he showed, by his policy towards the German Church, that he was the true heir of the Carolingian traditions. He made churchmen his ministers; he established missionary bishoprics on the Elbe which should spread Christianity among the Wends; and his dearest project was a new archbishopric of Magdeburg. The one thing needful was that he should, like Charlemagne, acquire the throne of Italy; and the dissolute condition of that country during the first half of the.

were already set on Empire, hoped to depose and succeed Irene, and thus to become sole representative of the conception Relations of Empire, both for the East and for the West. Sud- of the denly there came, in Boo, his own coronation as em- Carolin- peror, an act apparently unpremeditated at the gian to the moment, taking him by surprise, as one gathers from Eastern . Einhard's Pita Karoli, and interrupting his plans. It empire The German kingdom and the empire. 10th century made its acquisition not only possible, but almost imperative. Begun in 952, the acquisition was completed ten years later; and all the conditions were now present for Otto's assumption of the imperial throne. He was crowned by John XII. on Candlemas Day 962, and thus was begun the Holy Roman Empire, which lasted henceforth with a continuous life until 1806.1 The same ideas underlay the new empire which had underlain that of Charlemagne, strengthened and reinforced by the fact that they had already found a visible expression before in that earlier empire. Historically, there was the tradition of the old Roman empire, preserved by the Church as an idea, and preserved in the Church, and its imperial organization, as an actual fact. Ecclesiastically, there was the Pauline conception of a single Christian Church, one in subjection to Christ as its Head, and needing (so men still thought) a secular counterpart of its indivisible unity. 2 To these two sanctions philosophy later added a third; and the doctrine of Realism, that the one universal is the true abiding substance - the doctrine which pervades the De monarchic of Dante, - reinforced the feeling which demanded that Europe should be conceived as a single political unity. But if the Holy Roman empire of the German nation has the old foundations, it is none the less a thing sui generis. Externally, it meant far less than the empire of Charlemagne; it meant simply a union of Germany and northern Italy (to which, after 1032, one must also add Burgundy, though the addition is in reality nominal) under a single rule. Historians of the 19th century, during the years in which the modern German empire was in travail, disputed sorely on the advantages of this union; but whatever its advantages or disadvantages, the fact remains that the union of Teutonic Germany and Latin Italy was, from an external point of view, the essential fact in the structure of the medieval Empire. Internally, again, the Empire of the Ottos and their successors was new and unprecedented. If Latin imperialism had been combined with Frankish tribalism The in the Empire of Charlemagne, it now met and blended with feudalism. The Holy Roman emperor of the middle ages, as Frederick I. proudly told the Roman envoys, found his senate in the diet of the German baronage, his equites in the ranks of the German knights. Feudalism, indeed, came in time to invade the very conception of Empire itself. The emperors began to believe that their position of emperor made them feudal overlords of other kings and princes; and they came to be regarded as the topmost summit of the feudal pyramid, from whom kings held their kingdoms, while they themselves held directly of God. In this way the old conception of the world as a single political society entered upon a new phase: but the translation of that conception into feudal terms, which might have made Diocletian gasp, only gave it the greater hold on the feudal society of the middle ages. Yet in one way the feudal conception was a source of weakness to the Empire; for the popes, from the middle of the 12th century 1 It is a curious fact that imperial titles (imperator and basileus) are used in the Anglo-Saxon diplomata of the 10th century. Edred, for instance (946-955) is " imperator," " cyning and casere totius Britanniae," " basileus Anglorum hujusque insulae barbarorum ": Edgar is " totius Albionis imperator Augustus " (cf. Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. c. vii. § 71). These titles partly show the turgidity of English Latinity in the 10th century, partly indicate the quasi-imperial position held by the Wessex kings after the reconquest of the Danelaw. But there seems to be no real ground for Freeman's view (Norman Conquest, i. 548 sqq.), that England was regarded as a third Empire, side by side with the other Empires of West and East Europe. That the titles were assumed in order to repudiate possible claims of the Western Empire to the overlordship of England is disproved by the fact that they are assumed at a time when there is no Western emperor. The assumption of an imperial style by Henry VIII., which is mentioned below, is explained by the Reformation, and does not mean any recurrence to a forgotten AngloSaxon style.

