Articles in This Slice

186

APOLLODORUS, an Athenian painter, who flourished at the end of the 5th century B.C. He is said to have introduced great improvements in perspective and chiaroscuro. What these were it is impossible to say: perspective cannot have been in his day at an advanced stage. Among his works were an Odysseus, a priest in prayer, and an Ajax struck by lightning.

APOLLODORUS, an Athenian grammarian, pupil of Aristarchus and Panaetius the Stoic, who lived about 140 B.C. He was a prolific and versatile writer. There is extant under his name a treatise on the gods and the heroic age, entitled Βιβλιοθἠκη, a valuable authority on ancient mythology. Modern critics are of opinion that, if genuine, it is an abridgment of a larger work by him (Περὶ θεῶν).

APOLLODORUS, of Carystus in Euboea, one of the most important writers of the New Attic comedy, who flourished at Athens between 300 and 260 B.C. He is to be distinguished from an older Apollodorus of Gela (342-290), also a writer of comedy, a contemporary of Menander. He wrote 47 comedies and obtained the prize five times. Terence borrowed his Hecyra and Phormio from the Έκυρά and Έπιδικαζόμενος of Apollodorus.

APOLLODORUS, of Damascus, a famous Greek architect, who flourished during the 2nd century A.D. He was a favourite of Trajan, for whom he constructed the stone bridge over the Danube (A.D. 104-105). He also planned a gymnasium, a college, public baths, the Odeum and the Forum Trajanum, within the city of Rome; and the triumphal arches at Beneventum and Ancona. The Trajan column in the centre of the Forum is celebrated as being the first triumphal monument of the kind. On the accession of Hadrian, whom he had offended by ridiculing his performances as architect and artist, Apollodorus was banished, and, shortly afterwards, being charged with imaginary crimes, put to death (Dio Cassius lxix. 4). He also wrote a treatise on Siege Engines (Πολιορκητικά), which was dedicated to Hadrian.

APOLLONIA, the name of more than thirty cities of antiquity. The most important are the following: (1) An Illyrian city (known as Apollonia κατ᾽ Έπίδαμνον or πρὸς Έπιδάμνῳ) on the right bank of the Aous, founded by the Corinthians and Corcyraeans. It soon became a place of increasing commercial prosperity, as the most convenient link between Brundusium and northern Greece, and as one of the starting-points of the Via Egnatia. It was an important military post in the wars against Philip and during the civil wars of Pompey and Caesar, and towards the close of the Roman republic acquired fame as a seat of literature and philosophy. Here Augustus was being educated when the death of Caesar called him to Rome. It seems to have sunk with the rise of Aulon, and few remains of its ruins are to be found. The monastery of Pollina stands on a hill which probably is part of the site of the old city. (2) A Thracian city on the Black Sea (afterwards Sozopolis, and now Sizeboli), colonized by the Milesians, and famous for its colossal statue of Apollo by Calamis, which Lucullus removed to Rome.

APOLLONIUS, surnamed ὁ δύσκολος (“the Surly or Crabbed”), a celebrated grammarian of Alexandria, who lived in the reigns of Hadrian and Antoninus Pius. He spent the greater part of his life in his native city, where he died; he is also said to have visited Rome and attracted the attention of Antoninus. He was the founder of scientific grammar and is styled by Priscian grammaticorum princeps. Four of his works are extant: On Syntax, ed. Bekker, 1817; and three smaller treatises, on Pronouns, Conjunctions and Adverbs, ed. Schneider, 1878.

APOLLONIUS, surnamed ὁ μαλακός (“the Effeminate”), a Greek rhetorician of Alabanda in Caria, who flourished about 120 B.C. After studying under Menecles, chief of the Asiatic school of oratory, he settled in Rhodes, where he taught rhetoric, among his pupils being Mark Antony.

APOLLONIUS, surnamed “the Sophist,” of Alexandria, a famous grammarian, who probably lived towards the end of the 1st century A.D. He was the author of a Homeric lexicon (Λέξεις Όμηρικαί), the only work of the kind we possess. His chief authorities were Aristarchus and Apion’s Homeric glossary.

APOLLONIUS MOLON (sometimes called simply Molon), a Greek rhetorician, who flourished about 70 B.C. He was a native of Alabanda, a pupil of Menecles, and settled at Rhodes. He twice visited Rome as an ambassador from Rhodes, and Cicero and Caesar took lessons from him. He endeavoured to moderate the florid Asiatic style and cultivated an “Atticizing” tendency. He wrote on Homer, and, according to Josephus, violently attacked the Jews.

APOLLONIUS OF PERGA [Pergaeus], Greek geometer of the Alexandrian school, was probably born some twenty-five years later than Archimedes, i.e. about 262 B.C. He flourished in the reigns of Ptolemy Euergetes and Ptolemy Philopator (247-205 B.C.). His treatise on Conics gained him the title of The Great Geometer, and is that by which his fame has been transmitted to modern times. All his numerous other treatises have perished, save one, and we have only their titles handed down, with general indications of their contents, by later writers, especially Pappus. After the Conics in eight Books had been written in a first edition, Apollonius brought out a second edition, considerably revised as regards Books i.-ii., at the instance of one Eudemus of Pergamum; 187 the first three books were sent to Eudemus at intervals, as revised, and the later books were dedicated (after Eudemus’ death) to King Attalus I. (241-197 B.C.). Only four Books have survived in Greek; three more are extant in Arabic; the eighth has never been found. Although a fragment has been found of a Latin translation from the Arabic made in the 13th century, it was not until 1661 that a Latin translation of Books v.-vii. was available. This was made by Giovanni Alfonso Borelli and Abraham Ecchellensis from the free version in Arabic made in 983 by Abu ’l-Fath of Ispahan and preserved in a Florence MS. But the best Arabic translation is that made as regards Books i.-iv. by Hilal ibn Abi Hilal (d. about 883), and as regards Books v.-vii. by Tobit ben Korra (836-901). Halley used for his translation an Oxford MS. of this translation of Books v.-vii., but the best MS. (Bodl. 943) he only referred to in order to correct his translation, and it is still unpublished except for a fragment of Book v. published by L. Nix with German translation (Drugulin, Leipzig, 1889). Halley added in his edition (1710) a restoration of Book viii., in which he was guided by the fact that Pappus gives lemmas “to the seventh and eighth books” under that one heading, as well as by the statement of Apollonius himself that the use of the seventh book was illustrated by the problems solved in the eighth.

The degree of originality of the Conics can best be judged from Apollonius’ own prefaces. Books i.-iv. form an “elementary introduction,” i.e. contain the essential principles; the rest are specialized investigations in particular directions. For Books i.-iv. he claims only that the generation of the curves and their fundamental properties in Book i. are worked out more fully and generally than they were in earlier treatises, and that a number of theorems in Book iii. and the greater part of Book iv. are new. That he made the fullest use of his predecessors’ works, such as Euclid’s four Books on Conics, is clear from his allusions to Euclid, Conon and Nicoteles. The generality of treatment is indeed remarkable; he gives as the fundamental property of all the conics the equivalent of the Cartesian equation referred to oblique axes (consisting of a diameter and the tangent at its extremity) obtained by cutting an oblique circular cone in any manner, and the axes appear only as a particular case after he has shown that the property of the conic can be expressed in the same form with reference to any new diameter and the tangent at its extremity. It is clearly the form of the fundamental property (expressed in the terminology of the “application of areas”) which led him to call the curves for the first time by the names parabola, ellipse, hyperbola. Books v.-vii. are clearly original. Apollonius’ genius takes its highest flight in Book v., where he treats of normals as minimum and maximum straight lines drawn from given points to the curve (independently of tangent properties), discusses how many normals can be drawn from particular points, finds their feet by construction, and gives propositions determining the centre of curvature at any point and leading at once to the Cartesian equation of the evolute of any conic.

The other treatises of Apollonius mentioned by Pappus are—1st, Λόγου ἀποτομή, Cutting off a Ratio; 2nd, Χωρίου ἀποτομή, Cutting of an Area; 3rd, Διωρισμένη τομή, Determinate Section; 4th, Έπαφαί, Tangencies; 5th, Νεύσεις, Inclinations; 6th, Τόποι ἐπίπεδοι, Plane Loci. Each of these was divided into two books, and, with the Data, the Porisms and Surface-Loci of Euclid and the Conics of Apollonius were, according to Pappus, included in the body of the ancient analysis.

1st. De Rationis Sectione had for its subject the resolution of the following problem: Given two straight lines and a point in each, to draw through a third given point a straight line cutting the two fixed lines, so that the parts intercepted between the given points in them and the points of intersection with this third line may have a given ratio.

2nd. De Spatii Sectione discussed the similar problem which requires the rectangle contained by the two intercepts to be equal to a given rectangle.

An Arabic version of the first was found towards the end of the 17th century in the Bodleian library by Dr Edward Bernard, who began a translation of it; Halley finished it and published it along with a restoration of the second treatise in 1706.

3rd. De Sectione Determinata resolved the problem: Given two, three or four points on a straight line, to find another point on it such that its distances from the given points satisfy the condition that the square on one or the rectangle contained by two has to the square on the remaining one or the rectangle contained by the remaining two, or to the rectangle contained by the remaining one and another given straight line, a given ratio. Several restorations of the solution have been attempted, one by W. Snellius (Leiden, 1698), another by Alex. Anderson of Aberdeen, in the supplement to his Apollonius Redivivus (Paris, 1612), but by far the best is by Robert Simson, Opera quaedam reliqua (Glasgow, 1776).

4th. De Tactionibus embraced the following general problem: Given three things (points, straight lines or circles) in position, to describe a circle passing through the given points, and touching the given straight lines or circles. The most difficult case, and the most interesting from its historical associations, is when the three given things are circles. This problem, which is sometimes known as the Apollonian Problem, was proposed by Vieta in the 16th century to Adrianus Romanus, who gave a solution by means of a hyperbola. Vieta thereupon proposed a simpler construction, and restored the whole treatise of Apollonius in a small work, which he entitled Apollonius Gallus (Paris, 1600). A very full and interesting historical account of the problem is given in the preface to a small work of J.W. Camerer, entitled Apollonii Pergaei quae supersunt, ac maxime Lemmata Pappi in hos Libras, cum Observationibus, &c. (Gothae, 1795, 8vo).

5th. De Inclinationibus had for its object to insert a straight line of a given length, tending towards a given point, between two given (straight or circular) lines. Restorations have been given by Marino Ghetaldi, by Hugo d’Omerique (Geometrical Analysis, Cadiz, 1698), and (the best) by Samuel Horsley (1770).

6th. De Locis Planis is a collection of propositions relating to loci which are either straight lines or circles. Pappus gives somewhat full particulars of the propositions, and restorations were attempted by P. Fermat (Oeuvres, i., 1891, pp. 3-51), F. Schooten (Leiden, 1656) and, most successfully of all, by R. Simson (Glasgow, 1749).

Other works of Apollonius are referred to by ancient writers, viz. (1) Περὶ τοῦ πυρίου, On the Burning-Glass, where the focal properties of the parabola probably found a place; (2) Περὶ τοῦ κοχλίου, On the Cylindrical Helix (mentioned by Proclus); (3) a comparison of the dodecahedron and the icosahedron inscribed in the same sphere; (4) Ή καθόλου πραγματεία, perhaps a work on the general principles of mathematics in which were included Apollonius’ criticisms and suggestions for the improvement of Euclid’s Elements; (5) Ώκυτόκιον (quick bringing-to-birth), in which, according to Eutocius, he showed how to find closer limits for the value of π than the 31⁄7 and 310⁄71 of Archimedes; (6) an arithmetical work (as to which see Pappus) on a system of expressing large numbers in language closer to that of common life than that of Archimedes’ Sand-reckoner, and showing how to multiply such large numbers; (7) a great extension of the theory of irrationals expounded in Euclid, Book x., from binomial to multinomial and from ordered to unordered irrationals (see extracts from Pappus’ comm. on Eucl. x., preserved in Arabic and published by Woepcke, 1856). Lastly, in astronomy he is credited by Ptolemy with an explanation of the motion of the planets by a system of epicycles; he also made researches in the lunar theory, for which he is said to have been called Epsilon (ε).

APOLLONIUS OF RHODES (Rhodius), a Greek epic poet and grammarian, of Alexandria, who flourished under the Ptolemies Philopator and Epiphanes (222-181 B.C.). He was the pupil of Callimachus, with whom he subsequently quarrelled. In his youth he composed the work for which he is known—Argonautica, an epic in four books on the legend of the Argonauts. When he read it at Alexandria, it was rejected through the influence of Callimachus and his party. Disgusted with his failure, Apollonius withdrew to Rhodes, where he was very successful as a rhetorician, and a revised edition of his epic was well received. In recognition of his talents the Rhodians bestowed the freedom of their city upon him—the origin of his surname. Returning to Alexandria, he again recited his poem, this time with general applause. In 196, Ptolemy Epiphanes appointed him librarian of the Museum, which office he probably held until his death. As to the Argonautica, Longinus’ (De Sublim. p. 54, 19) and Quintilian’s (Instit, x. 1, 54) verdict of mediocrity seems hardly deserved; although it lacks the naturalness of Homer, it possesses a certain simplicity and contains some beautiful passages. There is a valuable collection of scholia. The work, highly esteemed by the Romans, was imitated by Virgil (Aeneid, iv.), Varro Atacinus, and Valerius Flaccus. Marianus (about A.D. 500) paraphrased it in iambic trimeters. Apollonius also wrote epigrams; grammatical and critical works; and Κτίσεις (the foundations of cities).

APOLLONIUS OF TRALLES (in Caria), a Greek sculptor, who flourished in the 2nd century B.C. With his brother Tauriscus, he executed the marble group known as the Farnese Bull, representing Zethus and Amphion tying the revengeful Dirce to the tail of a wild bull.

APOLLONIUS OF TYANA, a Greek philosopher of the Neo-Pythagorean school, born a few years before the Christian era. He studied at Tarsus and in the temple of Asclepius at Aegae, where he devoted himself to the doctrines of Pythagoras and adopted the ascetic habit of life in its fullest sense. He travelled through Asia and visited Nineveh, Babylon and India, imbibing the oriental mysticism of magi, Brahmans and gymnosophists. The narrative of his travels given by his disciple Damis and reproduced by Philostratus is so full of the miraculous that many have regarded him as an imaginary character. On his return to Europe he was saluted as a magician, and received the greatest reverence from priests and people generally. He himself claimed only the power of foreseeing the future; yet in Rome it was said that he raised from death the body of a noble lady. In the halo of his mysterious power he passed through Greece, Italy and Spain. It was said that he was accused of treason both by Nero and by Domitian, but escaped by miraculous means. Finally he set up a school at Ephesus, where he died, apparently at the age of a hundred years. Philostratus keeps up the mystery of his hero’s life by saying, “Concerning the manner of his death, if he did die, the accounts are various.” The work of Philostratus composed at the instance of Julia, wife of Severus, is generally regarded as a religious work of fiction. It contains a number of obviously fictitious stories, through which, however, it is not impossible to discern the general character of the man. In the 3rd century, Hierocles (q.v.) endeavoured to prove that the doctrines and the life of Apollonius were more valuable than those of Christ, and, in modern times, Voltaire and Charles Blount (1654-1693), the English freethinker, have adopted a similar standpoint. Apart from this extravagant eulogy, it is absurd to regard Apollonius merely as a vulgar charlatan and miracle-monger. If we cut away the mass of mere fiction which Philostratus accumulated, we have left a highly imaginative, earnest reformer who laboured to infuse into the flaccid dialectic of paganism a saner spirit of practical morality.

APOLLONIUS OF TYRE, a medieval tale supposed to be derived from a lost Greek original. The earliest mention of the story is in the Carmina (Bk. vi. 8, II. 5-6) of Venantius Fortunatus, in the second half of the 6th century, and the romance may well date from three centuries earlier. It bears a marked resemblance to the Antheia and Habrokomes of Xenophon of Ephesus. The story relates that King Antiochus, maintaining incestuous relations with his daughter, kept off her suitors by asking them a riddle, which they must solve on pain of losing their heads. Apollonius of Tyre solved the riddle, which had to do with Antiochus’s secret. He returned to Tyre, and, to escape the king’s vengeance, set sail in search of a place of refuge. In Cyrene he married the daughter of King Archistrates, and presently, on receiving news of the death of Antiochus, departed to take possession of the kingdom of Antioch, of which he was, for no clear reason, the heir. On the voyage his wife died, or rather seemed to die, in giving birth to a daughter, and the sailors demanded that she should be thrown overboard. Apollonius left his daughter, named Tarsia, at Tarsus in the care of guardians who proved false to their trust. Father, mother, and daughter were only reunited after fourteen years’ separation and many vicissitudes. The earliest Latin MS. of this tale, preserved at Florence, dates from the 9th or 10th century. The pagan features of the supposed original are by no means all destroyed. The ceremonies observed by Tarsia at her nurse’s grave, and the preparations for the burning of the body of Apollonius’s wife, are purely pagan. The riddles which Tarsia propounds to her father are obviously interpolated. They are taken from the Enigmata of Caelius Firmianus Symposius. The many inconsistencies of the story seem to be best explained by the supposition (E. Rohde, Der griechische Roman, 2nd ed., 1900, pp. 435 et seq.) that the Antiochus story was originally entirely separate from the story of Apollonius’s wanderings, and was clumsily tacked on by the Latin author. The romance kept its form through a vast number of medieval rearrangements, and there is little change in its outlines as set forth in the Shakespearian play of Pericles.

APOLLOS (Άπολλώς; contracted from Apollonius), an Alexandrine Jew who after Paul’s first visit to Corinth worked there in a similar way (1 Cor. iii. 6). He was with Paul at a later date in Ephesus (1 Cor. xvi. 12). In 1 Cor. i. 10-12 we read of four parties in the Corinthian church, of which two attached themselves to Paul and Apollos respectively, using their names, though the “division” can hardly have been due to conflicting doctrines. (See Paul.) From Acts xviii. 24-28 we learn that he spoke and taught with power and success. He may have captivated his hearers by teaching “wisdom,” as P.W. Schmiedel suggests, in the allegorical style of Philo, and he was evidently a man of unusual magnetic force. There seems to be some contradiction between Acts xviii. 25 a b and Acts xviii. 25 c, 26 b c; and it has been suggested that these latter passages are subsequent accretions. Since Apollos was a Christian and “taught exactly,” he could hardly have been acquainted only with John’s baptism or have required to be taught Christianity more thoroughly by Aquila and Priscilla. Martin Luther regarded Apollos as the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and many scholars since have shared his view.

APOLLYON, the “foul fiend” who assaulted Christian on his pilgrimage through the Valley of Humiliation in John Bunyan’s great allegory. The name (Gr. Άπολλύων), which means “destroyer” (ἀπολλύειν, to destroy), is taken from Rev. ix. 11, where it represents the Hebrew word Abaddon (lit. “place of destruction,” but here personified). The identification with the Asmodeus (q.v.) of Tobit iii. 8 is erroneous.

APOLOGETICS, in theology, the systematic statement of the grounds which Christians allege for belief in (at least) a supernatural revelation and a divine redemption (cf. e.g. Heb. i. 1-3). The majority of apologists in the past have further believed in an infallible Bible; but they admit this position can only be reached at a late stage in the argument. We should note, however, that even a liberal orthodoxy, while saying nothing about infallibility, is pledged to the essential authority of the Bible; it cannot e.g. simply ignore the Old Testament with F.E.D. Schleiermacher. Catholic apologetics must further give a central position to Church authority, which Roman Catholics explicitly define as infallible; but this position too is debated in a late section of their system. On the other hand, there may be a Christianity which seeks to extricate the “spiritual” from the “supernatural” (Arnold Toynbee, characterizing T.H. Green). It would only lead to confusion, however, if we called this method “apologetic.” Any single effort in apologetics may be termed “an apology.” More elaborate contrasts have been proposed between the two words, but are of little practical importance.

I. The Word itself.—In Greek, ἀπολογία is the defendant’s reply (personally, not through a lawyer) to the speech for the prosecution—κατηγορία. Sometimes defendants’ speeches passed into literature, e.g. Plato’s splendid version of the Apology of Socrates. Thus, in view of persecution or slander, the Christian church naturally produced literary “Apologies,” The word has never quite lost this connotation of standing on the defensive and rebutting criticism; e.g. Anselm’s Apologia contra insipientem Gaunilonem (c. 1100); or the Lutheran Apology for the Augsburg Confession (1531); or J.H. Newman’s Apologia pro vita sua (1864); or A.B. Bruce’s Apologetics; or Christianity Defensively Stated (1892). Of course, defence easily passes into counterattack, as when early apologists denounce Greek and Roman religion. Yet the purpose may be defence even then. And there is perhaps a reason of a deeper kind for holding Apologetics to the defensive. Christianity is a prophetic religion. Now a prophet does not argue; he declares what he feels to be God’s will. For himself, he rests, like the mystic, upon an immediate vision of truth; but he differs from most mystics in having a message for others; and—again unlike most mystics—he addresses the hearer’s conscience, which we might call (in one sense) the mystic element in every man—or better, perhaps, the prophetic. Can the positive grounds for a prophet’s message be analysed and stated in terms of argument? If so, apologetics is literally a science, and it is pedantry to claim the defensive and pretend to throw the onus probandi upon objectors. But, if not, then apologetics is a mere auxiliary, and is only “a science” in so far as it presents a conscious and systematic plea. Bruce’s title, and his programme of “succouring distressed faith,” imply the latter alternative; the moral appeal of Christianity, primary and essential; its confirmation by argument, secondary. The view has its difficulties; but it is hignly suggestive.

The word ἀπολογία is used by Origen (Contra Cel. ii. 65, v. 19) of the general Christian defence. But the introduction of the adjective “apologetic” and of the substantive “apologetics” is recent. They are serviceable as bracketing together (1) Natural Theology or Theism, (2) Christian Evidences—chiefly “miracles” and “prophecy”; or, on a more modern view, chiefly the character and personality of Christ. The lower usage of Apology (as expression of regret for a fault) has tipped many a sarcasm besides George III.’s on the occasion of Bishop Watson’s book, “I did not know that the Bible needed an apology!”

II. Apologetics in the Bible.—The Old Testament does not argue in support of its beliefs, unless when (chiefly in parts of the Wisdom literature) it seeks to rebut moral difficulties (cf. T.K. Cheyne, Job and Solomon; A.S. Peake, Problem of Suffering in the Old Testament, 1904). The New Testament reflects chiefly controversy with Jews. Great emphasis is laid upon alleged fulfilments—striking or fanciful, but very generally striking to that age—of Old Testament prophecy (Matt. especially; rather differently Ep. to Heb.). The miracles of Jesus are also canvassed. Jews do not deny their wonderful character, but attribute them to black art (Mark iii. 22 &c., &c.). On the other hand, Christians and Jews are pretty well agreed on natural theology; so the New Testament tends to take its theism for granted. However, Rom. i. 20 has had great influence on Christian theology (e.g. Thomas Aquinas) in leading it to base theism upon reason or argument. One apologetic contention, aimed at Gentile readers, is found among the motives of Acts. Christianity is not a lawless but an excellent law-abiding faith. So (it is alleged) rulers, both Jewish and Gentile, have often admitted (xviii. 14; xix. 37; xxiii. 9; xxvi. 32).

III. Early Christian.—When we leave the New Testament, apologetics becomes conspicuous until the political triumph of Christianity, and even somewhat later. The atmosphere is no longer Jewish but fully Greek. True there are, as always, Jewish controversialists. Justin Martyr writes a Dialogue with Trypho; Origen deals with many anti-Christian arguments borrowed by Celsus from a certain nameless Jew. Yet Greece was the sovereign power in all the world of ancient culture. And so Christianity was necessarily Hellenized, necessarily philosophized. One result was to bring natural theology into the forefront. A pure morality, belief in one God, hopes extending beyond death—these appealed to the age; the Church taught them as philosophically true and divinely revealed. But, further still, philosophy offered a vehicle which could be applied to the contents of Christianity. The Platonic or eclectic theism, which adopted the conception of the Logos, made a place for Christ in terms of philosophy within the Godhead. (John i. 1 may or may not be affected by Philo; it is almost or quite solitary in the N.T.) Similarly, the immortality of the soul may be maintained on Platonic or quasi-Platonic lines, as by St Athanasius (Contra Gentes, § 33)—a writer who repeatedly quotes the Alexandrian Book of Wisdom, in which Platonism and the Old Testament had already joined partnership. This 190 phase of Platonism, however, was much more slowly adopted. The earlier apologists dispute the natural immortality of the soul; Athanasius himself, in De Incarnatione Dei, §§ 4, 5, tones down the teaching of Wisdom; and the somewhat eccentric writer Arnobius, a layman—from Justin Martyr downwards apologetics has always been largely in the hands of laymen—stands for what has recently been called “conditional immortality”—eternal life for the righteous, the children of God, alone.

Allied with this more empiricist stand-point is the assertion that Greek philosophy borrowed from Moses; but in studying the Fathers we constantly find that groundless assertion uttered in the same breath with the dominant Idealist view, according to which Greek philosophy was due to incomplete revelation from the divine Logos.

On purely defensive lines, early apologists rebut charges of cannibalism and sexual promiscuity; the Christians had to meet in secret, and the gossip of a rotten age drew malignant conclusions. They make counter attacks on polytheism as a folly and on the shamefulness of obscene myths. Here they are in line with non-Christian writers or culture-mockers like Lucian of Samosata; or graver spirits like Porphyry, who champions Neo-Platonism as a rival to Christianity, and does pioneer work in criticism by attacks on some of the Old Testament books. Turning to Christian evidence proper, we are struck with the continued prominence of the argument from prophecy. The Old Testament was an immense religious asset to the early church. Their enemies had nothing like it; and—the N.T. canon being as yet but half formed—the Old Testament was pushed into notice by dwelling on this imperfect “argument,” which grew more extravagant as the partial control exercised by Jewish learning disappeared. An argument from miracles is also urged, though with more reserve. Formally, every one in that age admitted the supernatural. The question was, whose supernatural? And how far did it carry you? Miracle could not be to a 3rd century writer what it was to W. Paley—a conclusive and well-nigh solitary proof. Other apologies are by Aristides (recently recovered in translation), Athenagoras (“elegant”), Eusebius of Caesarea, Cyril of Alexandria; in Latin by Minucius Felix, Tertullian (a masculine spirit and phrase-coiner like T. Carlyle, if bitterer still), Lactantius Firmianus, &c., &c.1

As Christianity wins the day, a new objection is raised to it. The age is full of troubles; Christianity is ruining the empire! Besides notices elsewhere, we find the charge specially dealt with by St Augustine and his friends. Paulus Orosius argues that the world has always been a vale of tears. Salvian contends that not the acceptance of Christianity, but the sins of the people are bringing trouble upon them; and he gives ugly evidence of the continued prevalence of vice. Most impressive of all was Augustine’s own contribution in The City of God. Powers created by worldliness and sin are crumbling, as they well may; “the city of God remaineth!” Whether he meant it so or not, the saint’s argument became a programme and an apologia for the imperializing of the Western Church under the leadership of Rome during the middle ages.

IV. Middle Ages.—From the point of view of apologetics, we may mass together the long stretch of history which covers the period between the disappearance and the re-appearance of free discussion. When emperors became converts, the church, so lately a victim and a pleader for liberty, readily learned to persecute. Under such conditions there is little scope for apologetics. Force kills argument and drives doubt below the smooth surface of a nominal conformity. But there were two influences beyond the bounds or beyond the power of the christianized empire. The Jew remained, as always, stubbornly unconvinced, and, as often, fond of slanders. Many of the principal medieval attempts in apologetics are directed chiefly against him, e.g. the Pugio Fidei of Raymond Martini (c. 1280), which became one of Pascal’s sources (see V. below), or Peter Abelard’s Dialogus inter Judaeum Philosophum et Christianum. And the Moslem came on the scenes bringing, as a gift for Christendom, fuller knowledge of classical, especially Aristotelian, texts. The Jews, less bitterly opposed to Mahommedanism than the Christians were, caught fire more rapidly, and in some cases served as an intermediate link or channel of communication. These two religions anticipated the discussion of the problem of faith and reason in the Christian church. According to the great Avicenna and Maimonides, faith and the highest reason are sure to coincide (see Arabian Philosophy). According to Ghazali, in his Destruction of Philosophers, the various schools of philosophy cancel each other; reason is bankrupt; faith is everything. (So nearly Jehuda Halevi.) According to Averroes, reason suffices, and faith, with (what he considers) its dreams of immortality and the like, is useful only for the ignorant masses. Christian theology, however, strikes out a line of its own. Moslems and Jews were applying Aristotelian philosophy to rigorously monotheistic faiths; Christianity had been encouraged by Platonism in teaching a trinity of divine persons, and Platonism of a certain order long dominated the middle ages as part of the Augustinian tradition. In sympathy with this Platonism, the medieval church began by assuming the entire mutual harmony of faith and reason. Such is the teaching, along different lines, alike of St Anselm and of Abelard. But, when increased knowledge of Aristotle’s texts (and of the commentaries) led to the victory of a supposed Aristotelianism over a supposed Platonism, Albertus Magnus, and his still more distinguished pupil Thomas Aquinas, mark certain doctrines as belonging to faith but not to reason. They adhere to the general position with exceptions (in the case of what had been considered Platonic doctrines). From the point of view of philosophy, this was a compromise. Faith and reason partly agree, partly diverge. The tendency of the later middle ages is to add to the number of the doctrines with which philosophy cannot deal. Thomas’s great rival, Duns Scotus, does this to a large extent, at times affirming “two truths.” The latter position, ascribed by the schoolmen to the Averroists, becomes dominant among the later Nominalists, William of Occam and his disciples, who withdraw all doctrines of faith from the sphere of reason. This was a second and a more audacious compromise. It is not exactly an attempt to base Christian faith on rational scepticism. It is a consistent policy of harbouring inconsistencies in the same mind. A statement may be true in philosophy and false in theology, or vice versa. To the standpoint of Aquinas, however, the Church of Rome (at least in regard to the basis of doctrine) has more and more returned. The councils of Trent and of the Vatican mark the Two Truths hypothesis as heretical, when they affirm that there is a natural knowledge of God and natural certainty of immortality. Along with this affirmation, the Church of Rome (if less decisively) has adopted the limitations of the Thomist theory by the condemnation of “Ontologism”; certain mysterious doctrines are beyond reason. This cautious compromise sanctioned by the Church does not represent the extremest reaction against nominalism. Even in the nominalistic epoch we have Raymond of Sabunde’s Natural Theology (according to the article in Herzog-Hauck, not the title of the oldest Paris MS., but found in later MSS. and almost all the printed editions) or Liber Creaturarum (c. 1435). The book is not what moderns (schooled unconsciously in post-Reformation developments of Thomist ideas) expect under the name of natural theology. It is an attempt once more to demonstrate all scholastic dogmas out of the book of creation or on principles of natural reason. At many points it follows Anselm closely, and, of course, very often “makes light work” of its task.

The Thomist compromise—or even the more sceptical view of “two truths”—has the merit of giving filling of a kind to the formula “supernatural revelation”—mysteries inaccessible to reason, beyond discovery and beyond comprehension. According to earlier views—repeatedly revived in Protestantism—revelation is just philosophy over again. Can the choice be 191 fairly stated? If revelation is thought of as God’s personal word, and redemption as his personal deed, is it reasonable to view them either as open to a sort of scientific prediction or as capricious and unintelligible? Even in the middle ages there were not wanting those—the St Victors, Bonaventura—who sought to vindicate mystical if not moral redemption as the central thought of Christianity.

V. Earlier Modern Period.—It will be seen that apologetics by no means reissued unchanged from the long period of authority. The compromise of Aquinas, though not unchallenged, holds the field and that even with Protestants. G.W. Leibnitz devotes an introductory chapter in his Théodicée, 1710 (as against Pierre Bayle), to faith and reason. He is a good enough Lutheran to quote as a “mystery” the Eucharist no less than the Trinity, while he insists that truths above are not against reason. Stated thus baldly, has the distinction any meaning? The more celebrated and central thesis of the book—this finite universe, the best of all such that are possible—also restates positions of Augustine and Aquinas.

Before modern philosophy began its career, there was a great revival of ancient philosophy at the Renaissance; sometimes anti-Christian, sometimes pro-Christian. The latter furnishes apologies by Marsilio Ficino, Agostino Steuco, J.L. Vives.

Early in the modern period occurs the great name of Blaise Pascal (1623-1662). A staunch Roman Catholic, but belonging to a school of Augustinian enthusiasts (the Jansenists), whom the Church put down as heretics, he stands pretty much apart from the general currents. His Pensées, published posthumously, seems to have been meant for a systematic treatise, but it has come to us in fragments. Once again, a lay apologist! A layman’s work may have the advantage of originality or the drawback of imperfect knowledge. Pascal’s work exhibits both characters. It has the originality of rare genius, but it borrows its material (as industrious editors have shown) from very few sources—the Pugio Fidei, M. de Montaigne, P. Charron. Ideas as well as learning are largely Montaigne’s. The latter’s cheerful man-of-the-world scepticism is transfigured in Pascal to a deep distrust of human reason, in part, perhaps, from anti-Protestant motives. But this attitude, while not without parallels both earlier (Ghazali, Jehuda Halevi) and later (H.L. Mansel), has peculiarities in Pascal. It is fallen man whom he pursues with his fierce scorn; his view of man’s nature—intellect as well as character—is to be read in the light of his unflinching Augustinianism. Again, Pascal, unlike most apologists, belongs to the small company of saintly souls. This philosophical sceptic is full of humble joy in salvation, of deep love for the Saviour.

Another French Roman Catholic apologist, P.D. Huet (1630-1721)—within the conditions of his age a prodigy of learning (in apologetics see his Demonstratio Evangelica)—is not uninfluenced by Pascal (Traité de la faiblesse de l’esprit humaine).

As we might expect, Protestant lands are more busily occupied with apologetics. Intolerant reliance upon force presents greater difficulties to them; soon it grows quite obsolete. Benedict Spinoza, the eminent Jewish pantheist (1632-1677), to whom miracle is impossible, revelation a phrase, and who renews pioneer work in Old Testament criticism, finds at least a fair measure of liberty and comfort in Holland (his birth-land). Bayle, the historical sceptic, lectured and published his learned Dictionnaire (1696) at Rotterdam. From Holland, earlier, had proceeded an apologetic work by a man of European fame. Hugo Grotius’s De Veritate Christianae Religionis (1627) is partly the medieval tradition:—Oppose Mahommedans and Jews! It is partly practical:—Arm Christian sailors against religious danger! But in its cool spirit it forecasts the coming age, whose master is John Locke. His Reasonableness of Christianity (1695) is the thesis of “a whole century” of theologians. And his Essay on the Human Understanding (1690) is almost a Bible to men of education during the same period; its lightest word treasured. Locke does not break with the compromise of Aquinas. But he transfers attention from contents to proof. Reason proves that a revelation has been made-and then submits. Leibnitz has to supplement rather than correct Locke on this point.

In such an atmosphere, deism readily uttered its protest against mysterious revelation. Deism is, in fact, the Thomist natural theology (more clearly distinguished from dogmatic theology than in the middle ages, alike by Protestants and by the post-Tridentine Church of Rome) now dissolving partnership with dogmatic and starting in business for itself. Or it is the doctrine of unfallen man’s “natural state”—a doctrine intensified in Protestantism—separating itself from the theologians’ grave doctrine of sin. If Socinianism had challenged natural theology—Christ, according to it, was the prophet who first revealed the way to eternal life—it had glorified the natural powers of man; and the learning of the Arminian divines (friends of Grotius and Locke) had helped to modernize Christian apologetics upon rational lines. Deism now taught that reason, or “the light of nature,” was all-sufficient.

Not to dwell upon earlier continental “Deists” (mentioned by Viret as quoted first in Bayle’s Dictionary and again in the introduction to Leland’s View of the Deistical Writers), Lord Herbert of Cherbury (De Veritate, 1624; De Religione Gentilium, 1645?—according to J.G. Walch’s Bibliotheca Theologica (1757) not published complete until 1663) was universally understood as hinting conclusions hostile to Christianity (cf. also T. Hobbes, Leviathan, 1651, ch. xxxi.; Spinoza, Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, 1670, ch. xiv.). Professedly, Herbert’s contention merely is that non-Christians feeling after the “supreme God” and the law of righteousness must have a chance of salvation. Herbert was also epoch-making for the whole 18th century in teaching that priests had corrupted this primitive faith. During the 18th century deism spread widely, though its leaders were “irrepressible men like Toland, men of mediocre culture and ability like Anthony Collins, vulgar men like Chubb, irritated and disagreeable men like Matthew Tindal, who conformed that he might enjoy his Oxford fellowship and wrote anonymously that he might relieve his conscience” (A.M. Fairbairn). More distinguished sympathizers are Edward Gibbon, who has the deistic spirit, and David Hume, the historian and philosophical sceptic, who has at least the letter of the deistic creed (Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion), and who uses Pascal’s appeal to “faith” in a spirit of mockery (Essay on Miracles). In France the new school found powerful speaking-trumpets, especially Voltaire, the idol of his age—a great denier and scoffer, but always sincerely a believer in the God of reason—and the deeper but wilder spirit of J.J. Rousseau. Others in France developed still more startling conclusions from Locke’s principles, E.B. Condillac’s sensationalism—Locke’s philosophy purged of its more ideal if less logical elements—leading on to materialism in J.O. de la Mettrie; and at least one of the Encyclopedists (P.H. von Holbach) capped materialism with confessed atheism.

In Germany the parallel movement of “illumination” (H.S. Reimarus; J.S. Semler, pioneer in N.T. criticism; and a layman, the great Lessing) took the form of “rationalism” within the church—interpreting Bible texts by main force in a way which the age thought “enlightened” (H.E.G. Paulus, 1761-1851, &c.).

Among the innumerable English anti-deistic writers (see W. Law, The Case of Reason; R. Bentley, or “Phileleutherus Lipsiensis”; &c., &c.), three are of chief importance. Nathaniel Lardner (Arian, 1684-1768) stands in the front rank of the scholarship of his time, and uses his vast knowledge to maintain the genuineness of all books of the New Testament and the perfect accuracy of its history. Joseph Butler, a very original, careful and honest thinker, lifts controversy with deists from details to principles in his Analogy of Religion both Natural and Revealed to the Constitution and Course of Nature (1736). This title introduces us to a new conception. Deists and orthodox in those days agreed in recognizing not merely natural theology but natural religion—“essential religion,” Butler more than once styles it; the expression shows how near he stood intellectually to those he criticized. But morally he stood aloof. In part i.—on Natural Religion—he defends a moral or punishing Deity against the sentimental softness of the age. The God of Nature, whom deists confess does punish in time, if they will 192 but look at the facts; why not in eternity? “Morality,” as others have confessed, is “the nature of things”! Not the Being of God is discussed—Butler will not waste words on triflers (as he thinks them) who deny that—but God’s character. Unfortunately (perhaps) Butler prefers to argue on admitted principles; holds much of his own moral belief in reserve; tries to reduce everything to a question of probable fact. If this hampers him in part i., the situation appears still worse in part ii., which is directly occupied with the defence of Christianity. Butler says nothing about incomprehensible mysteries, and protests that reason is the only ground we have to proceed upon. But by treating the atonement simply as revealed (and unexplained) matter of fact—in spite of some partial analogies in human experience, a thing essentially anomalous—Butler repeats, and applies to the moral contents of Christianity, what Aquinas said of its speculative doctrines. (Whether one calls the unknowable a revealed mystery or an unexplained and inexplicable fact makes little difference.) William Paley (1743-1805) borrows from many writers; he borrows Lardner’s learning and Butler’s “particular evidence for Christianity,” viz. miracles, prophecy and “history”; and he states his points with perfect clearness. No man ever filled a typical position more exactly than Paley. Eighteenth-century ethics—Hedonism, with a theological background. Empiricist Natural Theology—the argument from Design. Christian Evidences—the strong probability of the resurrection of Christ and the consequent authority of his teaching. Horae Paulinae—mutual confirmations of Acts and Epistles; better, though one-sided. When such exclusively “external” arguments are urged, the contents of Christianity go for next to nothing.

VI. Later Modern Period.—Towards the end of the 18th century a new epoch of reconstruction begins in the thought and life of civilization. The leader in speculative philosophy is Immanuel Kant, though he includes many agnostic elements, and draws the inference (which some things in the letter of Butler might seem to warrant) that the essence of Christianity is an ethical theism. While he thus created a new and more ethical “rationalism,” Kant’s many-sided influence, alike in philosophy and in theology, worked to further issues. He (and other Germans, but not G.W.F. Hegel) was represented in England in a fragmentary way by S.T. Coleridge (1772-1834), probably the most typical figure of his period—another layman. His general thought was that “rationalism” represents an uprising of the lower reason or “understanding” against the higher or true “reason.” The mysteries of theology are its best part—not alien to reason but of its substance, the “logos.” This is to upset the compromise of Aquinas and go back to a Christian platonism. Of course the difficulty revives again: If a philosophy, why supernaturally revealed? Thomas Arnold, criticizing Edward Hawkins, appeals rather to the atonement as deeper neglected truth. So in Scotland, Thomas Erskine and Thomas Chalmers—the latter in contradiction to his earlier position—hold that the doctrine of salvation, when translated into experience, furnishes “internal evidence”—a somewhat broader use of the phrase than when it applies merely to evidence of date or authorship drawn from the contents of a book. This gives a new and moral filling to the conception of “supernatural revelation” The attempt to work out either of the reactions against Thomism in new theological systems is pretty much confined to Germany. Hegel’s theological followers, of every shade and party, represent the first, and Schleiermacher’s the second. Schleiermacher rejects natural religion in favour of the positive religions, while the school of A. Ritschl and W. Herrmann reject natural theology outright in favour of revelation—a striking external parallel to early Socinianism. British and American divines, on the other hand, are slow to suspect that a new apologetic principle may mean a new system of apologetics, to say nothing of a new dogmatic. Among the evangelicals, for the most part, natural theology, far from being rejected, is not even modified, and certain doctrines continue to be described as incomprehensible mysteries. No Protestant, of course, can agree with Roman Catholic theology that (supernatural) faith is an obedient assent to church authority and the mysteries it dictates. To Protestantism, faith is personal trust. But the principle is hardly ever carried out to the end. Mysterious doctrines are ascribed by Protestants to scripture; so half of revelation is regarded as matter for blind assent, if another half is luminous in experience. The movement of German philosophy which led from Kant to Hegel has indeed found powerful British champions (T.H. Green, J. and E. Caird, &c.), but less churchly than Coleridge (or F.D. Maurice or B.F. Westcott), though churchly again in J.R. Illingworth and other contributors to Lux Mundi (1890). Before this wave of thought, H.L. Mansel tried (1858) to play Pascal’s game on Kantian principles, developing the sceptical side of Kant’s many-faceted mind. But as he protested against relying on the human conscience—the one element of positive conviction spared by Kant—his ingenuity found few admirers except H. Spencer, who claims him as justifying anti-Christian agnosticism. Butler’s tradition was more directly continued by J.H. Newman—with modifications on becoming a Roman Catholic in the light of the church’s decision in favour of Thomism. A.M. Fairbairn (Catholicism, Roman and Anglican, ch. v., and elsewhere) and E.A. Abbott (Philomythus, and elsewhere) suspect Newman of a sceptical leaven and extend the criticism to Butler’s doctrine of “probability.” Yet it seems plain that any theology, maintaining redemption as historical fact (and not merely ideal), must attach religious importance to conclusions which are technically probable rather than proven. If we transfer Christian evidence from the “historical” to the “philosophical” with H. Rashdall—we surely cut down Christianity to the limits of theism. And the inner mind of Butler has moral anchorage in the Analogy, quite as much as in the Sermons. It is in part ii. more than in part i. of his masterpiece that the light seems to grow dim. Another of the Oxford converts to Rome, W.G. Ward, made vigorous contributions to natural theology.

VII. Contents of Modern Apologetics.—Superficially regarded, philosophy ebbs and flows, whatever progress the debate may reveal to speculative insight. Old positions re-emerge from forgetfulness, and there is always a philosophy to back every “case.” More visible dangers arise for the apologist in the region of science, historical or physical. There the progress of truth, within whatever limits, is manifest. Essays and Reviews (1860) was a vehement announcement of scientific results—startling English conservatism awake for the first time. And in the scientific region the great apologetic classics, like Butler, are hopelessly out of date. The modern apologist must do ephemeral work—unless it should chance that he proves to be the skirmisher, pioneering for a modified dogmatic. He holds a watching brief. While he must beware of hasty speech, he has often to plead that new knowledge does not really threaten faith; or that it is not genuinely established knowledge at all; or else, that faith has mistaken its own grounds, and will gain strength by concentrating on its true field. The work is not always well done; but the Christian church needs it.