2 It is in virtue of this aspect that the Empire is holy. The term sacrum imperium seems to have been first used about the time of Frederick I., when the emperors were anxious to magnify the sanctity of their office in answer to papal opposition. The emperor himself (see under Emperor) was always regarded, and at his coronation treated, as a persona ecclesiastica. onwards, began to claim for themselves a feudal overlordship of the world, and to regard the emperor as the chief of their vassals. The theory of the Translatio buttressed their claim to be overlords of the Empire; and the emperors found that their very duty to defend the Papacy turned them into its vassals - for was not the advocatus who defended the lands of an abbey or church its tenant by feudal service, and might not analogy extend the feudal relation to the imperial advocate himself ?

The relation of the Empire to the Papacy is indeed the cardinal fact in its history for the three centuries which followed the coronation of Otto I. (962-1250). For a century The (962-1076) the relation was one of amity. The pope Empire and the emperor stood as co-ordinate sovereigns, ruling together the commonwealth of Europe. 3 If papacy. either stood before the other, the emperor stood before the pope. The Romans had sworn to Otto I. that they would never elect or ordain a pope without his consent; and the rights over papal elections conceived to belong to the office of patricius, which they generally held, enabled the emperors, upon occasion, to nominate the pope of their choice. The partnership of Otto III., son of a Byzantine princess, and his nominee Silvester II. (already distinguished as Gerbert, scholasticus of the chapter school of Reims) forms a remarkable page in the annals of Empire and Papacy. Otto, once the pupil of Silvester in classical studies, and taught by his mother the traditions of the Byzantine empire, dreamed of renewing the Empire of Constantine, with Rome itself for its centre; and this antiquarian idealism (which Arnold of Brescia and Cola di Rienzi were afterwards, though with some difference of aim, to share) was encouraged in his pupil by the pope. Tradition afterwards ascribed to the two the first project of a crusade, and the institution of the seven electors: in truth their faces were turned to the past rather than to the future, and they sought not to create, but to renovate. The dream of restoring the age of Constantine passed with the premature death of Otto; and after the death of Silvester II. the papacy was degraded into an appendage of the Tusculan family. From that degradation the Church was rescued by Henry III. (the second emperor of the new Salian house, which reigned from 1024 to 11 2 5), when in 1046 he caused the deposition of three competing popes, and afterwards filled the papal chair with his own nominees; but it was rescued more effectually by itself, when in 1059 the celebrated bull In nomine Domini of Nicholas II. reserved the right of electing the popes to the college of cardinals (see Conclave). A new era of the Papacy begins with the decree, and that era found its exponent in Hildebrand. If under Henry III. the Empire stands in many respects at its zenith, and the emperor nominates to the Papacy, it sinks, under Henry IV., almost to the nadir of its fortunes, and a pope attempts, with no little success, to fight and defeat an emperor.

The rise of the Papacy, which the action of Henry III. in 1046 had helped to begin, and the bull of 10J9 had greatly promoted, was ultimately due to an ecclesiastical revival; which goes by the name of the Cluniac movement. The aim of that movement was to separate the Church from the world, and thus to make it independent of the laity and the lay power; and it sought to realize its aim first by the prohibition of clerical marriage and simony, and ultimately by the prohibition of lay investiture. A decree of Gregory VII. in 1075 forbade emperor, king or prince to " presume to give investiture of bishoprics," I under pain of excommunication; and Henry IV., contravening the decree, fell under the penalty, and the War of Investitures began (1076-1122). Whether or no Henry humiliated himself at Canossa (and the opinion of German historians now inclines to regard the traditional account as exaggerated) the Empire certainly suffered in his reign a 3 The emperor claimed suzerainty over the greater part of Europe at various dates. Hungary and Poland, France and Spain, the Scandinavian peninsula, the British Isles, were all claimed for the Empire at different times (see Bryce, Holy Roman Empire, c. xii.). The " effective " empire, if indeed it may be called effective, embraced only Germany, Burgundy and the regnum Italiae (the old Lombard kingdom in the valley of the Po).