1. Apologetics and Philosophy.—The main part of this subject is discussed under Theism. Some notes may be added on special points, (a) Freewill is generally assumed on the Christian side (R.C. Church; Scottish philosophy; H. Lotze; J. Martineau; W.G. Ward. Not in a libertarian sense; Leibnitz. New and obscure issues raised by Kant). But there is no continuous tradition or steady trend of discussion. (b) Personal immortality is affirmed as philosophically certain by the Church of Rome and many Protestant writers. Others teach “conditional immortality.” Others base the hope on belief in the resurrection of Christ, (c) Theodicy—the tradition of Leibnitz is preserved (on libertarian lines) by Martineau (A Study of Religion, 1883). See also F.R. Tennant’s Origin and Propagation of Sin (1902)—sin a “bye-product” of a generally good evolution. Others find in the gospel of redemption the true theodicy. (d) The problem of Christian apologetic has been simplified in the past by the prevalence of the Christian ethics and temper even among many non-Christians (e.g. J.S. Mill). But hereafter it may not prove possible for the apologist to assume as unchallenged the Christian 193 moral outlook. Germans have suspected an anti-Christian strain in Goethe; all the world knows of it in E. von Hartmann or F. Nietzsche.

2. Apologetics and Physical Science.—(a) Copernicanism has won its battles and the Church of Rome would fain have its error forgotten. The admission is now general that the Bible cannot be expected to use the language of scientific astronomy. Still, it is not certain that the shock of Copernicanism on supernatural Christianity is exhausted. (b) Geology has also won its battles, and few now try to harmonize it with Genesis. (c) Evolution came down from the clouds when C. Darwin and A.R. Wallace succeeded in displacing the naïf conception of special creation by belief in the origin of species out of other species through a process of natural law. This gave immense vogue to wider and vaguer theories of evolutionary process, notably to H. Spencer’s grandiose cosmic formula in terms of mechanism. Here the apologist has more to say. The special Darwinian hypothesis—natural “selection”—may or may not be true; it was at least a fruitful suggestion. If true, it need not be exhaustive. Again, evolution itself need not apply everywhere. We are offered a philosophical rather than a scientific speculation when E. Caird (Evolution of Religion, 1893) tries to vindicate Christianity as the highest working of nature—true just because evolved from lower religions. The Christian apologist indeed may himself seek, following John Fiske, to philosophize evolution as a restatement of natural theology—“one God, one law, one element and one far-off divine event”—and as at least pointing towards personal immortality. But if evolution is to be the whole truth regarding Christianity, we should have to surrender both supernatural revelation and divine redemption. And these, it may be strongly urged, contain the magic of Christianity. Losing them it might sink into a lifeless theory.

As far as pure science goes, the inference from science in favour of materialism has visibly lost much of its plausibility, and Protestant apologists would probably be prepared to accept in advance all verified discoveries as belonging to a different region from that of faith. Roman Catholic apologetic prefers to negotiate in detail.

3. Apologetics and History.—History brings us nearer the heart of the Christian position. (a) Old Testament criticism won startling victories towards the end of the 19th century. It blots out much supposed knowledge, but throws a vivid and interesting light on the reconstrued process of history. Most Protestants accept the general scheme of criticism; those who hang back make not a few concessions (e.g. J. Orr, Problem of the O.T., 1906). The Roman Catholic Church again prefers an attitude of reserve, (b) New Testament criticism raises even more delicate issues. Positively it may be affirmed that the recovered figure of the historical Jesus is the greatest asset in the possession of modern Christian theology and apologetics. The “Lives” of Christ, Roman Catholic and Protestant; “critical” (D.F. Strauss, A. Renan, &c., &c.) and “believing,” imply this at least. Negatively, “unchallenged historical certainties” are becoming few in number, or are disappearing altogether, through the industry of modern minds. True, the Tübingen criticism of F.C. Baur and his school—important as the first scientific attempt to conceive New Testament conditions and literature as a whole—has been abandoned. (A. Ritschl’s Entstehung der alt-katholischen Kirche, 2nd edition, 1857, was an especially telling reply.) The synoptic gospels are now treated with considerable respect. It is no longer suggested in responsible quarters that they are party documents sacrificing truth to “tendency.” But not all quarters are responsible; and in the effort to grasp scientifically, i.e. accurately, the amazing facts of Christ and primitive Christianity, every imaginable hypothesis is canvassed. Even the Roman Catholic Church produced the Abbé Loisy (though he undertakes to play off church certainties against historical uncertainties). Hitherto at least the fourth gospel has been the touchstone. The authorship of the epistles is in many cases a matter of subordinate importance; at least for Protestants or for those surrendering Bible infallibility, which Rome can hardly do. (c) New Testament history, The apologist must maintain (1) that Jesus of Nazareth is a real historical figure—a point well-nigh overlooked by Strauss, and denied by some modern advocates of a mythical theory; (2) that Jesus is knowable (not one “of whom we really know very little”—B. Jowett) in his teaching, example, character, historical personality; and that he is full of moral splendour. On the other hand, faith has no special interest in claiming that we can compose a biographical study of the development of Jesus. Certainly no early writer thought of providing material for such use. It is a common opinion in Germany that our material is in fact too scanty or too self-contradictory. Yet the fascination of the subject will always revive the attempt. If it succeeds, there will be a new line of communication along which that great personality will tell on men’s minds and hearts. If it fails—there are other channels; character can be known and trusted even when we are baffled by a thing necessarily so full of mystery as the development of a personality. Notably, the manifest non-consciousness of personal guilt in Jesus suggests to us his sinlessness. (3) Apologists maintain that Jesus “claimed” Messiahship. There are speculative constructions of gospel history which eliminate that claim; and no doubt apologetics could—with more or less difficulty—restate its position in a changed form if the paradox of to-day became accepted as historical fact to-morrow. The central apologetic thesis is the uniqueness of the “only-begotten”; it is here that “the supernatural” passes into the substance of Christian faith. But most probably the description of Jesus as thus unique will continue to be associated with the allegation—He told us so; he claimed Messiahship and “died for the claim.” (See preface to 5th ed. of Ecce Homo.) Nor did so superhuman a claim crush him, or deprive his soul of its balance. He imparted to the title a grander significance out of the riches of his personality. (4) In the light of this the “argument from prophecy” is reconstructed. It ceases to lay much stress upon coincidences between Old Testament predictions or “types” and events in Christ’s career. It becomes the assertion; historically, providentially, the expectation of a unique religious figure arose—“the” Messiah; and Jesus gave himself to be thought of as that great figure. (5) It is also claimed as certain that Jesus had marvellous powers of healing. More reserve is being shown towards the other or “nature” miracles. These latter, it may be remarked, are more unambiguously supernatural. But, if Jesus really cured leprosy or really restored the dead to life, we have miracle plainly enough in the region of healing. (6) For Jesus’ own resurrection several lines of evidence are alleged. (i.) All who believe that in any sense Christ rose again insist upon the impression which his personality made during life. It was he whose resurrection seemed credible! Some practically stop here; the apologist proceeds. (ii.) There is the report of the empty grave; historically, not easily waved aside. (iii.) We have New Testament reports of appearances of the risen Jesus; subjective? the mere clothing of the impression made by his personality during life? or objective? “telegrams” from heaven (Th. Keim)—“Veridical Hallucinations”? or something even more, throwing a ray of light perhaps on the state and powers of the happy dead? (iv.) There is the immense influence of Jesus Christ in history, associated with belief in him as the risen Son of God.

In view of the claims of Jesus, different possibilities arise, (i.) The evangelists impute to him a higher claim than he made. This may be called the rationalistic solution; with sympathy in Christ’s ethical teaching, there is relief at minimizing his great claim. So, brilliantly, Wellhausen’s Gospel commentaries and Introduction. (Mark fairly historical; other gospels’ fuller account of Christ’s teaching and claims unreliable.) (ii.) The claim was fraudulent (Reimarus; Renan, ed. 1; popular anti-Christian agitation). This is a counsel of despair. (iii.) He was an enthusiastic dreamer, expecting the world’s end. This the apologist will recognize as the most plausible hostile alternative. He may feel bound to admit an element of illusion in Christ’s vision’ of the future; but he will contend that the apocalyptic form did not destroy the spiritual content of Christ’s revelations—nay, that it was itself the 194 vehicle of great truths. So he will argue as the essence of the matter that (iv.) he who has occupied Christ’s place in history, and won such reverence from the purest souls, was what he claimed to be, and that his many-sidedness comes to focus and harmony when we recognize him as the Christ of God and the Saviour of the world.

To a less extent, similar problems and alternatives arise in regard to the church:—Catholicism a compromise between Jewish Christianity and Pauline or Gentile Christianity (F.C. Baur, &c.); Catholicism the Hellenizing of Christianity (A. Ritschl, A. Harnack); the Catholic church for good and evil the creation of St Paul (P. Wernle, H. Weinel); the church supernaturally guided (R.C. apologetic; in a modified degree High Church apologetic); essential—not necessarily exclusive—truth of Paulinism, essential error in first principles of Catholicism (Protestant apologetic).

APOLOGUE (from the Gr. ἀπόλογος, a statement or account), a short fable or allegorical story, meant to serve as a pleasant vehicle for some moral doctrine or to convey some useful lesson. One of the best known is that of Jotham in the Book of Judges (ix. 7-15); others are “The City Rat and Field Rat,” by Horace, “The Belly and its Members,” by the patrician Menenius Agrippa in the second book of Livy, and perhaps most famous of all, those of Aesop. The term is applied more particularly to a story in which the actors or speakers are taken from the brute creation or inanimate nature. An apologue is distinguished from a fable in that there is always some moral sense present, which there need not be in a fable. It is generally dramatic, and has been defined as “a satire in action.” It differs from a parable in several respects. A parable is equally an ingenious tale intended to correct manners, but it can be true, while an apologue, with its introduction of animals and plants, to which it lends our ideas and language and emotions, is necessarily devoid of real truth, and even of all probability. The parable reaches heights to which the apologue cannot aspire, for the points in which brutes and inanimate nature present analogies to man are principally those of his lower nature, and the lessons taught by the apologue seldom therefore reach beyond prudential morality, whereas the parable aims at representing the relations between man and God. It finds its framework in the world of nature as it actually is, and not in any grotesque parody of it, and it exhibits real and not fanciful analogies. The apologue seizes on that which man has in common with creatures below him, and the parable on that which he has in common with God. Still, in spite of the difference of moral level, Martin Luther thought so highly of apologues as counsellors of virtue that he edited and revised Aesop and wrote a characteristic preface to the volume. The origin of the apologue is extremely ancient and comes from the East, which is the natural fatherland of everything connected with allegory, metaphor and imagination. Veiled truth was often necessary in the East, particularly with the slaves, who dared not reveal their minds too openly. It is noteworthy that the two fathers of apologue in the West were slaves, namely Aesop and Phaedrus. La Fontaine in France; Gay and Dodsley in England; Gellert, Lessing and Hagedorn in Germany; Tomas de Iriarte in Spain, and Krilov in Russia, are leading modern writers of apologues. Length is not an essential matter in the definition of an apologue. Those of La Fontaine are often very short, as, for example, “Le Coque et la Perle.” On the other hand, in the romances of Reynard the Fox we have medieval apologues arranged in cycles, and attaining epical dimensions. An Italian fabulist, Corti, is said to have developed an apologue of “The Talking Animals” to the bulk of twenty-six cantos. La Motte, writing at a time when this species of literature was universally admired, attributes its popularity to the fact that it ménage et flatte l’amour-propre by inculcating virtue in an amusing manner without seeming to dictate or insist. This was the ordinary 18th-century view of the matter, but Rousseau contested the educational value of instruction given in this indirect form.

APOLOGY (from Gr. ἀπολογία, defence), in its usual sense, an expression of regret for something which has been wrongfully said or done; a withdrawal or retraction of some charge or imputation which is false. In an action for libel, the fact that an apology has been promptly and fully made is a plea in mitigation of damages. The apology should have the same form of publicity as the original charge. If made publicly, the proper form is an advertisement in a newspaper; if made within the hearing of a few only, a letter of apology, which may be read to those who have heard what was said, should be sufficient. By the English Libel Act 1843, s. 2, it was enacted that in an action for libel contained in a newspaper it is a defence for the defendant to plead that the libel was inserted without actual malice and without gross negligence, and that before the commencement of the action and at the earliest opportunity afterwards he inserted in the newspaper a full apology for the libel, or, where the newspaper in which the libel appeared was published at intervals exceeding one week, he offered to publish the apology in any newspaper selected by the plaintiff. The apology must be full and must be printed in as conspicuous a place and manner as the libel was.

The word “apology” or “apologia” is also used in the sense of defence or vindication, the only meaning of the Greek ἀπολογία, especially of the defence of a doctrine or system, or of religious or other beliefs, &c., e.g. Justin Martyr’s Apology or J.H. Newman’s Apologia pro vita sua. (See Apologetics.)

APONEUROSIS (ἀπο, away, and νεῦρον, a sinew), in anatomy, a membrane separating muscles from each other.

APOPHTHEGM (from the ἀπόφθεγμα), a short and pointed utterance. The usual spelling up to Johnson’s day was apothegm, which Webster and Worcester still prefer; it indicates the pronunciation—i.e. “apothem”—better than the other, which, however, is more usual in England and follows the derivation. Such sententious remarks as “Knowledge is Power” are apophthegms. They become “proverbs” by age and acceptance. Plutarch made a famous collection in his Apophthegmata Laconica.

195

APOPHYGE (Gr. ἀποφυγή, a flying off), in architecture, the lowest part of the shaft of an Ionic or Corinthian column, or the highest member of its base if the column be considered as a whole. The apophyge is the inverted cavetto or concave sweep, on the upper edge of which the diminishing shaft rests.

APOPHYLLITE, a mineral often classed with the zeolites, since it behaves like these when heated before the blowpipe and has the same mode of occurrence; it differs, however, from the zeolites proper in containing no aluminium. It is a hydrous potassium and calcium silicate, H7KCa4(SiO3)8 + 4½(H2O). A small amount of fluorine is often present, and it is one of the few minerals in which ammonium has been detected. The temperature at which the water is expelled is higher than is usually the case with zeolites; none is given off below 200°, and only about half at 250°; this is slowly reabsorbed again from moist air, and is therefore regarded as water of crystallization, the remainder being water of constitution. When heated before the blowpipe, the mineral exfoliates, owing to loss of water, and on this account was named apophyllite by R.J. Haüy in 1806, from the Greek ἀπο, from, and φύλλον, a leaf.

Apophyllite always occurs as distinct crystals, which belong to the tetragonal system. The form is either a square prism terminated by the basal planes (fig. 2), or an acute pyramid (fig. 1). A prominent feature of the mineral is its perfect basal cleavage, on which the lustre is markedly pearly, presenting, in white crystals, somewhat the appearance of the eye of a fish after boiling, hence the old name fish-eye-stone or ichthyophthalmite for the mineral. On other surfaces the lustre is vitreous. The crystals are usually transparent and colourless, sometimes with a greenish or rose-red tint. Opaque white crystals of cubic habit have been called albine; xylochlore is an olive-green variety. The hardness is 4½, and the specific gravity 2.35.

The optical characters of the mineral are of special interest, and have been much studied. The sign of the double refraction may be either positive or negative, and some crystals are divided into optically biaxial sectors. The variety known as leucocyclite shows, when examined in convergent polarized light, a peculiar interference figure, the rings being alternately white and violet-black and not coloured as in a normal figure seen in white light.

Apophyllite is a mineral of secondary origin, commonly occurring, in association with other zeolites, in amygdaloidal cavities in basalt and melaphyre. Magnificent groups of greenish and colourless tabular crystals, the crystals several inches across, were found, with flesh-red stilbite, in the Deccan traps of the Western Gháts, near Bombay, during the construction of the Great Indian Peninsular railway. Groups of crystals of a beautiful pink colour have been found in the silver veins of Andreasberg in the Harz and of Guanaxuato in Mexico. Crystals of recent formation have been detected in the Roman remains at the hot springs of Plombières in France.

APOPHYSIS (Gr. ἀπόφυσις, offshoot), a bony protuberance, in human physiology; also a botanical term for the swelling of the spore-case in certain mosses.

APOPLEXY (Gr. ἀποπληξία, from ἀποπλήσσειν, to strike down, to stun), the term employed by Galen to designate the “sudden loss of feeling and movement of the whole body, with the exception of respiration,” to which, after the time of Harvey, was added “and with the exception of the circulation.” Although the term is occasionally employed in medicine with other significations, yet in its general acceptation apoplexy may be defined as a sudden loss of consciousness, of sensibility, and of movement without any essential modification of the respiratory and circulatory functions occasioned by some brain disease. It was discovered that the majority of the cases of apoplexy were due to cerebral haemorrhage, and what looked like cerebral haemorrhage, red softening; and the idea for a long time prevailed that apoplexy and cerebral haemorrhage could be employed as synonymous terms, and that an individual who, in popular parlance, “had an apoplectic stroke,” had necessarily suffered from haemorrhage into his brain. A small haemorrhage may not, however, cause an apoplectic fit, nor is an apoplectic fit always caused by haemorrhage; it may be due to sudden blocking of a large vessel by a clot from a distant part (embolism), or by a sudden clotting of the blood in the vessel itself (thrombosis). Owing to the prevailing idea in former times that cerebral haemorrhage and apoplexy were synonymous terms, the word apoplexy was applied to haemorrhage into other organs than the brain; thus the terms pulmonary apoplexy, retinal apoplexy and splenic apoplexy were used.

The term “apoplexy” is now used in clinical medicine to denote that form of coma or deep state of unconsciousness which is due to sudden disturbance of the cerebral circulation occasioned by a local cause within the cranial cavity, as distinct from the loss of consciousness due to sudden failure of the heart’s action (syncope) or the coma of narcotic or alcoholic poisoning, of status epilepticus, of uraemia or of head injury.

The sudden coma of sunstroke and heat-stroke might be included, although owing to the suddenness with which a person may be struck down, the term heat apoplexy is frequently used, and, from an etymological point of view, quite justifiably. The older writers use the term simple apoplexy for a sudden attack which could not be explained by any visible disease. Again, congestive apoplexy was applied to those cases of coma where, at the autopsy, nothing was found to account for the coma and death except engorgement of the vessels of the brain and its membranes. In senile dementia and in general paralysis the brain is shrunken and the convolutions atrophied, the increased space in the ventricles and between the convolutions being filled up with the cerebro-spinal fluid. In these diseases apoplectic states may arise, terminating fatally; the excess of fluid found in such cases was formerly thought to be the cause of the symptoms, consequently the condition was called serous apoplexy. Such terms are no longer used, owing to the better knowledge of the pathology of brain disease.

Having thus narrowed down the application of the term “apoplexy,” we are in a position to consider its chief features, and the mechanism by which it is produced. Apoplexy may be rapidly fatal, but it is very seldom instantly fatal. The onset is usually sudden, and sometimes the individual may be struck down in an instant, senseless and motionless, “warranting those epithets, which the ancients applied to the victims of this disease, of attoniti and siderati, as if they were thunder-stricken or planet-struck” (Sir Thomas Watson). The attack, however, may be less sudden and, not infrequently, attended by a convulsion; while occasionally, in the condition termed ingravescent apoplexy, the coma is gradual in its onset, occupying hours in its development. Although unexpected, various warning symptoms, sometimes slight, sometimes pronounced, occur in the majority of cases. Such are, fulness in the head, headache, giddiness, noises in the ears, mental confusion, slight lapses of consciousness, numbness or tingling in the limbs. A characteristic apoplectic attack presents the following phenomena: the individual falls down suddenly and lies without sense or motion, except that his pulse keeps beating and his breathing continues. He appears to be in a deep sleep, from which he cannot be roused; the breathing is laboured and stertorous, and is accompanied with puffing out of the cheeks; the pulse may be beating more strongly than natural, and the face is often flushed and turgid. The reflexes are abolished. Although apoplexy may occur without paralysis, and paralysis without apoplexy, the two, owning the same cause, very frequently co-exist, or happen in immediate sequence and connexion; consequently there is in most cases definite evidence of paralysis affecting usually one side of the body in addition to the coma. Thus the pupils are unequal; there may be asymmetry of the face, or the limbs may be more rigid or flaccid on one side than on the other. These signs of localized disease enable a distinction to be made from the coma 196 of narcotic poisoning and alcoholic intoxication. It must be borne in mind that a person smelling strongly of liquor and found lying in the street in a comatose state may be suffering from apoplexy, and the error of sending a dying man to a police cell may be avoided by this knowledge.

If the fit is only moderately severe, the reflexes soon return, and the patient may in a few hours show indications of returning consciousness by making some movements or opening his eyes when spoken to, although later it may be found that he is unable to speak, or may be paralysed or mentally afflicted (see Paralysis). In severe cases the coma deepens and the patient dies, usually from interference with the breathing, or, less commonly, from arrest of the heart’s action.

The mechanism by which apoplexy is produced has been a matter of much dispute; the condition was formerly ascribed to the pressure exerted by the clot on the rest of the brain, but there is no increase of intracranial pressure in an apoplectic fit occurring as a result of the sudden closure of a large vessel by embolism or thrombosis. Suddenness of the lesion appears to be, then, the essential element common to all cases of apoplexy from organic brain disease. It is the sudden shock to the delicate mechanism that produces the unconsciousness; but seeing that the coma is usually deeper and more prolonged in cerebral haemorrhage than when occasioned by vascular occlusion, and that an ingravescent apoplexy coma gradually develops and deepens as the amount of haemorrhage increases, we may presume that increase of intracranial pressure does play an important part in the degree and intensity of the coma caused by the rupture of a vessel. Apoplexy seldom occurs under forty years of age, but owing to the fact that disease of the cerebral vessels may exist at any age, from causes which are fully explained in the article Neuropathology, no period of life is exempt; consequently cases of true apoplexy are not wanting even in very young children. Recognizing that there are two causes of apoplexy in advanced life, viz. (1) sudden rupture of a diseased vessel usually associated with high arterial pressure, enlarged, powerfully acting heart and chronic renal disease, and (2) the sudden clotting of blood in a large diseased vessel favoured by a low arterial pressure due to a weak-acting heart, it is obvious that the character of the pulse forms a good guide to the diagnosis of the cause, the prevention and warding off of an attack, and the treatment of such should it occur.

Anything which tends directly or indirectly to increase arterial pressure within the cerebral blood-vessels may bring on an attack of cerebral haemorrhage; and although the identification of an apoplectic habit of body with a stout build, a short neck and florid complexion is now generally discredited, it being admitted that apoplexy occurs as frequently in thin and spare persons who present no such peculiarity of conformation, yet a plethoric habit of body, occasioned by immoderate eating or drinking associated with the gouty diathesis, leads to a general arterio-sclerosis and high arterial pressure. All conditions which can give rise to a local intracranial or a general bodily increase of the arterial pressure, i.e. severe exertion of body and mind, violent emotions, much stooping, overheated rooms, exposure to the sun, sudden shocks to the body, constipation and straining at stool, may, by suddenly increasing the strain on the wall of a diseased vessel, lead to its rupture.

The outlook of apoplexy is generally unfavourable in cases where the coma is profound; death may take place at different intervals after the onset. If the patient, after recovering from the initial coma, suffers with continual headache and lapses into a drowsy state, the result is likely to be serious; for such a condition probably indicates that an inflammatory change has taken place about the clot or in the area of softening.

Treatment.—The patient should be placed in the recumbent position with the head and shoulders slightly raised. He should be moved as little as possible from the place where the attack occurred. The medical man who is summoned will probably give the following directions: an ice-bag to be applied to the head; a few grains of calomel or a drop of croton oil in butter to be placed on the tongue, or an enema of castor oil to be administered. He may find it necessary to draw off the water with a catheter. The practice of blood-letting, once so common in this disease, is seldom resorted to, although in some cases, where there is very high arterial tension and a general state of plethora, it might be beneficial. Depletives are not employed where there is evidence of failure of the heart’s action; indeed the cautious administration of stimulants may be necessary, either subcutaneously or by the mouth (if there exist a power of swallowing), together with warm applications to the surface of the body; a water-bed may be required, and careful nursing, is essential to prevent complications, especially the formation of bedsores.

APOROSE (from Gr. ἀ, without, and πόρος, passage), a biological term meaning imperforate, or not porous: there is a group of corals called Aporosa.

APOSIOPESIS (the Greek for “becoming silent”), a rhetorical device by which the speaker or writer stops short and leaves something unexpressed, but yet obvious, to be supplied by the imagination. The classical example is the threat, “Quos ego——!” of Neptune (in Virgil, Aen. i. 135).

APOSTASY (ἀπόστασις, in classical Greek a defection or revolt from a military commander), a term generally employed to describe a complete renunciation of the Christian faith, or even an exchange of one form of it for another, especially if the motive be unworthy. In the first centuries of the Christian era, apostasy was most commonly induced by persecution, and was indicated by some outward act, such as offering incense to a heathen deity or blaspheming the name of Christ.1 In the Roman Catholic Church the word is also applied to the renunciation of monastic vows (apostasis a monachatu), and to the abandonment of the clerical profession for the life of the world (apostasis a clericatu). Such defection was formerly often punished severely.

APOSTIL, or Apostille (possibly connected with Lat. appositum, placed near), a marginal note made by a commentator.

APOSTLE (ἀπόστολος, one sent forth on a mission, an envoy, as in Is. xviii. 2; Symmachus, ἀποστέλλειν ἀποστόλους; Aquila, πρεσβευτάς), a technical term used in the New Testament and in Christian literature generally for a special envoy of Jesus Christ. How far it had any similar use in Judaism in Christ’s day is uncertain; but in the 4th century A.D., at any rate, it denoted responsible envoys from the central Jewish authority, especially for the collection of religious funds. In its first and simplest Christian form, the idea is present already in Mark iii. 14 f., where from the general circle of his disciples Jesus “made twelve (‘whom he also named apostles,’ Luke vi. 13, but doubtful in Mark), that they should be with him, and that he might from time to time send them forth (ἵνα ἀποστέλλῃ) to preach and to have authority to cast out demons.” Later on (vi. 6 ff.), in connexion with systematic preaching among the villages of Galilee, Jesus begins actually to “send forth” the twelve, two by two; and on their return from this mission (vi. 30) they are for the first time described as “apostles” or missionary envoys. Matthew (x. 1 ff.) blends the calling of the twelve with their actual sending forth, while Luke (vi. 13) makes Jesus himself call them “apostles” (for Luke’s usage cf. xi. 49, “prophets and apostles,” where Matthew, xxiii. 34, has “prophets and wise men and scribes”). But it is doubtful whether Jesus ever used the term for the Twelve, in relation to their temporary missions, any more than for the “seventy others” whom he “sent forth” later (Luke x. 1). Even the Fourth Gospel never so describes them. It simply has “a servant is not greater than his lord, neither an apostle (envoy) greater than he that sent him” (xiii. 16); and applies the idea of “mission” alike to Jesus (cf. Heb. iii. 1, “Jesus, the apostle ... of our profession”) and to his disciples, generally, as represented by the Twelve (xvii. 18, with 3, 6 ff.). But while ideally all Christ’s disciples were “sent” with the Father’s Name in charge, there were different degrees in which this 197 applied in practice; and so we find “apostle” used in several senses, once it emerges as a technical term.

1. In the Apostolic age itself, “apostle” often denotes simply an “envoy,” commissioned by Jesus Christ to be a primary witness and preacher of the Messianic Kingdom. This wide sense was shown by Lightfoot (in his commentary on Galatians, 1865) to exist in the New Testament, e.g. in 1 Cor. xii. 28 f., Eph. iv. ii, Rom. xvi. 7; and his view has since been emphasized1 by the discovery of the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (see Didache), with its itinerant order of “apostles,” who, together with “prophets” (cf. Eph. ii. 20, iii. 5) and “teachers,” constituted a charismatic and seemingly unordained ministry of the Word, in some part of the Church (in Syria?) during the early sub-apostolic age. Paul is our earliest witness, as just cited; also in 1 Cor. xv. 5 ff., where he seems to quote the language of Palestinian tradition, in saying that Christ “appeared to Cephas; then to the Twelve; then ... to James; then to the apostles one and all (τοῖς ἀποστόλοις πᾶσιν); and last of all ... to me also.” The appearance to “all the Apostles” must refer to the final commission given by the risen Christ to certain assembled disciples (Acts i. 6 ff., cf. Luke xxiv. 33), including not only the Twelve and the Lord’s brethren (i. 13 f.), but also some at least of the Seventy. Of this wider circle of witnesses, taken from among personal disciples during Jesus’s earthly ministry, we get a further glimpse in the election of one from their number to fill Judas’s place among the Twelve (i. 21 ff.), as the primary official witnesses of Messiah and his resurrection. Many of the 120 then present (Acts i. 15), and not only the two set forward for final choice, must have been personal disciples, who by the recent commission had been made “apostles.” Among such we may perhaps name Judas Barsabbas and Silas (Acts xv. 22, cf. i. 23), if not also Barnabas (1 Cor. ix. 6) and Andronicus and Junia (Rom. xvi. 7).

So far, then, we gather that the original Palestinian type of apostleship meant simply (a) personal mission from the risen Christ (cf. I Cor. ix. i), following on (b) some preliminary intercourse with Jesus in his earthly ministry. It was pre-eminence in the latter qualification that gave the Twelve their special status among apostles (Acts i. 26, ii. 14, vi. 2; in Acts generally they are simply “the apostles”). Conversely, it was Paul’s lack in this respect which lay at the root of his difficulties as an apostle.

2. The Twelve.—When Jesus selected an inner circle of disciples for continuous training by personal intercourse, his choice of “twelve” had direct reference to the tribes of Israel (Matt. xix. 28; Luke xxii. 30). This gave them a symbolic or representative character as a closed body (cf. Rev. xxi. 14), marking them off as the primary religious authority (cf. Acts ii. 42, “the apostles’ teaching”) among the “disciples” or “brethren,” when these began to assume the form of a community or church. The relationship which other “apostles” had enjoyed with the Master had been uncertain; they had been his recognized intimates, and that as a body. Naturally, then, they took the lead, collectively—in form at least, though really the initiative lay with one or two of their own number, Peter in particular. The process of practical differentiation from their fellow apostles was furthered by the concentration of the Twelve, or at least of its most marked representatives, in Jerusalem, for a considerable period (Acts viii. 1, cf. xii. 1 ff.; an early tradition specifies twelve years). Other apostles soon went forth on their mission to “the cities of Israel” (cf. Acts ix. 31), and so exercised but little influence on the central policy of the Church. Hence their shadowy existence in the New Testament, though the actual wording of Matt. x. 5-42, read in the light of the Didachi, may help us to conceive their work in its main features.

3. “Pillar” Apostles.—But in fact differentiation between apostles existed among the Twelve also. There were “pillars,” like Peter and John (and his brother James until his death), who really determined matters of grave moment, as in the conference with Paul in Gal. ii. 9—a conference which laid the basis of the latter’s status as an apostle even in the eyes of Jewish Christians. Such pre-eminence was but the sequel of personal distinctions visible even in the preparatory days of discipleship, and it warns us against viewing the primitive facts touching apostles in the official light of later times.

Consciousness of such personal pre-eminence has left its marks on the lists of the Twelve in the New Testament. Thus (1) Peter, James, John, Andrew, always appear as the first four, though the order varies, Mark representing relative prominence during Christ’s ministry, and Acts actual influence in the Apostolic Church (cf. Luke viii. 51, ix. 28). (2) The others also stand in groups of four, the first name in each being constant, while the order of the rest varies.

The same lesson emerges when we note that one such apostolic “pillar” stood outside the Twelve altogether, viz. James, the Lord’s brother (Gal. ii. 9, cf. i. 19); and further, that “the Lord’s brethren” seem to have ranked above “apostles” generally, being named between them and Peter in 1 Cor. ix. 5. That is, they too were apostles with the addition of a certain personal distinction.

4. Paul, the “Apostle of the Gentiles.”—So far apostles are only of the Palestinian type, taken from among actual hearers of the Messiah and with a mission primarily to Jews—apostles “of the circumcision” (Gal. ii. 7-9). Now, however, emerges a new apostleship, that to the Gentiles; and with the change of mission goes also some change in the type of missionary or apostle. Of this type Paul was the first, and he remained its primary, and in some senses its only, example. Though he could claim, on occasion, to satisfy the old test of having seen the risen Lord (1 Cor. ix. 1, cf. xv. 8), he himself laid stress not on this, but on the revelation within his own soul of Jesus as God’s Son, and of the Gospel latent therein (Gal. i. 16). This was his divine call as “apostle of the Gentiles” (Rom. xi. 13); here lay both his qualification and his credentials, once the fruits of the divine inworking were manifest in the success of his missionary work (Gal. ii. 8 f.; 1 Cor. xi. 1 f.; 2 Cor. in. 2 f., xii. 12). But this new criterion of apostleship was capable of wider application, one dispensing altogether with vision of the risen Lord—which could not even in Paul’s case be proved so fully as in the case of the original apostles—but appealing to the “signs of an apostle” (1 Cor. ix. 2; 2 Cor. xii. 12), the tokens of spiritual gift visible in work done, and particularly in the planting of the Gospel in fresh fields (2 Cor. x. 14-18). It may be in this wide charismatic sense that Paul uses the term in 1 Cor. xii. 28 f., Eph. ii. 20, iii. 5, iv. 11, and especially in Rom. xvi. 7, “men of mark among the apostles” (cf. 2 Cor. xi. 13, “pseudo-apostles” masquerading as “apostles of Christ,” and perhaps 1 Thess. ii, 6, of himself and Silas). That he used it in senses differing with the context is proved by 1 Cor. xv. 9, where he styles himself “the least of apostles,” although in other connexions he claims the very highest rank, co-ordinate even with the Twelve as a body (Gal. ii. 7 ff.), in virtue of his distinctive Gospel.

This point of view was not widely shared even in circles appreciative of his actual work. To most he seemed but a fruitful worker within lines determined by “the twelve apostles of the Lamb” as a body (Rev. xxi. 14). So we read of “the plant (Church) which the twelve apostles of the Beloved shall plant” (Ascension of Isaiah, iv. 3); “those who preached the Gospel to us (especially Gentiles)... unto whom He gave authority over the Gospel, being twelve for a witness to the tribes” (Barn. viii. 3, cf. v. 9); and the going forth of the 198 Twelve, after twelve years, beyond Palestine “into the world,” to give it a chance to hear (Preaching of Peter, in Clem. Alex. Strom. vi. 5.43; 6.48). Later on, however, his own claim told on the Church’s mind, when his epistles were read in church as a collection styled simply “the Apostle.”

As the primary medium of the Gentile Gospel (Gal. i. 16, cf. i. 8, ii. 2) Paul had no peers as an “apostle of the Gentiles” (Rom. xi. 13, cf. XV. 15-20, and see 1 Cor. xv. 8, “last of all to me”), unless it were Barnabas who shares with him the title “apostle” in Acts xiv. 4, 14—possibly with reference to the special “work” on which they had recently been “sent forth by the Spirit” (xiii. 2, 4). Yet such as shared the spiritual gift (charisma) of missionary power in sufficient degree, were in fact apostles of Christ in the Spirit (1 Cor. xii. 28, II). Such a secondary type of apostolate—answering to “apostolic missionaries” of later times (cf. the use of ἱεραπόστολος in this sense by the Orthodox Eastern Church to-day)—would help to account for the apostolic claims of the missionaries censured in Rev. ii. 2, as also for the “apostles” of the second generation implied in the Didachē.

In the sub-apostolic age, however, the class of “missionaries” enjoying a charisma such as was conceived to convey apostolic commission through the Spirit, soon became distinguished from “apostles” (cf. Hennas, Sim. ix. 15.4, “the apostles and teachers of the message of the Son of God,” so 25.2; in 17.1 the apostles are reckoned as twelve), as the title became more and more confined by usage to the original apostles, particularly the Twelve as a body (e.g. Ascension of Isaiah and the Preaching of Peter), or to them and Paul (e.g. in Clement and Ignatius), and as reverence for these latter grew in connexion with their story in the Gospels and in Acts.2 Thus Eusebius describes as “evangelists” (cf. Philip the Evangelist in Acts xxi. 8, also Eph. iv. 11, 2 Tim. iv. 5) those who “occupied the first rank in the succession to the Apostles” in missionary work (Hist. Eccl. iii. 37, cf. v. 10). Yet the wider sense of “apostle” did not at once die out even in the third and fourth generations. It lingered on as applied to the Seventy3—by Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement and Origen— and even to Clement of Rome, by Clem. Alex. (? as a “fellow-worker” of Paul, Phil. iv. 3); while the adjective “apostolic” was applied to men like Polycarp (in his contemporary Acts of Martyrdom) and the Phrygian, Alexander, martyred at Lyons in A.D. 177 (Eus. v. 1), who was “not without share of apostolic charisma.”

The authority attaching to apostles was essentially spiritual in character and in the conditions of its exercise. Anything like autocracy among his followers was alien to Jesus’s own teaching (Matt, xxiii. 6-11). All Christians were “brethren,” and the basis of pre-eminence among them was relative ability for service. But the personal relation of the original Palestinian apostles to Jesus himself as Master gave them a unique fitness as authorized witnesses, from which flowed naturally, by sheer spiritual influence, such special forms of authority as they came gradually to exercise in the early Church. “There is no trace in Scripture of a formal commission of authority for government from Christ Himself” (Hort, Chr. Eccl. p. 84) given to apostles, save as representing the brethren in their collective action. Even the “resolutions” (δόγματα) of the Jerusalem conference were not set forth by the apostles present simply in their own name, nor as ipso facto binding on the conscience of the Antiochene Church. They expressed “a claim to deference rather than a right to be obeyed” (Hort, op. cit. 81-85). Such was the kind of authority attaching to apostles, whether collectively or individually. It was not a fixed notion, but varied in quantity and quality with the growing maturity of converts. This is how Paul, from whom we gather most on the point, conceives the matter. The exercise of his spiritual authority is not absolute, lest he “lord it over their faith”; consent of conscience or of “faith” is ever requisite (2 Cor. i. 24; cf. Rom. xiv. 23). But the principle was elastic in application, and would take more patriarchal forms in Palestine than in the Greek world. The case was essentially the same as on the various mission-fields to-day, where the position of the “missionary” is at first one of great spiritual initiative and authority, limited only by his own sense of the fitness of things, in the light of local usages. So the notion of formal or constitutional authority attaching to the apostolate, in its various senses, is an anachronism for the apostolic age. The tendency, however, was for their authority to be conceived more and more on formal lines, and, particularly after their deaths, as absolute.

The authority attaching to apostles as writers, which led gradually to the formation of a New Testament Canon—“the Apostles” side by side with “the Books” of the Old Testament (so 2 Clement xiv., c. A.D. 120-140)—is a subject by itself (see Bible).

This change of conception helped to further the notion of a certain devolution of apostolic powers to successors constituted by act of ordination. The earliest idea of an apostolical succession meant simply the re-emergence in others of the apostolic spirit of missionary enthusiasm. “The first rank in the succession of the apostles” consisted of men eminent as disciples of theirs, and so fitted to continue their labours (Euseb. iii. 37); and even under Commodus (A.D. 180-193) there were “evangelists of the word” possessed of “inspired zeal to emulate apostles” (v. 10). Such were perhaps the “apostles” of the Didachē. Of the notion of apostolic succession in ministerial grace conferred by ordination, there is little or no trace before Irenaeus. The famous passage in Clement of Rome (xliv. 2) refers simply to the succession of one set of men to another in an office of apostolic institution. The grace that makes Polycarp “an apostolic and prophetic teacher” (Mart. Polyc. 16) is peculiar to him personally. But Irenaeus holds, apparently on a priori grounds, that “elders” who stand in orderly succession to the apostolic founders of the true tradition in the churches, have, “along with the succession of oversight,” also an “assured gift of (insight into) truth” by the Father’s good pleasure (“cum episcopatus successione charisma veritatis certum secundum placitum Patris acceperunt”), in contrast to heretics who wilfully stand outside this approved line of transmission (adv. Haer. iv. 26. 2). So far, indeed, the succession is not limited to the monarchical episcopate as distinct from the presbyteral order to which it belonged (cf. “presbyterii ordo, principalis consessio” in the same context, and see iii. 14. 2), though the bishops of apostolic churches, as capable of being traced individually (iii. 3. 1), are specially appealed to as witnesses (cf. iv. 33. 8, v. 19. 2)—as earlier by Hegesippus (Euseb. iv. 22). Nor is there mention of sacerdotal grace attaching to the succession in apostolic truth.4 But once the idea of supernatural grace going along with office as such (of which we have already a trace in the Ignatian bishop, though without the notion of actual apostolic succession) arose in connexion with successio ab apostolis, the full development of the doctrine was but a matter of time.5

APOSTLE SPOONS, a set of spoons, usually of silver or silver gilt, with the handles terminating in figures of the apostles, each bearing their distinctive emblem. They were common baptismal gifts during the 15th and 16th centuries, but were dying out by 1666. Often single spoons were given, bearing the figure of the patron or name saint of the child. Sets of the twelve apostles are not common, and complete sets of thirteen, with the figure of our Lord on a larger spoon, are still rarer. The Goldsmiths’ Company in London has one such set, all by the same maker and bearing the hall-mark of 1626, and a set of thirteen was sold at Christie’s in 1904 for £4900.

APOSTOLICAL CONSTITUTIONS (Διαταγαὶ or Διατάξεις τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων διὰ Κλήμεντος τοῦ Ῥωμαίων ἐπισκόπου τε καὶ πολίτου. Καθολικὴ διδασκαλία), a collection of ecclesiastical regulations in eight books, the last of which concludes with the eighty-five Canons of the Holy Apostles. By their title the Constitutions profess to have been drawn up by the apostles, and to have been transmitted to the Church by Clement of Rome; sometimes the alleged authors are represented as speaking jointly, sometimes singly. From the first they have been very variously estimated; the Canons, as a rule, more highly than the rest of the work. For example, the Trullan Council of Constantinople (quini-sextum), A.D. 692, accepts the Canons as genuine by its second canon, but rejects the Constitutions on the ground that spurious matter had been introduced into them by heretics; and whilst the former were henceforward used freely in the East, only a few portions of the latter found their way into the Greek and oriental law-books. Again, Dionysius Exiguus (c. A.D. 500) translated fifty of the Canons into Latin,1 although under the title Canones qui dicuntur Apostolorum, and thus they passed into other Western collections; whilst the Constitutions as a whole remained unknown in the West until they were published in 1563 by the Jesuit Turrianus. At first received with enthusiasm, their authenticity soon came to be impugned; and their true significance was largely lost sight of as it began to be realized that they were not what they claimed to be. Vain attempts were still made to rehabilitate them, and they were, in general, more highly estimated in England than elsewhere. The most extravagant estimate of all was that of Whiston, who calls them “the most sacred standard of Christianity, equal in authority to the Gospels themselves, and superior in authority to the epistles of single apostles, some parts of them being our Saviour’s own original laws delivered to the apostles, and the other parts the public acts of the apostles” (Historical preface to Primitive Christianity Revived, pp. 85-86). Others, however, realized their composite character from the first, and by degrees some of the component documents became known. Bishop Pearson was able to say that “the eight books of the Apostolic Constitutions have been after Epiphanius’s time compiled and patched together out of the didascaliae or doctrines which went under the names of the holy apostles and their disciples or successors” (Vind. Ign. i. cap. 5); whilst a greater scholar still, Archbishop Usher, had already gone much further, and concluded, forestalling the results of modern critical methods, that their compiler was none other than the compiler of the spurious Ignatian epistles (Epp. Polyc. et Ign. p. lxiii. f., Oxon. 1644). The Apostolical Constitutions, then, are spurious, and they are one of a long series of documents of like character. But we have not really gauged their significance by saying that they are spurious. They are the last stage and climax of a gradual process of compilation and crystallization, so to speak, of unwritten church custom; and a short account of this process will show their real importance and value.

These documents are the outcome of a tendency which is found in every society, religious or secular, at some point in its history. The society begins by living in accordance with its fundamental principles. By degrees these Origin and real nature. translate themselves into appropriate action. Difficulties are faced and solved as they arise; and when similar circumstances recur they will tend to be met in the same way. Thus there grows up by degrees a body of what may be called customary law. Plainly, there is no particular point of time at which this customary law can be said to have begun. To all appearance it is there from the first in solution and gradually crystallizes out; and yet it is being continually modified as time goes on. Moreover, the time comes when the attempt is made, either by private individuals or by the society itself, to put this “customary law” into writing. Now when this is done, two tendencies will at once show themselves. (a) This “customary law” will at once become more definite: the very fact of putting it into writing will involve an effort after logical completeness. There will be a tendency on the part of the writer to fill up gaps; to state local customs as if they obtained universally; to introduce his personal equation, and to add to that which is the custom that which, in his opinion, ought to be. (b) There will be a strong tendency to fortify that which has been written with great names, especially in days when there is no very clear notion of literary property. This is done, not always with any deliberate consciousness of fraud (although it must be clearly recognized that truth is not one of the “natural virtues,” and that the sense of the obligations of truthfulness was far from strong), but rather to emphasize the importance of what was written, and the fact that it was no new invention of the writer’s. In a non-literary age fame gathers about great names; and that which, ex hypothesi, has gone on since the beginning of things is naturally attributed to the founders of the society. Then come interpolations to make this ascription more probable, and the prefixing of a title, then or subsequently, which states it as a fact. This is precisely the way in which the Apostolical Constitutions and other kindred documents have come into being. They are attempts, made in various places and at different times, to put into writing the order and discipline and character of the Church; in part for private instruction and edification, but in part also with a view to actual use; frequently even with an actual reference to particular circumstances. In this lies their importance, to a degree which is only just being adequately realized. They contain evidence of the utmost value as to the order of the Church in early days; evidence, however, which needs to be sifted with the greatest care, since the personal preferences of the writer and the customs of the local church to which he belongs are continually mixed up with things which have a wider prevalence. It is only by careful investigation, by the method of comparisons, that these elements can be disentangled; but as the number of documents of this class known to us is continually increasing, their value increases even more than proportionately. And whilst their local and fugitive character must be fully recognized and allowed for, is it unjustifiable to set them aside or leave them out of account as heretical, and therefore negligible.