great loss of prestige. The emperor lost his hold over Germany, where the aid of the pope strengthened the hands of the discontented nobility: he lost his hold over Italy, where the Lombard towns gradually acquired municipal independence, and the donation of the Countess Matilda gave the popes the germ of a new and stronger dominium temporale. The First Crusade came, and the emperor, its natural leader, could not lead it; while the centre of learning and civilization, in the course of the fifty years' War of Investitures, gradually shifted to France. The struggle was finally ended by a compromise - the Concordat of Worms - in 1122; but the Papacy, which had fought the long War of Investitures and inspired the First Crusade, was a far greater power than it had been at the beginning of the struggle, and the emperor, shaken in his hold on Germany and Italy, had lost both power and prestige (see Investiture). It is significant that a theory of the feudal subjection of the emperor to the pope, foreshadowed in the pontificate of Innocent II., and definitely enounced by the envoys of Adrian IV. at the diet of Besancon in 1157, now begins to arise. The popes, who had called the emperors to be heads of the European commonwealth in Boo and again in 962, begin to vindicate that headship for themselves. Gregory VII. had already claimed that the pope stood to the emperor, as the sun to the moon; and gradually the old coordination disappeared in a new subordination of the Empire to the papal plenitudo potestatis. The claim of ecclesiastical independence of the middle of the 11th century was rapidly becoming a claim of ecclesiastical supremacy in the middle of the 12th: the imperial claim to nominate popes, which had lasted till 1059, was turning into the papal claim to nominate emperors. Yet at this very time a new period of splendour dawned for the Empire; and the rule of the three Hohenstaufen emperors, Frederick I., Henry VI. and Frederick II. (1152-1250), marks the period of its history which attracts most sympathy and admiration.

Frederick I. regained a new strength in Germany, partly because he united in his veins the blood of the two great contending families, the Welfs and the Waiblingens; partly because he had acquired large patrimonial possessions in Swabia, which took the place of the last Saxon demesne; partly because he had a greater control over the German episcopate than his predecessors had enjoyed for many years past. At the same time the revival of interest in the study of Roman law gave the emperor, as source and centre of that law, a new dignity and prestige, particularly in Italy, the home and hearth of the revival. Confident in this new strength, he attempted to vindicate his claims on Italy, and sought, by uniting the two under his sway, to inspire with new life the old Ottonian Empire. He failed to crush Lombard municipal independence: defeated at Legnano in 1176, he had to recognize his defeat at the treaty of Constance in 1183. He failed to acquire control over the Papacy: a new struggle of Empire and Papacy, begun in the pontificate of Adrian IV. on the question of control over Rome, and continued in the pontificate of Alexander III., because Frederick recognized an anti-pope, ended in the emperor's recognition of his defeat at Venice in 1177. The one success was the acquisition of the Norman kingdom for Henry VI., who was married to its heiress, Constance. But the one success of Frederick's Italian policy proved the ruin of his house in the reign of his grandson Frederick II. On the one hand, the possession of Sicily induced Frederick II. to neglect Germany; and by two documents, one of 1220 and one of 1231, he practically abdicated his sovereign powers to the German princes in order to conciliate their support for his Italian policy. On the other hand, the possession of Sicily involved him in the third great struggle of Empire and Papacy. Strong in his Sicilian kingdom in the south, and seeking, like his grandfather, to establish his power in Lombardy, Frederick practically aimed at the unification of Italy, a policy which threatened to engulf the States of the Church and to reduce the Papacy to impotence. "The popes excommunicated the emperor: they aided the Lombard towns to maintain their independence; finally, after Frederick's death (1250), they summoned Charles of Anjou into Sicily to exterminate his house. By 1268 he had done his work, and the medieval Empire was practically at an end. When Rudolph of Habsburg succeeded in 1273, he was only the head of a federation of princes in Germany, while in of the Italy he abandoned all claims over the centre and south, and only retained titular rights in the Lombard plain. Thus ended the first great chapter in the history of the Holy Roman Empire which Otto had founded in 962. In those three centuries the great fact had been its relation to the Papacy: in the last two of those three centuries the relation had been one of enmity. The basis of the enmity had been the papal claim to supreme headship of Latin Christianity, and to an independent temporal demesne in Italy as the condition of that headship. Because they desired supreme headship, the popes had sought to reduce the emperor's headship to something lower than, and dependent upon, their own - to a mere fief held of St Peter: because they desired a temporal demesne, they had sought to expel him from Italy, since any imperial hold on Italy threatened their independence. They had succeeded in defeating the Empire, but they had also destroyed the Papacy; for the French aid which they had invoked against the Hohenstaufen developed, within fifty years of the fall of that house, into French control, and the captivity at Avignon (1308-1378) was the logical result of the final victory of Charles of Anjou at Tagliacozzo. The struggle seemed to have ended in nothing but the exhaustion of both combatants. Yet in many respects it had in reality made for progress. It had set men thinking of the respective limits of church and state, as the many libelli de lite imperatorum et pontificum show; and from that thought had issued a new conception of the state, as existing in its own right and supreme in its own sphere, a conception which is the necessary basis of the modern nation-state. If it had dislocated Germany into a number of territorial principalities, it had produced a college of electors to represent the cause of unity: if it had helped to prevent the unification of Italy, and had left to Italy the fatal legacy of Guelph and Ghibelline feuds, it had equally helped to produce Italian municipal independence.