It will be sufficient here to mention shortly the chief collections of this kind which came into existence during the first four centuries; generally as the work of private individuals, and having, at any rate, no more than a local authority Other collections. of some kind, (a) The earliest known to us is the Didachē or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, itself compiled from earlier materials, and dating from about 120 (see Didachē). (b) The Apostolic Church Order (apostolische Kirchenordnung of German writers); Ecclesiastical Canons of the Holy Apostles of one MS.; Sententiae Apostolorum of Pitra: of about 300, and emanating probably from Asia Minor. Its earlier part, cc. 1-14, depends upon the Didachē, and the rest of it is a book of discipline in which Harnack has attempted to distinguish two older fragments of church law (Texte u. Unters. ii. 5). (c) The so-called Canones Hippolyti, probably Alexandrian or Roman, and of the first half of the 3rd century. It will be observed that these 200 make no claim to apostolic authorship; but otherwise their origin is like that of the rest, unless indeed, as has been suggested, they represent the work of an actual Roman synod, (d) The so-called Egyptian Church Order, in Coptic from a Greek pre-Nicene original (c. 310). It is part of the Egyptian Heptateuch and contains neither communion nor ordination forms, (e) The Ethiopic Church Order, perhaps twenty years later than (d), and forming part of the Ethiopic Statutes. (f) The Verona Latin Fragments, discovered and published by Hauler, portions of a form akin to (e), which may be dated c. 340, though possibly earlier. It has a preface which refers to a treatise Concerning Spiritual Gifts as having immediately preceded it. (g) The recently discovered Testament of the Lord, which is somewhat later in date (c. 350), and likewise depends upon the Canones Hippolyti. (h) The so-called Canons of Basil. This is an Arabic work perhaps based on a Coptic and ultimately on a Greek original, embodying with modifications large portions of the Canons of Hippolytus. (On the relations between the six last-named, see Hippolytus, Canons of.)

The Constitutions themselves fall into three main divisions. (i.) The first of these consists of books i.-vi., and throughout runs parallel to the Didascalia. Bickell, indeed, held that this latter was an abbreviated form of books i.-vi.; Contents. but it is now agreed on all hands that the Constitutions are based on the Didascalia and not vice versa. (ii.) Then follows book vii., the first thirty-one chapters of which are an adaptation of the Didachē, whilst the rest contain various liturgical forms of which the origin is still uncertain, though it has been acutely suggested by Achelis, and with great probability, that they originated in the schismatical congregation of Lucian at Antioch. (iii.) Book viii. is more composite, and falls into three parts. The first two chapters, περὶ χαρισμάτων, may be based upon a lost work of St Hippolytus, otherwise known only by a reference to it in the preface of the Verona Latin Fragments; and an examination shows that this is highly probable. The next section, cc. 3-27, περὶ χειροτονιῶν, and cc. 28-46, περὶ κανόνων, is twofold, and is evidently that upon which the writer sets most store. The apostles no longer speak jointly, but one by one in an apostolic council, and the section closes with a joint decree of them all. They speak of the ordination of bishops (the so-called Clementine Liturgy is that which is directed to be used at the consecration of a bishop, cc. 5-15), of presbyters, deacons, deaconesses, sub-deacons and lectors, and then pass on to confessors, virgins, widows and exorcists; after which follows a series of canons on various subjects, and liturgical formulae. With regard to this section, all that can be said is that it includes materials which are also to be found elsewhere—in the Egyptian Church Order and other documents already spoken of—and that the precise relation between them is at present not determined. The third section consists of the Apostolic Canons already referred to, the last and most significant of which places the Constitutions and the two epistles of Clement in the canon of Scripture, and omits the Apocalypse. They are derived in part from the preceding Constitutions, in part from the canons of the councils of Antioch, 341, Nicaea, 325, and possibly Laodicaea, 363.

A comparison of the Constitutions with the material upon which they are based will illustrate the compiler’s method. (a) To begin with the Didascalia already mentioned. It is unmethodical and badly digested, homiletical in style, and abounding in biblical quotations. There is no precise arrangement; but the subjects, following a general introduction, are the bishop and his duties, penance, the administration of the offerings, the settlement of disputes, the divine service, the order of widows, deacons and deaconesses, the poor, behaviour in persecution, and so forth. The compiler of the Constitutions finds here material after his own heart. He is even more discursive and more homiletical in style; he adds fresh citations of the Scriptures, and additional explanations and moral reflexions; and all this with so little judgment that he often leaves confusion worse confounded (e.g. in ii. 57, where, upon a symbolical description of the Church as a sheepfold, he has superimposed the further symbolism of a ship). (b) Passing on to books vii. and viii., we observe that the compiler’s method of necessity changes with his new material. In the former book he still makes large additions and alterations, but there is less scope for his prolixity than before; and in the latter, where he is no longer dealing with generalities, but making actual definitions, the Constitutions of necessity become more precise and statutory in form. Throughout he adopts and adapts the language of his sources as far as possible, “only pruning in the most pressing cases,” but towards the end he cannot avoid making larger alterations from time to time. And his alterations throughout are not made aimlessly. Where he finds things which would obviously clash with the customs of his own day, he unhesitatingly modifies them. An account of the Passion, with a curiously perverted chronology, the object of which was to justify the length of the Passion-tide fast, is entirely revised for this reason (v. 14); the direction to observe Easter according to the Jewish computation is changed into the exact contrary for the same reason (v. 17); and where his archetype lapses into speaking of a lull in persecution he naïvely informs us that the Romans have now given up persecuting and have adopted Christianity (vi. 26), forgetting altogether that he is speaking in the character of the apostles. Above all, he both magnifies the office of the Christian ministry as a whole and alters what is said of it in detail (for example, the deaconess loses rank not a little), to make it agree with the circumstances of his day in general, and with his own ideas of fitness in particular. It is here that his evidence is at once most valuable and needs to be used with the greatest care. To give one striking example of the value of these documents. The Canones Hippolyti (vi. 43) provide that one who has been a confessor for the faith may be received as a presbyter by virtue of his confessorship and not by the laying on of the bishop’s hands; but if he be chosen a bishop, he is to be ordained. This provision passes on into the Egyptian Ecclesiastical Canons and other kindred documents, and even into the Testamentum Domini. But the corresponding passage in the Apostolical Constitutions (viii. 23) entirely reverses it: “A confessor is not ordained, for he is so by choice and patience, and is worthy of great honour.... But if there be occasion, he is to be ordained either a bishop, priest, or deacon. But if any one of the confessors who is not ordained snatches to himself any such dignity upon account of his confession, let the same person be deprived and rejected; for he is not in such an office, since he has denied the constitution of Christ, and is worse than an infidel.”

Who, then, is the author of the Constitutions, and what can be inferred with regard to him? (i.) By separating off the sources which he used from his own additions to them, it at once becomes clear that the latter are the work of one Authorship, place, and date. man: the style is unmistakable, and the method of working is the same throughout. The compiler of books i.-vi. is also the compiler of books vii., viii. (ii.) As to his theological position, different views have been held. Funk suggests Apollinarianism, which is the refuge of the destitute; and Achelis inclines in the same direction. But the affinities of the author are quite otherwise, the most pronounced of them being a strong subordinationist tendency, denial of a human 201 soul to Christ, and the like, which suggest not indeed Arianism but an inclination towards Arianism. Above all, his polemic is directed against the dying heresies of the 3rd century; and he writes with an absence of constraint which is not the language of one who lives amidst violent controversies or who is conscious of being in a minority. All this points to the position of a “conservative” or semi-Arian of the East, one who belongs, perhaps, to the circle of Lucian of Antioch and writes before the time of Julian. It is hard to think of any other time or circumstances in which a man could write like this, (iii.) The indications of time have been held to point to a different conclusion. On the one hand, the fact that the attempt to rebuild the temple by Julian in 363 is not mentioned in vi. 24 points to an earlier date; and the fact that the κοπιᾶται are not mentioned amongst the church officers points in the same direction, for elsewhere they are first mentioned in a rescript of Constantius in A.D. 357. On the other hand, in the cycle of feasts occur the names of several which are probably of later date—e.g. Christmas and St Stephen, which were introduced at Antioch c. A.D. 378 and 379 respectively. Again, Epiphanius (c. A.D. 374) appears to be unacquainted with it; he still quotes from the Didascalia, and elaborately explains it away where it is contrary to the usages of his own day. But as regards the former point, it is possible that the Apostolical Constitutions constantly gave rise to these festivals; or, on the other hand, that the two passages were subsequently introduced either by the writer himself or by some other hand, when the last book of the Constitutions was being used as a law-book. And as regards the latter, the fact that Epiphanius does not use the Constitutions is no proof that they had not yet been compiled. (iv.) As to the region of composition there is no real doubt. It was clearly the East, Syria or Palestine. Many indications are against the latter, and Syria is strongly suggested by the use of the Syro-Macedonian calendar. Moreover, the writer represents the Roman Clement as the channel of communication between the apostles and the Church. This fact both supplies him with the name by which he is commonly known, Pseudo-Clement, and also furnishes corroboration of his Syrian birth; since the other spurious writings bearing the name of Clement, the Homilies and Recognitions, are likewise of Syrian origin. Moreover, the spurious Ignatian epistles, which are also Syrian, depend throughout upon the Constitutions, (v.) But this is not all. It was long ago noticed that Pseudo-Clement bears a very close resemblance to Pseudo-Ignatius, the interpolator of the Ignatian Epistles in the longer Greek recension. Usher, as we have seen, identified them, and modern criticism accepts this identification as a fact (Lagarde, Harnack, Funk, Brightman). Lightfoot, indeed, still hesitated (Ap. Fathers, II. i. 266 n.) on the ground that Pseudo-Ignatius occasionally misunderstands the Constitutions, that the two writings give the Roman succession differently, and that Pseudo-Clement shows no knowledge of the Christological controversies of Nicaea. But as regards the first of these, it is rather a case of condensed citation than of misinterpretation; the second is explained by the writer’s carelessness as shown in other passages, and all are solved if a considerable interval of time elapsed between the compilation of the Constitutions and the spurious Ignatian epistles.

It seems clear then that the compiler was a Syrian, and that he also wrote the spurious Ignatian epistles; he was likewise probably a semi-Arian of the school of Lucian of Antioch. His date is given by Harnack as A.D. 340-360, with a leaning to 340-343; by Lightfoot as the latter half of the 4th century; by Brightman, 370-380; by Maclean, 375; and by Funk as the beginning of the 5th century.

APOSTOLIC CANONS, a collection of eighty-five rules for the regulation of clerical life, appended to the eighth book of the Apostolical Constitutions (q.v.). They are couched in brief legislative form though on no definite plan, and deal with the vexed questions of ecclesiastical discipline as they were raised towards the end of the 4th century. At least half of the canons are derived from earlier constitutions, and probably not many of them are the actual productions of the compiler, whose aim was to gloss over the real nature of the Constitutions, and secure their incorporation with the Epistles of Clement in the New Testament of his day. The Codex Alexandrinus does indeed append the Clementine Epistles to its text of the New Testament. The Canons may be a little later in date than the preceding Constitutions, but they are evidently from the same Syrian theological circle.

APOSTOLIC FATHERS, a term used to distinguish those early Christian writers who were believed to have been the personal associates of the original Apostles. While the title “Fathers” was given from at least the beginning of the 4th century to church writers of former days, as being the parents of Christian belief and thought for later times, the expression “Apostolic Fathers” dates only from the latter part of the 17th century. The idea of recognizing these “Fathers” as a special group exists already in the title “Patres aevi apostolici, sive SS. Patrum qui temporibus apostolicis floruerunt ... opera,” under which in 1672 J.B. Cotelier published at Paris the writings current under the names of Barnabas, Clement of Rome, Hermas, Ignatius and Polycarp. But the name itself is due to their next editor, Thomas Ittig (1643-1710), in his Bibliotheca Patrum Apostolicorum (1699), who, however, included under this title only Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp. Here already appears the doubt as to how many writers can claim the title, a doubt which has continued ever since, and makes the contents of the “Apostolic Fathers” differ so much from editor to editor. Thus the Oratorian Andrea Gallandi (1700-1779), in re-issuing Cotelier’s collection in his Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum (1765-1781), included the fragments of Papias and the Epistle to Diognetus, to which recent editors have added the citations from the “Elders” of Papias’s day found in Irenaeus and, since 1883, the Didachē.

The degree of historic claim which these various writings have to rank as the works1 of Apostolic Fathers varies greatly on any definition of “apostolic.” Originally the epithet was meant to be taken strictly, viz. as denoting those whom history could show to have been personally connected, or at least coeval, with one or more apostles; and an effort was made, as by Cotelier, to distinguish the writings rightly and wrongly assigned to such. Thus editions tended to vary with the historical views of editors. But the convenience of the category “Apostolic Fathers” to express not only those who might possibly have had some sort of direct contact with apostles—such as “Barnabas,” Clement, Ignatius, Papias, Polycarp—but also those who seemed specially to preserve the pure tradition of apostolic doctrine during the sub-apostolic age, has led to its general use in a wide and vague sense.

Conventionally, then, the title denotes the group of writings which, whether in date or in internal character, are regarded as belonging to the main stream of the Church’s teaching during the period between the Apostles and the Apologists (i.e. to c. A.D. 140). Or to put it more exactly, the “Apostolic Fathers” represent, chronologically in the main and still more from the religious and theological standpoint, the momentous process of 202 transition from the type of teaching in the New Testament to that which meets us in the early Catholic Fathers, from the last quarter of the 2nd century onwards. The Apologists no doubt show us certain fresh factors entering into this development; but on the whole the Apostolic Fathers by themselves go a long way to explain the transition in question, so far as knowledge of this saeculum obscurum is within our reach at all. It is true that they do not include the whole even of the ecclesiastical literature of the sub-apostolic age, not to mention what remains of Gnostic and other minority types. The Preaching and Apocalypse of Peter, for instance, are quite typical of the same period, and help us to read between the lines of the Apostolic Fathers. Yet they do not really add much to what is there already, and they have the drawbacks of pseudonymity; they lack concrete and personal qualities; they are general expressions of tendencies which we cannot well locate or measure, save by means of the Apostolic Fathers themselves or of their earliest Catholic successors.

(A) In external features the group is far from homogeneous, a fact which has led to their being disintegrated as a group in certain histories of early Christian literature (e.g. those of Harnack and Krüger), and classed each under its own literary type—so sacrificing to outer form, which is quite secondary in primitive Christian writings, the more significant fact of religious affinity. Its original members, those still best entitled to their name in any strict sense, are epistles, and in this respect also most akin to Apostolic writings. Indeed Ignatius takes pleasure in saluting his readers “after the apostolic stamp” (ad Troll. inscr.), while yet disclaiming all desire to emulate the apostolic manner in other respects, being fully conscious of the gulf between himself and apostles like Peter and Paul in claim to authority (ib. in. 3, ad Rom. iv. 3). The like holds of Polycarp, who, in explaining that he writes to exhort the Philippians only at their own request, adds, “for neither am I, nor is any other like me, able to follow the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul” (in. 2). Clement’s epistle, indeed, conforms more to the elaborate and treatise-like form of the Epistle to the Hebrews, on which it draws so largely; and the same is true of “Barnabas.” But one and all are influenced by study of apostolic epistles, and witness to the impression which these produced on the men of the next generation. Unconsciously, too, they correspond to the apostolic type of writing in another respect, viz. their occasional and practical character. They are evoked by pressing needs of the hour among some definite body of Christians and not by any literary motive.2 This is a universal trait of primitive Christian writings; so that to speak of primitive Christian “literature” at all is hardly accurate, and tends to an artificial handling of their contents. These sub-apostolic epistles are veritable “human documents,” with the personal note running through them. They are after all personal expressions of Christianity, in which are discernible also specific types of local tradition. To such spontaneous actuality a large part of their interest and value is due.

Nor is this pre-literary and vital quality really absent even from the writing which is least entitled to a place among “Apostolic Fathers,” the Epistle to Diognetus. This beautiful picture of the Christian life as a realized ideal, and of Christians as “the soul” of the world, owes its inclusion to a double error: first, to the accidental attachment at the end of another fragment (§ ii), which opens with the writer’s claim to stand forth as a teacher as being “a disciple of apostles”; and next, to mistaken exegesis of this phrase as implying personal relations with apostles, rather than knowledge of their teaching, written or oral. Whether in form addressed to Diognetus, the tutor of Marcus Aurelius, as a typical cultured observer of Christianity, or to some other eminent person of the same name in the locality of its origin, or, as seems more likely, to cultured Greeks generally, personified under the significant name “Diognetus” (“Heaven-born,” of. Acts xvii. 28 along with § iii. 4)—the epistle is in any case an “open letter” of an essentially literary type. Further, its opening seems modelled on the lines of the preface to Luke’s Gospel, to which, along with Acts, it may owe something of its very conception as a reasoned appeal to the lover of truth. But while literary in form and conception, its appeal is in spirit so personal a testimony to what the Gospel has done for the writer and his fellow Christians, that it is akin to the piety of the Apostolic Fathers as a group. It is true that it has marked affinities, e.g. in its natural theology, with the earliest Apologists, Aristides and Justin, even as it is itself in substance an apology addressed not to the State, but to thoughtful public opinion. But this only means that we cannot draw a hard and fast line between groups of early Christian writings at a time when practical religious interests overshadowed all others.

If thus related to the Apologists of the middle of the 2nd century, the Epistle to Diognetus has also points of contact with one of the most practical and least literary writings found among our Apostolic Fathers, viz. the homily originally known as the Second Epistle of Clement (for this ascription, as for other details, see Clementine Literature). The recovery of its concluding sections in the same MS. which brought the Didachē to light, proves beyond question that we have here the earliest extant sermon preached before a Christian congregation, about A.D. 120-140 (so J.B. Lightfoot). Its opening section, recalling to its hearers the passing of the mists of idolatry before the revelation in Jesus Christ, is markedly similar in tone and tenor to passages in the Epistle to Diognetus. Far closer, however, are the affinities between the homily and the Shepherd of Hermas, “the first Christian allegory,” which as a literary whole dates from about A.D. 140, but probably represents a more or less prolonged prophetic activity on the part of its author, the brother of Pius, the Roman bishop of his day (c. 139-154). In both the primary theme is repentance, as called for by serious sins, after baptism has placed the Christian on his new and higher level of responsibility. Thus both are hortatory writings, the one argumentative in form, the other prophetic, after the manner of later Old Testament prophets whose messages came in visions and similitudes. This prophetic and apocalyptic note, which characterizes Hermas among the Apostolic Fathers (though there are traces of it also in the Didachē and in Ignatius, ad Eph. xx.), is a genuinely primitive trait and goes far to explain the vogue which the Shepherd enjoyed in the generations immediately succeeding, as also the influence of its disciplinary policy, which is its prophetic “burden” (see Hermas, Shepherd of).

We come finally to the anonymous Teaching of the Twelve Apostles and Papias’s Exposition of Oracles of the Lord, so far as this is known to us. The former, besides embodying catechetical instruction in Christian conduct (the “Two Ways”), which goes back in substance to the early apostolic age and is embodied also in “Barnabas,” depicts in outline the fundamental usages of church life as practised in some conservative region (probably within Syria) about the last quarter of the 1st century and perhaps even later. The whole is put forth as substantially the apostolic teaching (Didachē) on the subjects in question. This is probably a bona fide claim. It expresses the feeling common to the Apostolic Fathers and general in the sub-apostolic age, at any rate in regions where apostles had once laboured, that local tradition, as held by the recognized church leaders, did but continue apostolic doctrine and practice. Into later developments of this feeling an increasing element of illusion entered, and all other written embodiments of it known to us take the form of literary fictions, more or less bold. It is in contrast to these that the Didachē is justly felt to be genuinely primitive and of a piece with the Apostolic Fathers. Thus while its form would by analogy tend per se to awaken suspicion, its contents remove this feeling; and we may even infer from this surviving early formulation of local ecclesiastical tradition, that others of somewhat similar character came into being in the sub-apostolic age, but failed to survive save as embodied in later local teaching, oral or written, very much as if the Didachē had perished and its literary offspring alone remained (see Didachē).

As regards Papias’s Exposition, which Lightfoot describes 203 as “among the earliest forerunners of commentaries, partly explanatory, partly illustrative, on portions of the New Testament,” we need here only remark that, whatever its exact form may have been—as to which the extant fragments still leave room for doubt—it was in conception expository of the historic meaning of Christ’s more ambiguous Sayings, viewed in the light of definitely ascertained apostolic traditions bearing on the subject. The like is true also of the fragments of the Elders preserved in Irenaeus (so far as these do not really come from Papias). Both bodies of exposition represent the traditional principle at work in the sub-apostolic age, making for the preservation in relative purity, over against merely subjective interpretations—those of the Gnostics in particular—of the historic or original sense of Christ’s teaching, just as Ignatius stood for the historicity of the facts of His earthly career in their plain, natural sense.