A new chapter of the history of the Empire fills the three centuries from 1273 to 1556 - from the accession of Rudolph of Habsburg to the abdication of Charles V. Italy was now lost: the Empire had now no peculiar connexion with Rome, and far less touch with the Papacy. A new Germany had risen. The extinction of several royal election of stocks and the nomination of anti-kings in the course of civil wars had made the monarchy elective and raised 3' to the side of the emperor a college of electors (see Electors), which appears as definitely established soon after 1250. With Italy lost, and Germany thus transmuted, why should the Empire have still continued to exist? In the first place, it continued to exist because the Germans still found a king necessary and because, the German king having been called for three centuries emperor, it seemed necessary that he should still continue to bear the name. In this sense the Empire existed as the presidency of a Germanic confederation, and as something analogous to the modern German empire, with the one great difference that the Hohenzollerns now derive from Prussia a strength which enables them to make their imperial position a reality, while no Luxemburg or Habsburg was able to make his imperial position otherwise than honorary and nominal. In the second place, it continued to exist because the conception of the unity of western Europe still lingered, and was still conceived to need an exponent. In this sense the Empire existed as a presidency, still more honorary and still more nominal, of the nations of western Europe. In both capacities the emperor existed to a great extent because he was a legal necessity - because, in Germany, he was necessary for the investiture of princes with their principalities, and because, in Europe, he was necessary, as the source of all rights, to bestow crowns upon would-be kings, or to act as the head of the great orders of chivalry, or to give patents to notaries. With the history of the Empire regarded as a German confederation we are not here concerned. The reigns of the Habsburg, Luxemburg and Wittelsbach emperors belong to the history of Germany. Yet two of these emperors, Henry VII. and Louis IV., should not pass without notice, the one for his own sake, the other for the sake of his adherents, and both because, by interfering in Italy, and coming into conflict with the Papacy, they brought once more into prominence the European aspect of the Empire.

Henry VII., the contemporary and the hero of Dante, descended into Italy in 1310, partly because he had no power and no occupation in Germany, partly because he was deeply imbued with the sense of his imperial dignity. Coming as a peacemaker and mediator, he was driven by Guelph opposition into a Ghibelline role; and he came into conflict with Clement V., the first of the Avignonese popes, who under the pressure of France attempted to enforce upon Henry a recognition of his feudal subjection. Henry asserted his independence: he claimed Rome for his capital, and the lordship of the world for his right; but, just as a struggle seemed impending, he died, in 1313. During the reign of his successor, Louis IV., the struggle came. Louis had been excommunicated by John XXII. in 1324 for acting as emperor before he had received papal recognition. None the less, in 1328, he came to Rome for his coronation. He had gathered round him strange allies; on the one hand, the more advanced Franciscans, apostles of the cause of clerical disendowment, and inimical to a wealthy papacy; on the other hand, jurists like Marsilius of Padua and John of Jandun, who brought to the cause of Louis the spirit and the doctrines which had already been used in the struggle between Boniface VIII. and Philip IV. of France. Marsilius in particular, in a treatise called the Defensor Pacis, insisted on the majesty of the lay state, and even on its superiority to the Church. Perhaps it was Marsilius, learned as he was in Roman law, and remembering the lex regia by which the Roman people had of old conferred its power on the emperor, who suggested to Louis the policy, which he followed, of receiving the imperial crown by the decree and at the hands of the Roman people. The policy was remarkable: Louis embraced an alliance which Frederick Barbarossa had spurned, and recognized the medieval Romans as the source of imperial power. Not less remarkable was the new attitude of the German electors, who for the first time supported an emperor against the pope, because they now felt menaced in their own electoral rights; and the one permanent result which finally flowed from the struggle was the enunciation and definition of the rights and privileges of the electors in the Golden Bull of 1356 (see Golden Bull).

In this struggle with the Papacy the Empire had shown something of its old universal aspect. It had come into connexion with Italy, and into close connexion with Rome: it had enlisted in defence of its rights at once an Italian like Marsilius and an Englishman like Ockham. The same universal aspect appeared once more in the age of the conciliar movement, at the beginning of the 15th century. One of the essential duties of the emperor, as defender of the Church, was to help the assembling and the deliberations of general councils of the Church. This was the duty discharged by Sigismund, when he forced John XXIII. to summon a council at Constance in 1414, and sought, though in vain, to guide its deliberations. The journey which Sigismund undertook in the interests of the council (1415-1417) is particularly noteworthy. He sought to make peace throughout western Europe, acting as international arbitrator - in virtue of his presidency of western Europe - between England and France, between Burgundians and Armagnacs; but he failed in his aim, and when he returned to the council, it was only to witness the defeat of the party of reform which he championed. National feeling and national antipathies proved too strong for Sigismund's attempt to revive the medieval empire for the purposes of international arbitration: the same feeling, the same antipathies, made inevitable the failure of the council itself, in which western Europe had sought to meet once more as a single religious commonwealth. Early in the 15th century, therefore, the conception of the unity of western Europe, as a single Empire-Church, was already waning in both its aspects. The unity of the Church Universal was dissolving, and the conception of the nation-church arising (as the separate concordats granted by Martin V. to the different nations prove); while the unity of the Empire was proved a dream, by the powerlessness of the emperor in the face of the struggle of England and France.

Renaissance and Reformation combined to complete the fall which the failure of Sigismund to guide the conciliar movement had already foreshadowed. The Renaissance, revolting against the medievalism of the studium and not the sparing even the sacerdotium of the middle ages, had little respect for the medieval imperium; and, going t on. back to pure Latin and original Greek, it went back beyond even the classical empire to find its ideals and inspirations. But it is the coming of the Reformation, and with it of the nation-church, which finally marks the epoch at which the last vestige of the old conception of the political unity of the world disappears before the nation-state. Externally indeed it seemed, at the time of the Reformation, as if the old Empire had been revived in the person of Charles V., who owned territories as vast as those of Charlemagne. But Charles's dominions were a. dynastic agglomeration, knit together by no vivifying conception; and, though Charles was a champion of the one Catholic Church against the Reformation, he did not in any way seek to revive the power of the medieval empire. Meanwhile the reforming monarchs, while they cast off the Roman Church, cast off with it the Roman empire. Henry VIII. declared himself free, not only of the pope, but of all other foreign power; not only so, but as he sought to take the place of the pope with regard to his own church, so he sought to take the place of the emperor with regard to his kingdom, and spoke of his " imperial " crown, a style which recurs in later Tudor reigns.' The conception of one Empire passed out of Europe, or, if it remained, it remained only in an honorary precedence accorded by other sovereigns to the king of Germany, who still entitled himself emperor. In Germany itself the honorary presidency which the emperor enjoyed over the princes came to mean still less than before, when religious differences divided the country, and the principle of cujus regio ejus religio accentuated the local autonomy of the prince. When Charles abdicated in 1556, the change which the accession of Rudolph of Habsburg had already marked was complete: there was no empire except in Germany, and in Germany the Empire was nothing more than a convenient legal conception. The Reformation, by sweeping away the spiritual unity of western Christendom, had swept away any real conception of its political unity, and with that conception it had swept away the Empire; while it had also, by splitting Germany into two religious camps, and making the emperor at the most the head of a religious faction, dissipated the last vestiges of a real Empire in the country which had, since 962, been its peculiar home.