(B) Here the question of external form passes readily over into that of the internal character and spirit. Indeed much has already been said or suggested bearing on these. The relation of these writers to the apostolic teaching generally has become pretty evident. It is one of absolute loyalty and deference, as to the teaching of inspiration. They are conscious, as are we in reading them, that they are not moving on the same level of insight as the Apostles; they are sub-apostolic in that sense also. Hence there appear constant traces of study of the Apostolic writings, so far as these were accessible in the locality of each writer at his date of writing (for the details of this subject, and its bearing on the history of the Canonical Scriptures of the New Testament, see The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers, Oxford, 1905). As Lightfoot points out (Apostolic Fathers, pt. i. vol. i. p. 7), however, personality, with its variety of temperament and emphasis, largely colours the Apostolic Fathers, especially the primary group. Clement has all the Roman feeling for duly constituted order and discipline; Ignatius has the Syrian or semi-oriental passion of devotion, showing itself at once in his mystic love for his Lord and his over-strained yearning to become His very “disciple” by drinking the like cup of martyrdom; Polycarp is, above all things, steady in his allegiance to what had first won his conscience and heart, and his “passive and receptive character” comes out in the contents of his epistle. Of the rest, whose personalities are less known to us, Papias shares Polycarp’s qualities and their limitations, the anonymous homilist and Hermas are marked by intense moral earnestness, while the writer to Diognetus joins to this a profound religious insight. These personal traits determine by selective affinity, working under conditions given by the special local type of tradition and piety, the elements in the Apostolic writings which each was able to assimilate and express—though we must allow also for variety in the occasions of writing. Thus one New Testament type is echoed in one and another in another; or it may be several in turn. The latter is the case in Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp; perhaps also in “Barnabas.” In Hermas there is special affinity to the language and thought of the epistle of James, and in the homilist to those of Paul. Yet their very use of the same terms or ideas makes us the more aware of “a marked contrast to the depth and clearness of conception with which the several Apostolic writers place before us different aspects of the Gospel” (Lightfoot). While Apostolic phrases are used, the sense behind them is often different and less evangelic. They have not caught the Apostolic meaning, because they have not penetrated to the full religious experience which gave to the words, often words with long and varied history both in the Septuagint and in ordinary Greek usage, their specific meaning to each apostle and especially to Paul. This phenomenon was noted particularly by E. Reuss, in his Histoire de la théologie chrétienne an siècle apostolique (3rd ed., 1864). Take for instance Clement. Lightfoot, indeed, dwells on the all-round “comprehensiveness” with which Clement, as the mouthpiece of the early Roman Church, utters in succession phrases or ideas borrowed impartially from Peter and Paul and James and the Epistle to Hebrews. He admits, however, that such mere co-ordination of the language of Paul and James, for instance, as appears in his twice bracketing “faith and hospitality” as grounds of acceptance with God (the cases are those of Abraham and Rahab, in chs. x. and xii.), is “from a strictly dogmatic point of view” his weakness. But the weakness is more than a dogmatic one; it is one of religious experience, as the source of spiritual insight. It is not merely that “there is no dogmatic system in Clement” or in any other of the Apostolic Fathers; that may favour, not hinder, religious insight. There is a want of depth in Christian experience, in the power of realizing relative spiritual values in the light of the master principle involved in the distinctively Christian consciousness, such as could raise Clement above a verbal eclecticism, rather than comprehensiveness, in the use of Apostolic language. As R.W. Dale remarks, in a note on Reuss’s too severe words (Eng. trans. ii. 295): “The vital force of the Apostolic convictions gave to Apostolic thought a certain organic and consistent form.” It is lack of this organic quality in the thought, not only of Clement but also of the Apostolic Fathers generally—with the possible exception of Ignatius, who seems to share the Apostolic experience more fully than any other, to which Reuss rightly directs attention. In virtue of this defect, due largely to the failure to enter into the Apostolic experience of mystic union with Christ, he can rightly speak of “an immense retrogression” in theology visible “at the end of the century, and in circles where it might have been least expected” (ii. p. 294, cf. 541).

In fact the perspective of the Gospel was seriously changed and its most distinctive features obscured. This was specially the case with the experimental doctrines of grace. Here the central glory of the Cross as “the power of God unto salvation” suffered some eclipse, although the passion of Christ was felt to be a transcendent act of Divine Grace in one way or another. But even more serious was the loss of an adequate sense of the contrast between “grace” and “works” as conditions of salvation. There was little or no sense of the danger of the legal principle, as related to human egoism and the instinct to seek salvation as a reward for merit. The passages in which these things are laid bare by Paul’s remorseless analysis of his own experience “under Law” seem to have made practically no impression on the Apostolic Fathers as a whole. Gentile Christians had not felt the fang of the Law as the ex-Pharisee had occasion to feel it. Even if first trained in the Hellenistic synagogues of the Dispersion, as was often the case, they apprehended the Law on its more helpful and less exacting side, and had not been brought “by the Law to die unto the Law,” that they might “live unto God.” The result was too great a continuity between their religious conceptions before and after embracing the Gospel. Thus the latter seemed to them simply to bring forgiveness of past sins for Christ’s sake, and then an enhanced moral responsibility to the New Law revealed in Him. Hence a new sort of legalism, known to recent writers as Moralism, underlies much of the piety of the Apostolic Fathers, though Ignatius is quite free from it, while Polycarp and “Barnabas” are less under its influence than are the Didachē, Clement, the Homilist and Hermas. It conceives salvation as a “wages” (μισθός) to be earned or forfeited; and regards certain good works, such as prayer, fasting, alms—especially the last—as efficacious to cancel sins. The reality of this tendency, particularly at Rome, betrays itself in Hermas, who teaches the supererogatory merit of alms gained by the self-denial of fasting (Sim. v. 3. 3 ff.). Marcion’s reaction, too, against the Judaic temper in the Church as a whole, in the interests of an extravagant Paulinism, while it suggests that Paul’s doctrines of grace generally were inadequately realized in the sub-apostolic age, points also to the prevalence of such moralism in particular.

(C) In attempting a final estimate of the value of the Apostolic Fathers for the historian to-day, we may sum up under these heads: ecclesiastical, theological, religious. (a) As a mine of materials for reconstructing the history of Church institutions, they are invaluable, and that largely in virtue of their spontaneous and “esoteric” character, with no view to the public generally or to posterity. (b) Theologically, as a stage in the 204 history of Christian doctrine, their value is as great negatively as positively. Impressive as is their witness to the persistence of the Apostolic teaching in its essential features, amidst all personal and local variations, perhaps the most striking thing about these writings is the degree in which they fail to appreciate certain elements of the Apostolic teaching as embodied in the New Testament, and those its higher and more distinctively Christian elements.3 This negative aspect has a twofold bearing. Firstly, it suggests the supernormal level to which the Apostolic consciousness was raised at a bound by the direct influence of the Founder of Christianity, and justifies the marking-off of the Apostolic writings as a Canon, or body of Christian classics of unique religious authority. To this principle Marcion’s Pauline Canon is a witness, though in too one-sided a spirit. Secondly, it means that the actual development of ecclesiastical doctrine began, not from the Apostolic consciousness itself, but from a far lower level, that of the inadequate consciousness of the sub-apostolic Church, even when face to face with their written words. This theological “retrogression” is of much significance for the history of dogma, (c) On the other hand, there is great religious and moral continuity, beneath even theological discontinuity, in the life working below all conscious apprehension of the deeper ideas involved (E. von Dobschutz, Christian Life in the Primitive Church, 1905). There is continuity in character; the Apostolic Fathers strike us as truly good men, with a goodness raised to a new type and power. This is what the Gospel of Christ aims chiefly at producing as its proper fruit; and the Apostolic Fathers would have desired no better record than that they were themselves genuine “epistles of Christ.”

APOSTOLICI, Apostolic Brethren, or Apostles, the names given to various Christian heretics, whose common doctrinal feature was an ascetic rigidity of morals, which made them reject property and marriage. The earliest Apostolici appeared in Phrygia, Cilicia, Pisidia and Pamphylia towards the end of the 2nd century or the beginning of the 3rd. According to the information given by Epiphanius (Haer. 61) about the doctrines of these heretics, it is evident that they were connected with the Encratites and the Tatianians. They condemned individual property, hence the name sometimes given to them of Apotactites or Renuntiatores. They preserved an absolute chastity and abstained from wine and meat. They refused to admit into their sect those Christians whom the fear of martyrdom had once restored to paganism. As late as the 4th century St Basil (Can. 1 and 47) knew some Apostolici. After that period they disappeared, either becoming completely extinct, or being confounded with other sects (see St Augustine, Haer. 40; John of Damascus, Haer. 61).

Failing a more exact designation, the name of Apostolici has been given to certain groups of Latin heretics of the 12th century. It is the second of the two sects of Cologne (the first being composed very probably of Cathari) that is referred to in the letter addressed in 1146 by Everwin, provost of Steinfeld, to St Bernard (Mabillon, Vet. Anal. iii. 452). They condemned marriage (save, perhaps, first marriages), the eating of meat, baptism of children, veneration of saints, fasting, prayers for the dead and belief in purgatory, denied transubstantiation, declared the Catholic priesthood worthless, and considered the whole church of their time corrupted by the “negotia saecularia” which absorbed all its zeal (of. St Bernard, Serm. 65 and 66 in Cantic.). They do not seem to have been known as Apostles or Apostolici: St Bernard, in fact, asks his hearers: “Quo nomine istos titulove censebis?” (Serm. 66 in Cantic.). Under this designation, too, are included the heretics of Perigueux in France, alluded to in the letter of a certain monk Heribert (Mabillon, Vet. Anal. iii. 467). Heribert says merely: “Se dicunt apostolicam vitam ducere.” It is possible that they were Henricians (see Henry of Lausanne). During his mission in the south-east of France in 1146-1147 St Bernard still met disciples of Henry of Lausanne in the environs of Périgueux. The heretics of whom Heribert speaks condemned riches, denied the value of the sacraments and of good works, ate no meat, drank no wine and rejected the veneration of images. Their leader, named Pons, gathered round him nobles, priests, monks and nuns.

In the second half of the 13th century appeared in Italy the Order of the Apostles or Apostle Brethren (see especially the Chron. of Fra Salimbene). This was a product of the mystic fermentation which proceeded from exalted Franciscanism and from Joachimism (see Fraticelli and Joachim). It presents great analogies with groups of the same character, e.g. Sachets, Bizocchi, Flagellants, &c. The order of the Apostles was founded about 1260 by a young workman from the environs of Parma, Gerard Segarelli, who had sought admission unsuccessfully to the Franciscan order. To make his life conform to that of Christ, his contemporaries say that he had himself circumcised, wrapped in swaddling clothes and laid in a cradle, and that he then, clad in a white robe and bare-footed, walked through the streets of Parma crying “Penitenz agite!” (“Poenitentiam agite!”). He was soon followed by a throng of men and women, peasants and mechanics. All had to live in absolute poverty, chastity and idleness. They begged, and preached penitence. Opizo, bishop of Parma, protected them until they caused trouble in his diocese. Their diffusion into several countries of Christendom disturbed Pope Honorius IV., who in 1286 ordered them to adhere to an already recognized rule. On their refusal, the pope condemned them to banishment and Opizo imprisoned Segarelli. The councils of Würzburg (1287) and Chichester (1289) took measures against the Apostles of Germany and England. But in 1291 the sect reappeared, sensibly increased, and Pope Nicholas IV. published anew the bull of Honorius IV. From that day the Apostles, regarded as rebels, were persecuted pitilessly. Four were burned in 1294, and Segarelli, as a relapsed heretic, went to the stake at Parma in 1300.

They had had close relations with the dissident Franciscans, but the Spirituals often disavowed them, especially when the sect, which in Segarelli’s time had had no very precise doctrinal character, became with Dolcino frankly heterodox. Dolcino of Novara was brought up at Vercelli, and had been an Apostle since 1291. Thrice he fell into the hands of the Inquisition, and thrice recanted. But immediately after Segarelli’s death he wrote an epistle, soon followed by a second, in which he declared that the third Joachimite age began with Segarelli and that Frederick of Sicily was the expected conqueror (Hist. Dulcini and Addit. ad Hist. Dulcini in Muratori, Scriptores, vol. ix.). He gave himself out as an angel sent from God to elucidate the prophecies. Soon he founded an Apostolic congregation at whose head he placed himself. Under him were his four lieutenants, his “mystic sister,” Margherita di Franck, and 4000 disciples. He taught almost the same principles of devotion as Segarelli, but the Messianic character which he attributed to himself, the announcement of a communistic millennial kingdom, and, besides, an aggressive anti-sacerdotalism, gave to Dolcino’s sect a clearly marked character, analogous only to the theocratic community of the Anabaptists of Münster in the 16th century. On the 5th of June 1305 Pope Clement V., recognizing the impotence of the ordinary methods of repression, issued bulls for preaching a crusade against the Dolcinists. But four crusades, directed by the bishop of Vercelli, were required to reduce the little army of the heresiarch, entrenched in the mountains in the neighbourhood of Vercelli. Not till the 23rd 205 of March 1307 were the sectaries definitively overcome. The Catholic crusaders seized Dolcino in his entrenchments on Mount Rubello, and the pope at once announced the happy event to King Philip the Fair. At Vercelli Dolcino suffered a horrible punishment. He was torn in pieces with red-hot pincers—the torture lasting an entire day—while Margherita was burned at a slow fire. Dante mentions Dolcino’s name (Inferno, c. xxviii.), and his memory is not yet completely effaced in the province of Novara. The Apostles continued their propaganda in Italy, Languedoc, Spain and Germany. In turn they were condemned by the councils of Cologne (1306), Treves (1310) and Spoleto (1311). The inquisitor of Languedoc, Bernard Gui, persecuted them unremittingly (see Gui’s Practica Inquisitionis). From 1316 to 1323 the condemnations of Apostles increased at Avignon and Toulouse. They disappeared, however, at a comparatively late date from those regions (council of Lavaur, 1368; council of Narbonne, 1374). In Germany two Apostles were burned at Lübeck and Wismar at the beginning of the 15th century (1402-1403) by the inquisitor Eylard.

Several controversialists, including Gotti, Krohn and Stockmann, have mentioned among the innumerable sects that have sprung from Anabaptism a group of individuals whose open-air preaching and rigorous practice of poverty gained them the name of Apostolici. These must be carefully distinguished from the Apostoolians, Mennonites of Frisia, who followed the teachings of the pastor Samuel Apostool (1638-beginning of 18th century). In the Mennonite church they represent the rigid, conservative party, as opposed to the Galenists, who inclined towards the Arminian latitudinarianism and admitted into their community all those who led a virtuous life, whatever their doctrinal tendencies.

APOSTOLIC MAJESTY, a title borne by the kings of Hungary. About A.D. 1000 it was conferred by Pope Silvester II. upon St Stephen (975-1038), the first Christian king of Hungary, in return for his zeal in seeking the conversion of the heathen. It was renewed by Pope Clement XIII. in 1758 in favour of the empress Maria Theresa and her descendants. The emperor of Austria bears the title of apostolic king of Hungary.

APOSTOLIUS, MICHAEL (d. c. 1480), a Greek theologian and rhetorician of the 15th century. When, in 1453, the Turks conquered Constantinople, his native city, he fled to Italy, and there obtained the protection of Cardinal Bessarion. But engaging in the great dispute that then raged between the upholders of Aristotle and Plato, his zeal for the latter led him to speak so contemptuously of the more popular philosopher and of his defender, Theodorus Gaza, that he fell under the severe displeasure of his patron. He afterwards retired to Crete, where he earned a scanty living by teaching and by copying manuscripts. Many of his copies are still to be found in the libraries of Europe. One of them, the Icones of Philostratus at Bologna, bears the inscription: “The king of the poor of this world has written this book for his living.” Apostolius died about 1480, leaving two sons, Aristobulus Apostolius and Arsenius. The latter became bishop of Malvasia (Monemvasia) in the Morea.

APOSTROPHE (Gr. ἀποστροφή, turning away; the final e being sounded), the name given to an exclamatory rhetorical figure of speech, when a speaker or writer breaks off and addresses some one directly in the vocative. The same word (representing, through the French, the Greek ἀπόστροφος προσῳδία, the accent of elision) means also the sign (’) for the omission of a letter or letters, e.g. in “don’t.” In physiology, “apostrophe” is used more precisely in connexion with its literal meaning of “turning away,” e.g. for movement away from the light, in the case of the accumulation of chlorophyll-corpuscles on the cells of leaves.

APOTACTITES, or Apotactici (from Gr. ἀποτακτός, set apart), a sect of early Christians, who renounced all their worldly possessions. (See Apostolici ad init.)

APOTHECARY (from the Lat. apothecarius, a keeper of an apotheca, Gr. ἀποθήκη, a store), a word used by Galen to denote the repository where his medicines were kept, now obsolete in its original sense. An apothecary was one who prepared, sold and prescribed drugs, but the preparing and selling of drugs prescribed by others has now passed into the hands of duly qualified and authorized persons termed “chemists and druggists,” while the apothecary, by modern legislation, has become a general medical practitioner, and the word itself, when used at all, is applied, more particularly in the United States and in Scotland, to those who in England are called “pharmaceutical chemists.” The Apothecaries’ Society of London is one of the corporations of that city, and both by royal charters and acts of parliament exercises the power of granting licences to practise medicine. The members of this society do not possess and never have possessed any exclusive power to deal in or sell drugs; and until 1868 any person whatever might open what is called a chemist’s shop, and deal in drugs and poisons. In that year, however, the Pharmacy Act was passed, which prohibits any person from engaging in this business without being registered.

From early records we learn that the different branches of the medical profession were not regularly distinguished till the reign of Henry VIII., when separate duties were assigned to them, and peculiar privileges were granted to each. In 1518 the physicians of London were incorporated, and the barber-surgeons in 1540. But, independently of the physicians and the surgeons, there were a great number of irregular practitioners, who were more or less molested by their legitimate rivals, and it became necessary to pass an act in 1543 for their protection and toleration. As many of these practitioners kept shops for the sale of medicines, the term “apothecary” was used to designate their calling.

In April 1606 James I. incorporated the apothecaries as one of the city companies, uniting them with the grocers. On their charter being renewed in 1617 they were formed into a separate corporation, under the title of the “Apothecaries of the City of London.” These apothecaries appear to have prescribed medicines in addition to dispensing them, and to have claimed an ancient right of acting in this double capacity; and it may be mentioned that Henry VIII., after the grant of the charter to the College of Physicians, appointed an apothecary to the Princess Mary, who was delicate and unhealthy, at a salary of 40 marks a year, “pro meliore cura, et consideratione sanitatis suae.” During the 17th century, however, there arose a warm contest between the physicians and the apothecaries,—the former accusing the latter of usurping their province, and the latter continuing and justifying the usurpation until the dispute was finally set at rest by a judgment of the House of Lords in 1703 (Rose v. College of Physicians, 5 Bro. P. C. 553), when it was decided that the duty of the apothecary consisted not only in compounding and dispensing, but also in directing and ordering the remedies employed in the treatment of disease. In 1722 an act was obtained empowering the Apothecaries’ Company to visit the shops of all apothecaries practising in London, and to destroy such drugs as they found unfit for use. In 1748 great additional powers were given to the company by an act authorizing them to appoint a board of ten examiners, without whose licence no person should be allowed to dispense medicines in London, or within a circuit of 7 m. round it. In 1815, however, an act of parliament was passed which gave the Apothecaries’ Society a new position, empowering a board, consisting of twelve of their members, to examine and license all apothecaries throughout England and Wales. It also enacted that, from the 1st of August of that year, no persons except those who were so licensed should have the right to act as apothecaries, and it gave the society the power of prosecuting those who practised 206 without such licence. But the act expressly exempted from prosecution all persons who were then in actual practice, and it distinctly excluded from its operation all persons pursuing the calling of chemists and druggists. It was also provided that the act should in no way interfere with the rights or privileges of the English universities, or of the English College of Surgeons or the College of Physicians; and indeed a clause imposed severe penalties on any apothecaries who should refuse to compound and dispense medicines on the order of a physician, legally qualified to act as such. It is therefore clear that the act contemplated the creation of a class of practitioners who, while having the right to practise medicine, should assist and co-operate with the physicians and surgeons.

Before this act came into operation the education of the medical practitioners of England and Wales was entirely optional on their own part, and although many of them possessed degrees or licences from the universities or colleges, the greater number possessed no such qualification, and many of them were wholly illiterate and uneducated. The court of examiners of the Apothecaries’ Society, being empowered to enforce the acquisition of a sufficient medical education upon its future licentiates, specified from time to time the courses of lectures or terms of hospital practice to be attended by medical students before their examination, and in the progress of years regular schools of medicine were organized throughout England.

As it was found that, notwithstanding the stringent regulations as to medical acquirements, the candidates were in many instances deficient in preliminary education, the court of examiners instituted, about the year 1850, a preliminary examination in arts as a necessary and indispensable prerequisite to the medical curriculum, and this provision has been so expanded that, at the present day, all medical students in the United Kingdom are compelled to pass a preliminary examination in arts, unless they hold a university degree. An act of parliament, passed in 1858, and known as the Medical Act, made very little alteration in the powers exercised by the Apothecaries’ Society, and indeed it confirmed and in some degree amplified them, for whereas by the act of 1815, the licentiates of the society were authorized to practise as such only in England and Wales, the new measure gave them the same right in Scotland and Ireland. The Medical Act 1886 extended the qualifications necessary for registration under the medical acts, by making it necessary to pass a qualifying examination in medicine, surgery and midwifery. (See Medical Education.)

An act, passed in 1874, related exclusively to the Apothecaries’ Society, and is termed the Apothecaries’ Act Amendment Act. By this measure some provisions of the act of 1815, which had become obsolete or unsuitable, were repealed, and powers were given to the society to unite or co-operate with other medical licensing bodies in granting licences to practise. The act of 1815 had made it compulsory on all candidates for a licence to have served an apprenticeship of five years to an apothecary, and although by the interpretation of the court of examiners of the society this term really included the whole period of medical study, yet the regulation was felt as a grievance by many members of the medical profession. It was accordingly repealed, and no apprenticeship is now necessary. The restriction of the choice of examiners to the members of the society was also repealed, and the society was given the power (which it did not before possess) to strike off from the list of its licentiates the names of disreputable persons. The act of 1874 also specified that the society was not deprived of any right or obligation they may have to admit women to examination, and to enter their names on the list of licentiates if they acquit themselves satisfactorily.

The Apothecaries’ Society is governed by a master, two wardens and twenty-two assistants. The members are divided into Three grades, yeomanry or freemen, the livery, and the court. Women are not, however, admitted to the freedom. The hall of the society, situated in Water Lane, London, and covering about three-quarters of an acre, was acquired in 1633. It was destroyed by the great fire, but was rebuilt about ten years later and enlarged in 1786. This is the only property possessed by the society. In 1673, the society established a botanic and physic garden at Chelsea, and in 1722 Sir Hans Sloane, who had become the ground owner, gave it to the society on the condition of presenting annually to the Royal Society fifty dried specimens of plants till the number should reach 2000. This condition was fulfilled in 1774. Owing to the heavy cost of maintenance and other reasons, the “physic garden” was handed over in 1902, with the consent of the Charity Commissioners, to a committee of management, to be maintained in the interests of botanical study and research.