From 1556 to 1806 the Empire means a loose federation of the different princes of Germany, lay and ecclesiastical, under the presidency, elective in theory but hereditary in The practice, of the house of Habsburg. It is an empire much in the same sense as the modern German empire, with a diet somewhat analogous to the modern Bundesrat, and a cumbrous imperial chamber for purposes of t i on. justice, hardly at all analogous to the highly organized system of federal justice which prevails in Germany to-day. The dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire into this loose federation had already been anticipated by the concessions made to the princes by Frederick II. in 1220 and 1231; but the final organization of Germany on federal lines was only attained in the treaty of Westphalia of 1648. The attempt of Ferdinand II., in the course of the Thirty Years' War, to assert a practically monarchical authority over the princes of Germany, only led to the regular vindication by the princes of their own monarchical authority. The emperor, who had tried in the 15th century to be the international authority of all Europe, now sank to the position of less than inter-state arbitrator in Germany. That the Empire and the emperor were retained at all, when the princes became 1 Cf. the Act 25 Henry VIII. c. 22, § I: " the lawful kings and emperors of this realm." so many independent sovereigns, was due partly to a lingering sense of quasi-national sentiment for a magni nominis umbra, partly to the need of some authority which should combine in one whole principalities of very different sizes and strengths, and should protect the weak from the strong, and all from France. But this authority only found its symbol in the emperor. Such real federal authority as there was remained with the diet, a congress of sovereign princes through their accredited representatives; and the emperor's sole rights, as emperor, were those of granting titles and confirming tolls. The Habsburgs, emperors in each successive generation, never pursued an imperial, but always a dynastic policy; and they were perfectly ready to sacrifice to the aggrandizement of their house the honour of the Empire, as when they ceded Lorraine to France in return for Tuscany (1735).

It needed the cataclysm of the French Revolution finally to overthrow the Empire. Throughout the 18th century it lasted, End of a thing of long-winded protocols and never-ending the Holy lawsuits, " neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire." Roman But with Napoleon came its destroyer. As far back Empire. as the end of the 13th century, French kings had been scheming to annex the title or at any rate absorb the territories of the Empire: at the beginning of the 19th century the annexation of the title by Napoleon seemed very imminent. Posing as the New Charlemagne (" because, like Charlemagne, I unite the crown of France to that of the Lombards, and my Empire marches with the East "), he resolved in 1806, during the dissolution and recomposition of Germany which followed the peace of Luneville, to oust Francis II. from his title, and to make the Holy Roman Empire part and parcel of the " Napoleonic idea." He was anticipated, however, by the prompt action of the proud Habsburg, who was equally resolved that no other should wear the crown which he himself was powerless to defend, and accordingly, on the 6th of August 1806, Francis resigned the imperial dignity. So perished the Empire. Out of its ashes sprang the Austrian Empire, for Francis,in 1804,partly to counter Napoleon's assumption of the title of Emperor of the French, partly to prepare for the impending dissolution of the old Empire, had assumed the title of " Hereditary Emperor of Austria." And in yet more recent times the German empire may be regarded, in a still more real sense than Austria, as the descendant and representative of the old Empire of the German nation.