APOTHEOSIS (Gr. ἀποθεοῦν, to make a god, to deify), literally deification. The term properly implies a clear polytheistic conception of gods in contrast with men, while it recognizes that some men cross the dividing line. It is characteristic of polytheism to blur that line in several ways. Thus the ancient Greek religion was especially disposed to belief in heroes and demigods. Founders of cities, and even of colonies, received worship; the former are, generally speaking, mythical personages and, in strictness, heroes. But the worship after death of historical persons, such as Lycurgus, or worship of the living as true deities, e.g. Lysander and Philip II. of Macedon, occurred sporadically even before Alexander’s conquests brought Greek life into contact with oriental traditions. It was inevitable, too, that ancient monarchies should enlist polytheistic conceptions of divine or half-divine men in support of the dynasties; “Seu deos regesve canit deorum Sanguinem,” Horace (Odes, iv. 2, II. 12, 13) writes of Pindar; though the reference is to myths, yet the phrase is significant. In the East all such traits are exaggerated, a result perhaps rather of the statecraft than of the religions of Egypt and Persia. Whatever part vanity or the flattery of courtiers may have played with others, or with Alexander, it is significant that the dynasties of Alexander’s various successors all claim divine honours of some sort (see Ptolemies, Seleucid Dynasty, &c.). Theocritus (Idyll 17) hails Ptolemy Philadelphus as a demigod, and speaks of his father as seated among the gods along with Alexander. Ancestor worship, or reverence for the dead, was a third factor. It may work even in Cicero’s determination that his daughter should enjoy “ἀποθέωσις”— as he writes to Atticus—or receive the “honour” of consecratia (fragment of his De Consolatione). Lastly, we need not speak of mere sycophancy. Yet it was common; Verres was worshipped before he was impeached!

The Romans had, up to the end of the Republic, accepted only one official apotheosis; the god Quirinus, whatever his original meaning, having been identified with Romulus. But the emperor Augustus carried on the tradition of ancient statecraft by having Julius Caesar recognized as a god (divus Julius), the first of a new class of deities proper (divi). The tradition was steadily followed and was extended to some ladies of the imperial family and even to imperial favourites. Worship of an emperor during his lifetime, except as the worship of his genius, was, save in the cases of Caligula and Domitian, confined to the provinces. Apotheosis after his death, being in the hands of the senate, did not at once cease, even when Christianity was officially adopted. The Latin term is consecratio, which of course has a variety of senses, including simple burial. (Inscription in G. Boissier, La Religion romaine; Renier, Inscriptions d’Algiers, 2510.) The Greek term Apotheosis, probably a coinage of the Hellenistic epoch, becomes more nearly technical for the deification of dead emperors. But it is still used simply for the erection of tombs (clearly so in some Greek inscriptions, Corpus Inscript. Graec. 2831, 2832, quoted in Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. Apotheosis). Possibly there is a trace of ancestor worship even here; but the two usages have diverged. The squib of the philosopher Seneca on the memory of Claudius (d. A.D. 54), Apocolocyntosis (“pumpkinification”), is evidence that, as early as Seneca’s lifetime, apotheosis was in use for the recognition of a departed emperor as a god. It also indicates how much contempt might be associated with this pretended worship. The people, says 207 Suetonius (Jul. Caes. c. 88), fully believed in the divinity of Julius Caesar, hinting at the same time that this was by no means the case with the majority of the apotheoses subsequently decreed by the senate. Yet we learn from Capitolinus that Marcus Aurelius was still worshipped as a household divinity in the time of Diocletian, and was believed to impart revelations in dreams (Vit. M. Ant. c. 18). Antinous, the favourite of Hadrian, was adored in Egypt a century after his death (Origen, Contra Celsum, iii. 36), though, according to Boissier, his worship never had official sanction. The ceremonies attendant on an imperial apotheosis are very fully described by Herodianus (bk. iv. c. 2) on occasion of the obsequies of Severus, which he appears to have witnessed. The most significant was the liberation, at the moment of kindling the funeral pyre, of an eagle which was supposed to bear the emperor’s soul to heaven. Sharp-sighted persons had actually beheld the ascension of Augustus (Suet. August, c. 100), and of Drusilla, sister of Caligula. Representations of apotheoses occur on several works of art; the most important are the apotheosis of Homer on a relief in the Townley collection of the British Museum, that of Titus on the arch of Titus, and that of Augustus on a magnificent cameo in the Louvre.

In China at the present day many Taoist gods are (or are given out as) men deified for service to the state. This again may be statecraft. In India, the (still unexplained) rise of the doctrine of transmigration hindered belief. Apotheosis can mean nothing to those who hold that a man may be reborn as a god, but still needs redemption, and that men on earth may win redemption, if they are brave enough. Curiously, Buddhism itself is ruled by the ghost or shadowy remainder of belief in transmigration—Karma.

Apotheosis may also be used in wider senses. (a) Some (e.g. Herbert Spencer) hold that most gods are deified men, and most myths historical traditions which have been grotesquely distorted. This theory is known as Euhemerism (see Euhemerus). It is needless to say that the attitude of those holding the Euhemerist theory is at the farthest pole from belief in apotheosis. According to the latter, some men may become gods. According to the former, all gods are but men; or, some men have been erroneously supposed to become gods. The Euhemerist theory mainly appeals to ancestor worship—a fact of undoubted importance in the history of religion, especially in China and in ancient Rome. In India, too, a dead person treated with funeral honours becomes a guardian spirit—if neglected, a tormenting demon. But whether the great gods of polytheism were really transfigured ancestors is very doubtful. (b) Again, there is a tendency to offer something like worship to the founders of religions. Thus more than human honour is paid to Zoroaster and Buddha and even to the founders of systems not strictly religious, e.g. to Confucius and Auguste Comte. It is noticeable that this kind of worship is not accorded in rigidly monotheistic systems, e.g. to Moses and Mahomet. Nor is it accurate to speak of apotheosis in cases where the founder is in his lifetime regarded as the incarnation of a god (cf. Ali among Shi’ite Mahommedans; the Băb in Babism; the Druse Hakim). Most Christians on this ground repudiate the application of the term to the worship of Jesus Christ. Curiously, Apotheosis is used by the Latin Christian poet, Prudentius (c. 400), as the title of a poem defending orthodox views on the person of Christ and other points of doctrine—the affectation of a decadent age. (c) The worship paid to Saints, in those Christian churches which admit it, is formally distinguished as dulia (δουλεία) from true worship or latria (λατρεία). Even the Virgin Mary, though she is styled Mother of God and Queen of Heaven, receives only dulia or at most hyperdulia.

APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS, the general name given to a vast system of elevations in North America, partly in Canada, but mostly in the United States, extending as a zone, from 100 to 300 m. wide, from Newfoundland, Gaspé Peninsula and New Brunswick, 1500 m. south-westward to central Alabama. The whole system may be divided into three great sections: the Northern, from Newfoundland to the Hudson river; the Central, from the Hudson Valley to that of New river (Great Kanawha), in Virginia and West Virginia; and the Southern, from New river onwards. The northern section includes the Shickshock Mountains and Notre Dame Range in Quebec, scattered elevations in Maine, the White Mountains and the Green Mountains; the central comprises, besides various minor groups, the Valley Ridges between the Front of the Allegheny Plateau and the Great Appalachian Valley, the New York-New Jersey Highlands and a large portion of the Blue Ridge; and the southern consists of the prolongation of the Blue Ridge, the Unaka Range, and the Valley Ridges adjoining the Cumberland Plateau, with some lesser ranges.

The Chief Summits.—The Appalachian belt includes, with the ranges enumerated above, the plateaus sloping southward to the Atlantic Ocean in New England, and south-eastward to the border of the coastal plain through the central and southern Atlantic states; and on the north-west, the Allegheny and Cumberland plateaus declining toward the Great Lakes and the interior plains. A remarkable feature of the belt is the longitudinal chain of broad valleys—the Great Appalachian Valley—which, in the southerly sections divides the mountain system into two subequal portions, but in the northernmost lies west of all the ranges possessing typical Appalachian features, and separates them from the Adirondack group. The mountain system has no axis of dominating altitudes, but in every portion the summits rise to rather uniform heights, and, especially in the central section, the various ridges and intermontane valleys have the same trend as the system itself. None of the summits reaches the region of perpetual snow. Mountains of the Long Range in Newfoundland reach heights of nearly 2000 ft. In the Shickshocks the higher summits rise to about 4000 ft. elevation. In Maine four peaks exceed 3000 ft., including Katahdin (5200 ft.), Mount Washington, in the White Mountains (6293 ft.), Adams (5805), Jefferson (5725), Clay (5554), Monroe (5390), Madison (5380), Lafayette (5269); and a number of summits rise above 4000 ft. In the Green Mountains the highest point, Mansfield, is 4364 ft.; Lincoln (4078), Killington (4241), Camel Hump (4088); and a number of other heights exceed 3000 ft. The Catskills are not properly included in the system. The Blue Ridge, rising in southern Pennsylvania and there known as South Mountain, attains in that state elevations of about 2000 ft.; southward to the Potomac its altitudes diminish, but 30 m. beyond again reach 2000 ft. In the Virginia Blue Ridge the following are the highest peaks east of New river: Mount Weather (about 1850 ft.), Mary’s Rock (3523), Peaks of Otter (4001 and 3875), Stony Man (4031), Hawks Bill (4066). In Pennsylvania the summits of the Valley Ridges rise generally to about 2000 ft., and in Maryland Eagle Rock and Dans Rock are conspicuous points reaching 3162 ft. and 2882 ft. above the sea. On the same side of the Great Valley, south of the Potomac, are the Pinnacle (3007 ft.) and Pidgeon Roost (3400 ft.). In the southern section of the Blue Ridge are Grandfather Mountain (5964 ft.), with three other summits above 5000, and a dozen more above 4000. The Unaka Ranges (including the Black and Smoky Mountains) have eighteen peaks higher than 5000 ft., and eight surpassing 6000 ft. In the Black Mountains, Mitchell (the culminating point of the whole system) attains an altitude of 6711 ft., Balsam Cone, 6645, Black Brothers, 6690, and 6620, and Hallback, 6403. In the Smoky Mountains we have Clingman’s Peak (6611), Guyot (6636), Alexander (6447), Leconte (6612), Curtis (6588), with several others above 6000 and many higher than 5000.

In spite of the existence of the Great Appalachian Valley, the master streams are transverse to the axis of the system. The main watershed follows a tortuous course which crosses the mountainous belt just north of New river in Virginia; south of this the rivers head in the Blue Ridge, cross the higher Unakas, receive important tributaries from the Great Valley, and traversing the Cumberland Plateau in spreading gorges, escape by way of the Cumberland and Tennessee rivers to the Ohio and Mississippi, and thus to the Gulf of Mexico; in the central section the rivers, rising in or beyond the Valley Ridges, flow through 208 great gorges (water gaps) to the Great Valley, and by south-easterly courses across the Blue Ridge to tidal estuaries penetrating the coastal plain; in the northern section the water-parting lies on the inland side of the mountainous belt, the main lines of drainage running from north to south.

Geology.—The rocks of the Appalachian belt fall naturally into two divisions; ancient (pre-Cambrian) crystallines, including marbles, schists, gneisses, granites and other massive igneous rocks, and a great succession of Paleozoic sediments. The crystallines are confined to the portion of the belt east of the Great Valley where Paleozoic rocks are always highly metamorphosed and occur for the most part in limited patches, excepting in New England and Canada, where they assume greater areal importance, and are besides very generally intruded by granites. The Paleozoic sediments, ranging in age from Cambrian to Permian, occupy the Great Valley, the Valley Ridges and the plateaus still farther west. They are rarely metamorphosed to the point of recrystallization, though locally shales are altered to roofing slates, sandstones are indurated, limestones slightly marblized, and coals, originally bituminous, are changed to anthracite in northern Pennsylvania, and to graphite in Rhode Island. Igneous intrusions consist only of unimportant dikes of trap. The most striking and uniformly characteristic geologic feature of the mountains is their internal structure, consisting of innumerable parallel, long and narrow folds, always closely appressed in the eastern part of any cross-section (Piedmont Plateau to Great Valley), less so along a central zone (Great Valley and Valley Ridges), and increasingly open on the west (Allegheny and Cumberland Plateaus). Asymmetry of the folds is a marked characteristic in the zones of closer folding, the anticlines having long gently inclined easterly limbs, and short, steep and even overturned limbs upon the west. The effect of such folds is often exaggerated by thrusts, and faulting of this sort is prominent in the southern section, where the existence of over-thrusts measured by several miles has been established.

What may be termed the ancestral Appalachian system was formed during the post-carboniferous revolution, though certain of its elements had been previously outlined, and perhaps at different dates. Folding of the rocks resulted from the operation of great compressive forces acting tangentially to the figure of the earth. Extensive and deep-seated crumpling was necessarily accompanied by vertical uplift throughout the zone affected, but once at least since their birth the mountains have been worn down to a lowland, and the mountains of to-day are the combined product of subsequent uplift of a different sort, and dissection by erosion. Produced by long-continued subaerial decay and erosion, in later Cretaceous times this lowland extended from the Atlantic Ocean well toward the interior of North America; since then the whole continent has been generally elevated, and by successive steps the Appalachian belt has been raised to form a wide but relatively low arch. The crosswise courses of the greater rivers result from the rivers being older than the mountains, which indeed have been produced by circumdenudation. The master streams of the present have inherited their channels from the drainage systems of the Cretaceous lowland, and though raised athwart the courses of the lowland trunk streams the great arch was developed so slowly that these channels could be maintained through pari passu deepening. Former tributaries have given place to others developed with reference to the distribution of more or less easily eroded strata, the present longitudinal valleys being determined by the out-crop of soft shales or soluble limestones, and the parallel ridges upheld by hard sandstones or schists. Parallelism of mountain ridges and intervening valleys is thus attributable to the folding of the rocks, but the origin of the interior structure of the mountains is to be kept distinct from the origin of the mountains as features of topography.

Flora and Fauna.—Much of the region is covered with forest yielding quantities of valuable timber, especially in Canada and northern New England. The most valuable trees for lumber are spruce, white pine, hemlock, cedar, white birch, ash, maple and basswood; all excepting pine and hemlock and poplar in addition are ground into wood pulp for the manufacture of paper. In the central and southern parts of the belt oak and hickory constitute valuable hard woods, and certain varieties of the former furnish quantities of tan bark. The tulip tree produces a good clear lumber known as white wood or poplar, and is also a source of pulp. In the south both white and yellow pine abounds. Many flowering and fruit-bearing shrubs of the heath family add to the beauty of the mountainous districts, rhododendron and kalmia often forming impenetrable thickets. Bears, mountain lions (pumas), wild cats (lynx) and wolves haunt the more remote fastnesses of the mountains; foxes abound; deer are found in many districts and moose in the north.

Influence on History.—For a century the Appalachians were a barrier to the westward expansion of the English colonies; the continuity of the system, the bewildering multiplicity of its succeeding ridges, the tortuous courses and roughness of its transverse passes, a heavy forest and dense undergrowth all conspired to hold the settlers on the seaward-sloping plateaus and coastal plains. Only by way of the Hudson and Mohawk valleys, and round about the southern termination of the system were there easy routes to the interior of the country, and these were long closed by hostile aborigines and jealous French or Spanish colonists. In eastern Pennsylvania the Great Valley was accessible by reason of a broad gateway between the end of South Mountain and the Highlands, and here in the Lebanon Valley settled German Moravians, whose descendants even now retain the peculiar patois known as “Pennsylvania Dutch.” These were late comers to the New World forced to the frontier to find unclaimed lands. With their followers of both German and Scotch-Irish origin, they worked their way southward and soon occupied all of the Virginia Valley and the upper reaches of the Great Valley tributaries of the Tennessee. By 1755 the obstacle to westward expansion had been thus reduced by half; outposts of the English colonists had penetrated the Allegheny and Cumberland plateaus, threatening French monopoly in the transmontane region, and a conflict became inevitable. Making common cause against the French to determine the control of the Ohio valley, the unsuspected strength of the colonists was revealed, and the successful ending of the French and Indian War extended England’s territory to the Mississippi. To this strength the geographic isolation enforced by the Appalachian mountains had been a prime contributor. The confinement of the colonies between an ocean and a mountain wall led to the fullest occupation of the coastal border of the continent, which was possible under existing conditions of agriculture, conducing to a community of purpose, a political and commercial solidarity, which would not otherwise have been developed. As early as 1700 it was possible to ride from Portland, Maine, to southern Virginia, sleeping each night at some considerable village. In contrast to this complete industrial occupation, the French territory was held by a small and very scattered population, its extent and openness adding materially to the difficulties of a disputed tenure. Bearing the brunt of this contest as they did, the colonies were undergoing preparation for the subsequent struggle with the home government. Unsupported by shipping, the American armies fought toward the sea with the mountains at their back protecting them against Indians leagued with the British. The few settlements beyond the Great Valley were free for self-defence because debarred from general participation in the conflict by reason of their position.

APPANAGE, or Apanage (a French word from the late Lat. apanagium, formed from apanare, i.e. panem porrigere, to give bread, i.e. sustenance), in its original sense, the means of subsistence given by parents to their younger children as distinct 209 from the rights secured to the eldest born by the custom of primogeniture. In its modern usage it is practically confined to the money endowment given to the younger children of reigning or mediatized houses in Germany and Austria, which reverts to the state or to the head of the family on the extinction of the line of the original grantee. In English history the system of appanages never played any great part, and the term is now properly applied only to the appanages of the crown: the duchy of Cornwall, assigned to the king’s eldest son at birth, or on his father’s accession to the crown, and the duchy of Lancaster. In the history of France, however, the appanage was a very important factor. The word denotes in very early French law the portion of lands or money given by fathers and mothers to their sons or daughters on marriage, and usually connotes a renunciation by the latter of any future inheritance; or it may denote the portion given by the eldest son to his brothers and sisters when he was sole inheritor. The word apanage is still employed in this sense in French official texts of some Customs; but it was in old public law that it received its definite meaning and importance. Under the kings of the third dynasty, the division of the kingdom among the sons of the dead monarch which had characterized the Merovingian and Carolingian dynasties, ceased. The eldest son alone succeeded to the crown; but at the same time a custom was established by which the king made territorial provision suitable to their rank for his other children or for his brothers and sisters; custom forbade their being left landless. Lands and lordships thus bestowed constituted the appanages, which interfered so greatly with the formation of ancient France. While the persevering policy of the Capets, which aimed at reuniting the great fiefs, duchies, countships, baronies, &c., to the domain of the crown, gradually reconstructed for their benefit a territorial sovereignty over France, the institution of the appanage periodically subtracted large portions from it. Louis XI., in particular, had to struggle against the appanaged nobles. The old law, however, never abolished this institution. The edict of Moulins (1566) maintained it, as one of the exceptions to the inalienability of the crown-lands; only it was then decided that daughters of France should be appanaged in money, or that if, in default of coin, lands were assigned to them, these lands should be redeemable by the crown in perpetuity. The efforts of the kings to minimize this evil, and of the old jurisprudence to deal with the matter, resulted in two expedients: (1) the reversion of the appanage to the crown was secured as far as possible, being declared inalienable and transmissible only to male descendants in the male line of the person appanaged; (2) originally the person appanaged had possessed all the rights of a duke or count—that is to say, in the middle ages nearly all the attributes of sovereignty; the more important of these attributes were now gradually reserved to the monarch, including public authority over the inhabitants of the appanage in all essential matters. However, it is evident from the letters of appanage, dated April 1771, in favour of the count of Provence, how many functions of public authority an appanaged person still held. The Constituent Assembly, by the law dated the 22nd of November 1790, decided that in future there should be no appanages in real estate, and that younger sons of monarchs, married and over twenty-five years of age, should be provided for by yearly grants (rentes apanagères) from the public funds. The laws of the 13th of August and the 21st of December 1790 revoked all the existing appanages, except those of the Luxembourg Palace and the Palais Royal. To each person hitherto appanaged an annual income of one million livres was assigned, and two millions for the brothers of the king. All this came to an end with the monarchy. Napoleon, by the sénatus-consulte of the 30th of January 1810, resolved to create appanages for the emperor’s princely descendants, such appanages to consist for the most part of lands on French soil. The fall of the empire again annulled this enactment. The last appanage known in France was that enjoyed by the house of Orleans. Having been re-established, or recognized as still existing, by the Restoration, it was formally confirmed by the law of the 15th of January 1825. On the accession of Louis Philippe it was united to the national property by the law of the 2nd of March 1832.

APPAREL (from O. Fr. aparail, aparailler, mod. appareil, from Low Lat. adpariculare, to make fit or equal), equipment, outfit, things furnished for the proper performance of anything, now chiefly used of dress. The word is also applied to the “orphreys,” i.e. embroidered strips or borders, on ecclesiastical vestments.

APPARITIONS. An apparition, strictly speaking, is merely an appearance (Lat. apparere, to appear), the result of perception exercised on any stimulus of any of the senses. But in ordinary usage the word apparition denotes a perception (generally through the sense of sight) which cannot, as a rule, be shown to be occasioned by an object in external nature. We say “as a rule” because many so-called apparitions are merely illusions, i.e. misconstructions of the perceptive processes, as when a person in a bad light sees a number of small children leading a horse, and finds, on nearer approach, that he sees two men carrying bee-hives suspended from a pole. Again, Sir Walter Scott’s vision of Byron, then lately dead, proved to be a misconstruction of certain plaids and cloaks hanging in the hall at Abbotsford, or so Sir Walter declared. Had he not discovered the physical basis of this illusion (which, while it lasted, was an apparition, technically speaking), he and others might have thought that it was an apparition in the popular sense of the word, a ghost. In popular phraseology a ghost is understood to be a phantasm produced in some way by the spirit of a dead person, the impression being usually visual, though the ghost, or apparition, may also affect the sense of hearing (by words, knocks, whistles, groans and so forth), or the sense of touch, or of weight, as in the case of the “incubus.” In ordinary speech an apparition of a person not known to the percipient to be dead is called a wraith, in the Highland phrase, a spirit of the living. The terms ghost and wraith involve the hypothesis that the false perceptions are caused by spirits, a survival of the archaic animistic hypothesis (see Animism), an hypothesis as difficult to prove as to disprove. Apparitions, of course, are not confined to anthropomorphic phantasms; we hear of phantom coaches (sometimes seen, but more frequently heard), of phantom dogs, cats, horses, cattle, deer, and even of phantom houses.

Whatever may be the causes of these and other false perceptions,—most curious when the impression is shared by several witnesses,—they may best be considered under the head of hallucination (q.v.). Hallucinations may be pathological, i.e. the result of morbid conditions of brain or nerve, of disease, of fever, of insanity, of alcoholism, of the abuse of drugs. Again, they may be the result of dissociation, or may occur in the borderland of sleep or waking, and in this case they partake of the hallucinatory nature of dreams (q.v.). Again, hallucinations may, once or twice in a lifetime, come into the experience of the sane, the healthy, and, as far as any tests can be applied, of the wide-awake. In such instances the apparition (whether it take the form of a visual phantasm, of a recognized voice, of a touch, or what not) may be coincidental or non-coincidental. The phantasm is called coincidental if it represents a known and distant person who is later found to have been dying or in some other crisis at the moment of the percipient’s experience. When the false perception coincides with nothing of the sort, it is styled non-coincidental. Coincidental apparitions have been explained by the theory of telepathy (q.v.), one mind or brain impressing another in some unknown way so as to beget an hallucinatory apparition or phantasm. On the evidence, so far as it has been collected and analysed, it seems that the mind which, on the hypothesis, begets the hallucinations, usually does so without conscious effort (see Subliminal Self). There are, however, a few cases in which the experiment of begetting, in another, an hallucination from a distance, is said to have been experimentally and consciously made, with success.