What had been the results of the Holy Roman Empire, in the course of its long history, upon Germany and upon Europe? General It has been a vexata quaestio among German historians, influence whether or no the Empire ruined Germany. Some of the have argued that it diverted the attention of the Empire. German kings from their own country to Italy, and that, by bringing them into conflict with the popes, and by thus strengthening the hands of their rebellious baronage with a papal alliance, it prevented the development of a national German monarchy, such as other sovereigns of western Europe were able to found. Others again have emphasized the racial division of Saxon and Frank, of High German and Low German, as the great cause of the failure of Germany to grow into a united national whole, and have sought to ascribe to the influence of the Empire such unity as was achieved; while they have attributed the learning, the trade, the pre-eminence of medieval Germany to the Italian connexion and the prestige which the Empire brought. It is difficult to pronounce on either side; but one feels that the old localism and individualism which characterized the early German, and had never, on German soil, been combined with and counteracted by a large measure of Roman population and Roman civilization, as they were in Gaul and Spain, would in any case have continued to divide and disturb Germany till late in her history, even if the Empire had never come to reside within her borders. Of the larger question of the influence of the Empire on Europe we can here only say that it worked for good. An Empire which represented, as a Holy Empire, the unity of all the faithful as one body in their secular, no less than in their religious life - an Empire which, again, as a Roman. Empire, represented with an unbroken continuity the order of Roman administration and law - such an empi°e could not but make for the betterment of the world. It was not an empire resting on force, a military empire; it was not, as in modern times empires have sometimes been, an autocracy warranted and stamped by the plebiscite of the mob. It was an empire resting neither on the sword nor on the ballotbox, but on two great ideas, taught by the clergy and received by the laity, that all believers in Christ form one body politic, and that the one model and type for the organization of that body is to be found in the past of Rome. It was indeed the weakness of the Empire that its roots were only the thoughts of men; for the lack of material force, from which it always suffered, hindered it from doing work it might well have done - the work, for instance, of international arbitration. Yet, on the other hand, it was the strength and glory of the Empire that it lived, all through the middle ages, an unconquerable idea of the mind of man. Because it was a being of their thought, it stirred men to reflection: the Empire, particularly in its clash with the Papacy, produced a political consciousness and a political speculation reflected for us in the many libelli de lite imperatorum et pontificum, and in the pages of Dante and Marsilius of Padua. Roman, it perpetuated the greatest monument of Roman thought - that ordered scheme of law, which either became, as in England, the model for the building of a native system, or, as in Germany from the end of the 15th century onwards, was received in its integrity and administered in the courts. Holy, it fortified and consolidated Christian thought, by giving a visible expression to the kingdom of God upon earth; and not only so, but it maintained, however imperfectly, some idea of international obligation, and some conception of a commonwealth of Europe.' The Holy Roman Empire of western Europe had in its own day a contemporary and a rival - that east Roman empire of which we have already spoken. From Arcadius to John Palaeo logus, from A.D. 395 to 1453, the Roman empire was continued at Constantinople - not as a theory and an idea, but as a simple and daily reality of politics and administration. In one sense the East Roman Empire was more lineally and really Roman than the West: it was absolutely continuous from ancient times. In another sense the Western Empire was the most Roman; for its capital - in theory at least - was Rome itself, and the Roman Church stood by its side, while Constantinople was Hellenic and even Oriental. Between the two Empires there was fixed an impassable gulf; and they were divided by deep differences of thought and temper, which appeared most particularly in the sphere of religion, and expressed themselves in the cleavage between the Catholic and the Orthodox Churches. Yet, as when Rome fell, the Catholic Church survived, and ultimately found for itself a new Empire of the West, so, when Constantinople fell, the Orthodox Church continued its life, and found for itself a new Empire of the East - the Empire of Russia. Under Ivan the Great (1462-1505) Moscow became the metropolis of Orthodoxy; Byzantine law influenced his code; and he took for his cognizance the double-headed eagle. Ivan the Terrible, his grandson, finally assumed in 1547 the title of Tsar; and henceforth the Russian emperor is, in theory and very largely in fact, the successor of the old East Roman emperor, 2 the head of the Orthodox Church, with the mission of vengeance on Islam for the fall of Constantinople.

In the r9th century the word " empire " has had a large and important bearing in politics. In France it has been the apanage of the Bonapartes, and has meant a centralized system Modern of government by an efficient Caesar, resting immedi- Empires. ately on the people, and annihilating the powers of the people's representatives. Under Napoleon I. this conception had a Carolingian colour: under Napoleon III. there is less of ' The Papacy, consistent to the last, formally protested at the Congress of Vienna in 1815 against the failure of the Powers to restore the Holy Roman Empire, the " centre of political unity " (Ed.).

The Turks, occupying Constantinople, have also claimed to be the heirs of the old emperors of Constantinople; and their sultans have styled themselves Keisar-i-Rum. Carolingianism, and more of Caesarism - more of a popular dictatorship. While in modern France Empire has meant autocracy instead of representative government, in Germany it has meant a greater national unity and a federal government in the place of a confederation. The modern German empire is at once like and unlike the old Holy Roman Empire. It is unlike the old medieval Empire; for it has no connexion with the Catholic Church, and no relation to Rome. But it is like the Holy Roman Empire of the 17th and 18th centuries - for it represents a federation, but a more real and more unitary federation, of the several states of Germany. The likeness is perhaps more striking than the dissimilarity; and in virtue of this likeness, and because the memory of the old German Kaiserzeit was a driving force in 1870, we may speak of the modern German empire as the successor of the old Holy Roman Empire, if we remember that we are speaking of that Empire in its last two centuries of existence. The modern " Empire of Austria," on the other hand, does not connote an empire in the sense of a federation, but is a convenient designation for the sum of the territories ruled by a single sovereign under various titles (king of Bohemia, archduke of Austria, &c.) and unified in a single political system.' The title of Emperor was assumed, as we have seen, through an historical accident; and, though the Habsburgs of to-day are personally the lineal descendants of the old Holy Roman emperors, they do not in any way possess an empire that represents the old Holy Empire. In England, of recent years, the term " Empire " and the conception of imperialism have become prominent and crucial. To Englishmen to-day, as to Germans before 1870, the term and the conception stand for the greater unity and definitely federal government of a number of separate states. For the German, indeed, Empire has meant, in great measure, the strengthening of a loose federal institution by the addition of a common personal superior: to us it means the turning of a loose union of separate states already under a common personal superior - the King - into a federal commonwealth living under some common federal institutions. But the aim is much the same; it is the integration of a people under a single scheme which shall be consistent with a large measure of political autonomy. We speak of imperial federation; and indeed our modern imperialism is closely allied to federalism. Yet we do well to cling to the term empire rather than federation; for the one term emphasizes the whole and its unity, the other the part and its independence. This imperialism, which is federalism viewed as making for a single whole, is very different from that Bonapartist imperialism, which means autocracy; for its essence is free co-ordination, and the self-government of each co-ordinated part. The British Empire is, in a sense, an aspiration rather than a reality, a thought rather than a fact; but, just for that reason, it is like the old Empire of which we have spoken; and though it be neither Roman nor Holy, yet it has, like its prototype, one law, if not the law of Rome - one faith, if not in matters of religion, at any rate in the field of political and social ideals.

- See, in the first place, J. Bryce, Holy Roman Empire (1904 edition); J. von Dellinger, article on " The Empire of Charles the Great " (in Essays on Historical and Literary Subjects, translated by Margaret Warre, 1894); H. Fisher, The Medieval Empire (1898); E. Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, edited by J. B. Bury. It would be impossible to refer to all the books bearing on the article, but one may select (i.) for the period down to 476, Stuart Jones, The Roman Empire (1908), an excellent brief sketch; H. Schiller, Geschichte der riimischen Kaiserzeit (1883-1888); O. Seeck, Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt (Band I., Berlin, 1897-1898, Band II., 1901) (a remarkable and stimulating book); and the two excellent articles on " Imperium " and " Princeps " in Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890); (ii.) for the period from 476 down to 888, T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders (1880-1900); F. Gregorovius, Geschichte der Stadt Rom im Mittelalter (1886-1894; Eng. trans., London, 18 941900); E. Lavisse, Histoire de France, 1 1.1. (1901); J. B. Bury, History of the Later Roman Empire (1889); (iii.) for the Holy Roman 1 This does not, of course, apply to Hungary, which since 1867 has not formed part of the Austrian empire and is ruled by the head of the house of Habsburg not as emperor, but as king of Hungary.

Empire of the German nation, W. von Giesebrecht, Geschichte der deutschen Kaiserzeit (1881-1890); J. Zeller, Histoire d'Allemagne (1872-1891); R. L. Poole, Illustrations of Medieval Thought (1884);. S. Riezler, Die literarischen Widersacher der Papste sur Zeit Ludwigs des Baiers (1874); J. Jannsen, Geschichte des deutschen Volkes seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters (1885-1894); L. von Ranke, Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation (1839-1847), and Zur deutschen Geschichte. Vom Religionsfrieden bis zum dreissigjcihrigen Krieg (1869); and T. Carlyle, Frederick the Great (1872-1873). On the fall of the Roman Empire and the transition to the modern German Empire see Sir J. R. Seeley, Life and Times of Stein (1878); H. von Treitschke, Deutsche Geschichte (1879-1894); and H. von. Sybel, Die Begriindung des deutschen Reichs (1890-1894, Eng. trans., The Founding of the Germ. Emp., New York, 1890-1891). For institutional history, see R. Schroder, Lehrbuch der deutschen Rechtsgeschichte (1894). On the influence of the Holy Roman Empire upon the history of Germany, see J. Ficker, Das deutsche Kaiserreich (1861), and Deutsches Konigtum and Kaisertum (1862); and H. von Sybel, Die deutsche Nation and das Kaiserreich (1861). (E. BR.)