If the telepathic theory of coincidental hallucinations be accepted, we have still to account for the much more common 210 non-coincidental apparitions of the living who do not happen to be in any particular crisis. In these instances it cannot be demonstrated that telepathy has not been at work, as when a person is seen at a place which he thought of visiting, but did not visit. F.W. Myers even upheld a theory of psychorhagy, holding that the spirits of some persons have a way of manifesting themselves at a distance by a psychic invasion. This involves, as he remarked, paleolithic psychology, and the old savage doctrine of animism, rather than telepathy (see Myers, Human Personality). Of belief in coincidental hallucinations or wraiths among savages, records are scanty; the belief, however, is found among Maoris and Fuegians (see Lang, Making of Religions). The perception of apparitions of distant but actual scenes and occurrences is usually called clairvoyance (q.v.). The belief is also familiar under the name of second sight (see Second Sight), a term of Scots usage, though the belief in it, and the facts if accepted, are of world-wide diffusion. The apparitions may either represent actual persons and places, or may be symbolical, taking the form of phantasmic lights, coffins, skeletons, shrouds and so forth. Again, the appearances may either represent things, persons and occurrences of the past (see Retrocognition), or of the present (clairvoyance), or of the future (see Premonition). When the apparitions produce themselves in given rooms, houses or localities, and are exhibited to various persons at various times, the locality is popularly said to be haunted by spirits, that is, of the dead, on the animistic hypothesis (see Hauntings). Like the other alleged facts, these are of world-wide diffusion, or the belief in them is world-wide, and peculiar to no race, age, or period of culture. A haunted place is a centre of permanent possibilities of hallucinations, or is believed to be so. A distinct species of hauntings are those in which unexplained sounds and movements of objects, apparently untouched, occur. The German term Poltergeist (q.v.) has been given to the supposed cause of these occurrences where the cause is not ascertained to be sportive imposture. In the performances of modern spiritualists the Poltergeist appears, as it were, to be domesticated, and to come at the call of the medium.

An intermittent kind of ominous haunting attached, not to places, but to families, is that of the banshee (Celtic) or family death omen, such as the white bird of the Oxenhams, the Airlie drummer, the spectral rider of Clan Gilzean, the rappings of the Woodde family. These apparitions, with fairies and djinns (the Arab form of fairy), haunt the borderland between folk-lore and psychical research.

So far we have been concerned with spontaneous apparitions, or with the belief in them. Among induced apparitions may be reckoned the materialized forms of spiritual séances, which have a material basis of veils, false moustaches, wigs and the corpus vile of the medium. It is also possible that mere expectancy and suggestion induce hallucinatory perceptions among the members of the circle. That apparitions of a sort can be induced by hypnotic and posthypnotic suggestion is certain enough (see Hypnotism). Savages produce apparitions in similar ways by suggestion, accompanied by dances, fumigations, darkness, fasting, drugs, and whatever can affect the imaginations of the onlookers (see Magic). Both in savage and civilized life, some persons can provoke themselves into beholding apparitions usually fantastic, but occasionally coincidental, by sedulously staring into any clear deep water, a fragment of rock crystal, a piece of polished basalt or obsidian, a mirror, a ring, a sword blade, or a glass of sherry (see Crystal Gazing). Indeed any object, a wall, the palm of the hand, the shoulder-blade-bone of a sheep, may be, and has been used to this end (see Divination).

Almost all known apparitions may accommodate themselves to one or other of the categories given, whether they be pathological, coincidental or spontaneous, induced, permanently localized, or sporadic.

APPARITOR, or Apparator (Latin for a servant of a public official, from apparere, to attend in public), an attendant who executed the orders of a Roman magistrate; hence a beadle in a university, a pursuivant or herald; particularly, in English ecclesiastical courts, the official who serves the processes of the court and causes defendants to appear by summons.

APPEAL, in law. In the old English common law the term “appeal” was used to describe a process peculiar to English criminal procedure. It was a right of prosecution possessed as a personal privilege by a party individually aggrieved by a felony, a privilege of which the crown could not directly or indirectly deprive him, since he could use it alike when the prisoner was tried and acquitted, and when he was convicted and pardoned. It was chiefly known in practice as the privilege of the nearest relation of a murdered person. When in 1729 (after Colonel Oglethorpe’s inquiry and report on the London prisons) Banbridge and other gaolers were indicted for their treatment of prisoners, but were acquitted for deficiency of evidence, appeals for murder were freely brought by relatives of deceased prisoners. In the case of Slaughterford (1708) the accused was charged with murdering a woman whom he had seduced; the evidence was very imperfect, and he was acquitted on indictment. But public indignation being aroused by the atrocities alleged to have been perpetrated, an appeal was brought, and on conviction he was hanged, as his execution was a privilege belonging to the prosecutor, of which the crown could not deprive him by a pardon. In 1818 an appeal was ingeniously met by an offer of battle, since if the appellee were an able-bodied man he had the choice between combat or a jury (see Wager). This neutralizing of one obsolete and barbarous process by another called the attention of the legislature to the subject, and appeal in criminal cases, along with trial by battle, was abolished in 1819. The history of this appeal is fully dealt with in Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law, 1898.

In its usual modern sense the term appeal is applied to the proceeding by which the decision of a court of justice is brought for review before another tribunal of higher authority. In Roman jurisprudence it was used in this and in other significations; it was sometimes equivalent to prosecution, or the calling up of an accused person before a tribunal where the accuser appealed to the protection of the magistrate against injustice or oppression. The derivation from appellare (“call”) suggests that its earliest meaning was an urgent outcry or prayer against injustice. During the republic the magistrate was generally supreme within his sphere, and those who felt themselves outraged by injustice threw themselves on popular protection by provocatio, instead of looking to redress from a higher official authority. Under the empire different grades of jurisdiction were established, and the ultimate remedy was an appeal to the emperor; thus Paul, when brought before Festus, appealed unto Caesar. Such appeals were, however, not heard by the emperor in person but by a supreme judge representing him. In the Corpus Juris the appeal to the emperor is called indiscriminately appellatio and provocatio. A considerable portion of the 49th book of the Pandects is devoted to appeals; but little of the practical operation of the system is to be deduced from the propositions there brought together.

During the middle ages full scope was afforded for appeals from the lower to the higher authorities in the church. In matters ecclesiastical, including those matrimonial, testamentary and other departments, which the church ever tried to bring within the operation of the canon law, there were various grades of appeal, ending with the pope. The claims of the church to engross appeals in matters trenching on the temporal rights of princes led to continual conflicts between church and state, terminated in England at the reformation by the suppression in 1534 of appeals to Rome, which had previously been discouraged by legislation of Edward III. and Richard II.

In temporal, as distinct from spiritual matters, it became customary for ambitious sovereigns to encourage appeals from the courts of the crown vassals to themselves as represented by the supreme judges, and Charlemagne usually enjoys the credit of having set the example of this system of centralization by establishing missi dominici. It is not improbable that his claim was suggested or justified by the practice of the Roman empire, to the sovereignty whereof he claimed to be successor.

211

England.—When the royal authority in England grew strong as against that of the tenants in capite, the king’s courts in England were more effectively organized, and their net swept wider so as to draw within their cognizance matters previously adjudged in courts baron or courts leet or in the county court, and they acquired authority to supervise and review the decisions of the inferior and local courts, to control and limit their claims to exercise jurisdiction, and to transfer causes from the local to the royal courts. The machinery by which this process was usually effected, under the common law, was not by what is now known as appeal, but by the process of certiorari or writs of error or prohibition. Recourse was also had against the decisions of the royal courts by appeal to the great council of the king, or to parliament as a whole. The supremacy of the king’s courts over all causes, as well ecclesiastical as civil, has been completely established since the reign of Henry VIII., and they have effectually asserted the power to regulate and keep within their proper jurisdiction all other tribunals within the realm. Since that date the organization of judicial tribunals has gradually been changed and improved with the object (1) of creating a judicial hierarchy independent of executive control; (2) of ensuring that all decisions on questions of law shall be co-ordinated and rendered systematic by correction of the errors and vagaries of subordinate tribunals; and (3) of securing so far as possible uniformity in the judicial interpretation and administration of the law, by creating a supreme appellate tribunal to whose decisions all other tribunals are bound to conform. It would be undesirable to detail at length the history of appellate jurisdiction in England, involving as it would the discussion in great detail of the history and procedure of English law, and it may suffice to indicate the system of appeals as at present organized, beginning with the lowest courts.

Justices of the Peace.—The decisions of justices of the peace sitting as courts of summary jurisdiction are subject to review on questions of law only by the High Court of Justice. This review is in a sense consultative, because it is usually effected by means of a case voluntarily stated by the justices at the request of the aggrieved party, in which are set forth the facts as determined by the justices, the questions of law raised and their decision thereon, as to the correctness whereof the opinion of the High Court is invited. The procedure is equally open in criminal and civil matters brought before the justices. But when the justices decline to state a case for the opinion of the High Court, the latter, if review seems desirable, may order the justices to state a case. And the High Court has also power to control the action of justices by prohibiting them from acting in a case beyond their jurisdiction, ordering them to exercise jurisdiction where they have improperly declined (mandamus), or bringing up for review and quashing orders or convictions which they have made in excess of jurisdiction, or in cases in which interested or biassed justices have adjudicated (certiorari). None of these regulative processes exactly corresponds to what is popularly known as an appeal, but in effect if not in form an appeal is thus given.

There is also another form of appeal, in the fullest sense of the term, from the decision of justices sitting as a court of summary jurisdiction to the justices of the same county sitting in general or quarter sessions, or in the case of a borough to the recorder as judge of the borough court of quarter sessions. This form of appeal is in every case the creation of statute: and even in text-books it is hardly possible to find a really complete list of the matters in respect of which such appeal lies. But as regards criminal cases there is an approximately general rule, given by § 19 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act 1879, viz. that an appeal to quarter sessions lies from the conviction or order of a court of summary jurisdiction directing imprisonment without the option of a fine as a punishment for an offence, or for failing to do or to abstain from doing any act required to be done or left undone other than an order for the payment of money, or to find sureties or give security or to enter into a recognizance, or a conviction made on a plea of guilty or admission of the truth of the matter of complaint.

As a general rule, subject to particular statutory exceptions, appeals of this kind are by way of rehearing, i.e. the actor or prosecutor must before the appellate tribunal call his witnesses and prove his case just as if no previous hearing had taken place before the court appealed from (Pritchard, Quarter Sessions Practice, 2nd ed., 461). The only limit is that the appellant must confine himself to the grounds of appeal stated in the notice of appeal given by him.

Justices in Quarter Sessions.—This tribunal has under the commission of the peace and under statute power to refer questions of difficulty arising before it for decision to the High Court. The old mode of exercising this power was by sending on to assizes indictments raising difficult questions which had been presented at quarter sessions. The High Court has ex officio power to transfer such indictments where the nature of the case and the demands of justice call for such transfer. The quarter sessions had also power under statute on trying an indictment to refer to the court for crown cases reserved (Crown Cases Act 1848), abolished by the Criminal Appeal Act 1907, questions of law which had arisen at the trial, and in all civil cases the quarter sessions has power of its own volition and subject to no direct compulsion to consult the High Court on legal questions of difficulty which have arisen. Until 1894 this jurisdiction was regarded as consultative only. It was and is exercised by stating the facts, of which the court of quarter sessions is the sole judge, and indicating the questions of law arising on the facts, and the view of quarter sessions thereon, and inviting the opinion of the High Court. Under the Judicature Act 1894 cases stated in this way are now treated as “appeals” in the popular sense.

Inferior Courts of purely Civil Jurisdiction.—An appeal also lies as a general rule to the High Court from the judgment of a county court or of any inferior tribunal having civil jurisdiction.

(a) County Courts. Any party to an action or matter in a county court who is dissatisfied with the determination or direction of the judge in law or equity, or upon the admission or rejection of any evidence, may appeal against the decision in the following cases: (1) if the amount of claim or counter-claim in the proceeding exceeds £20; or (2) in all equity matters or cases in which an injunction has been given; or (3) in actions to recover possession of land where questions of title are involved (County Courts Act 1888, § 120). In the case of a claim below £20 no appeal lies except by the leave of the county court. The old practice of appeal by way of special case as in appeals from justices has been abolished, and the present procedure is by notice of motion (R.S.C. O. LIX. rr. 10-18).

These appeals are heard in the king’s bench division, except in the case of appeals from judgments of a county court sitting in the exercise of admiralty jurisdiction, which are heard by two or more judges sitting in the probate, divorce and admiralty division. The chancery division has never sat to hear “appeals” from a county court exercising equity jurisdiction; but at times, by prohibition or certiorari, has, in effect, reviewed or restrained excess of jurisdiction by county courts in equity matters.

The decision of the High Court on county court appeals is final unless an appeal to the court of appeal is brought by leave of that court or of the High Court (Judicature Act 1894, § 1, sub. sect. 5; Judicature Act 1873, § 45).

(b) Other inferior courts of civil jurisdiction. Appeals from the local courts of record which still survive in certain cities, towns and districts are in a somewhat anomalous position. The general rule is that, unless a statute regulates such appeal, it may be brought in the king’s bench division of the High Court on notice of motion in any case in which, before the Judicature Acts, the court of king’s bench could have reviewed the decision of the inferior court by writ of error. The history of this question is dealt with in Darlow v. Shuttleworth, 1902, 1 K.B. 721.

In the case of the mayor’s court of London, under the local and general statutes regulating that court, the appeal is usually to the king’s bench division, but where there is what is termed “error” on the face of the proceedings of the mayor’s court, 212 the appeal lies direct to the court of appeal as successor of the court of exchequer chamber. Appeals from the Liverpool court of passage and from the chancery courts of the duchies of Lancaster and Durham lie by statute direct to the court of appeal.

High Court of Justice.—Until the Supreme Court of Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875 came into operation, the superior courts in England were imperfectly co-ordinated both as to jurisdiction and appeals. The effect of these acts was to create a Supreme Court of Judicature divided into two main branches, the High Court of Justice, which is an appellate court with respect to the inferior courts already mentioned, and to certain other special courts and persons; and the court of appeal, which is mainly concerned with appeals from the High Court of Justice.

The High Court of Justice acts as an appellate court or court of consultation with reference to courts of summary jurisdiction or quarter sessions and to county courts and other inferior courts of civil jurisdiction in the cases already indicated. The three divisions of the court are somewhat differently placed with reference to appeals.

In the chancery division (made up, in 1908, of six single judge courts) no appeals are heard except from subordinate officials (masters) of the court, or an occasional interference by certiorari or prohibition with a county court.

In the probate, divorce and admiralty division, besides the supervision which may be exercised by a single judge over the subordinate officers of the court (registrars), divisional courts (of two judges) hear appeals from decisions of the county court in admiralty causes, and appeals from justices in cases between husband and wife under the Summary Jurisdiction (Married Women) Act 1895, as amended by the Licensing Act 1902. In the first of these cases the appeal is on law only as in the case of other county court appeals; in the second, the procedure is by rehearing, or reconsideration of the facts as minuted in the court appealed from, and of the law there applied to these facts.

The bulk of the appellate work of the High Court is conducted in the king’s bench division—which, as successor of the old court of king’s bench in the duties of custos morum of the realm, still retains supervisory power over all inferior courts in all cases in which that supervision has not been transferred to the other divisions of the High Court or to the court of appeal, or to the court of criminal appeal.

The king’s bench division exercises appellate jurisdiction in the following cases.

With respect to decisions of justices of the peace sitting at quarter sessions, or as a court of summary jurisdiction, except in the case above stated, the subject matter of appeal is for the most part of a criminal or quasi-criminal character, the civil jurisdiction of justices being comparatively limited. The appeal in such cases is as to matters of law only, the justices’ decision on facts not being subject to review.

In the case of the courts above named, the appeal is brought by writ of certiorari, where the jurisdiction of quarter sessions to give the judgment challenged is denied in toto, or in some cases by writ of habeas corpus, where the appellant is in custody under an order of the court appealed from (Judicature Act 1894, § 2). The best example of this is the right of a fugitive criminal committed for extradition to challenge the legality of the decision of the committing magistrate by writ of habeas corpus. Save in cases of want of jurisdiction or refusal to exercise it, no appeal lies from quarter sessions except by consent of the court appealed from, which states the facts as ascertained by the inferior court, and invites the review of the superior court upon the questions of law raised by the facts as found.

Decisions of justices sitting in the exercise of summary jurisdiction are subject to review by a special case in which the justices state the facts found by them and their decision on the points of law, and invite the review of the appellate court on these grounds. Such cases for appeal are usually stated by consent of the justices, but in the event of their refusal the appellate court may order that a case shall be stated.

Decisions of justices in the exercise of summary jurisdiction may also be challenged by writ of certiorari as having been wholly outside their jurisdiction; and in such proceeding the appellate tribunal may review the evidence taken below so far as to ascertain whether the justices have by an erroneous finding of fact enabled themselves to assume a jurisdiction which upon the true facts they did not possess.

Where the decision appealed from is in a criminal cause or matter the decision of the High Court is final. Where it is in a civil matter a further appeal also lies to the court of appeal by leave of the High Court or of the court of appeal (Judicature Act 1873, § 45).

Appeals in criminal cases tried on indictment, criminal information or coroner’s inquisition, stand on a different footing from other appeals.

For many years the question of criminal appeal in general had been a matter of great controversy. As early as 1844 a bill had been unsuccessfully introduced for the purpose of establishing appeal in criminal cases, and from that time up to 1906 nearly thirty bills were brought forward with the same object, but none succeeded in passing. In 1892 the question was referred to the council of judges and favourably reported upon by them. It may be remarked that England was practically the only civilized country in which there was no appeal in criminal cases. It is true there was an appeal on questions of law arising at the trial. But the procedure was intricate and technical, being either (1) by writ of error, issued by the consent of the attorney-general (expressed by his fiat), to review errors of law appearing in the record of the trial, or (2) by special case, stated by the judge presiding at the trial, with respect to a question of law raised at the trial. These appeals were heard by the king’s bench division. Meanwhile there had been a considerable development of public opinion in favour of the establishment of criminal appeal, a development undoubtedly hastened by the report of a committee of inquiry in the case of Adolf Beck (1904), showing clearly that the home office was not a satisfactory tribunal of final appeal. In 1906 the lord chancellor (Lord Loreburn) introduced another criminal appeal bill, which passed the House of Lords, but was dropped in the House of Commons after a first reading. The next year the act (Criminal Appeal Act 1907), which was ultimately carried, was introduced into the House of Commons. By this act a court is established consisting of the lord chief justice and eight judges of the king’s bench division, the jurisdiction of the court for crown cases reserved being transferred to the new court. The court to be duly constituted must consist of not less than three judges and of an uneven number of judges. The court may sit in two or more divisions if the lord chief justice so directs. Its sittings are held in London unless special directions are given by the lord chief justice that it shall sit at some other place. The opinion of the majority of those hearing the case determines any question before the court, and judgment is pronounced by the president (who is the lord chief justice or senior member present), unless in questions of law, when, if it is convenient that separate judgments should be pronounced by the members of the court, they may be so pronounced. The judgment of the court of criminal appeal is final, except where the decision involves a point of law of exceptional public importance, and a certificate must be obtained from the attorney-general to that effect. The court of criminal appeal is a superior court of record. An appeal may be made either against conviction or against sentence. A person convicted on indictment may appeal either on a question of law alone or of fact alone, or on a question of mixed law and fact. On a point of law a prisoner has an unqualified right of appeal, on a question of fact or of mixed law and fact there is a right of appeal only if leave be obtained from the court of criminal appeal or a certificate be granted by the judge who tried the prisoner that it is a fit case for appeal. The court is given a wide discretion as to whether a conviction may be sustained or set aside. The court may allow the appeal if they think that the verdict of the jury should be set aside because it is 213 unreasonable, or because it cannot be supported having regard to the evidence, or that the judgment should be set aside on the ground of a wrong decision on any point of law, or that on any ground there was a miscarriage of justice. Power is given to the court to dismiss the appeal if they consider that no substantial miscarriage of justice has occurred, even though they are of opinion that the point raised in the appeal might be decided in favour of the appellant. The sentence passed at the trial may be quashed by the appeal court and such other sentence (whether more or less severe) warranted in law by the verdict substituted. Notice of appeal or notice of application for leave to appeal must be given within ten days of the date of conviction; where a conviction involves sentence of death or corporal punishment the sentence must not be executed until after the expiration of ten days, and, if notice of appeal is given, not until after the determination of the appeal or the final dismissal of the application for leave to appeal. The act gives the court power to order any witnesses who would have been compellable witnesses at the trial to attend and be examined before the court, and to receive the evidence, if tendered, of any witness who is a competent but not compellable witness. If any question arises on the appeal involving prolonged examination of documents or accounts or any scientific or local investigation, which the court thinks cannot be conveniently conducted before it, the matter may be referred to a special commissioner appointed by the court, and the court may act on the report of that commissioner if it thinks fit. An appellant is given the right to be present on the hearing of his appeal, if he desires it, except where the appeal is on some ground involving a question of law alone, but rules of court may provide for his presence in such a case, or the court may give him leave. The act requires shorthand notes to be taken of the proceedings at the trial of any person, who, if convicted, would have a right to appeal under the act. Nothing in the act affects the prerogative of mercy, and the home secretary may, if he thinks fit, at any time refer a case to the court of criminal appeal.

The Court of Appeal.—The court of appeal, constituted under the Judicature Acts, is one of the two permanent divisions of the Supreme Court of Judicature. As now constituted the court consists of ex officio members and five ordinary members, styled lords justices of appeal. The ex officio members are the lord chancellor, every person who has held that office, the lord chief justice, the master of the rolls, and the president of the probate, &c., division.

The ordinary business of the court is carried on by the lords justices under the presidency of the master of the rolls, who in 1881 ceased to be a judge of the High Court (Judicature Act 1881, § 2). The court usually sits in two divisions of three judges, but on occasion a third court can be formed, with the assistance of the other ex officio judges, in the absence of the ordinary judges from illness or public engagements, or to deal with arrears of business. The quorum for final appeals is three, for interlocutory appeals two judges.

The court of appeal has succeeded to the appellate authority exercised (1) in the case of equity and bankruptcy matters by the lord chancellor and the lords justices of appeal in chancery (Judicature Act 1873, § 18); (2) in the case of common law matters, by the court of exchequer chamber, as a court of error, and the superior courts of common law sitting to review the decisions of single judges of these courts sitting with or without a jury at first instance in civil actions; (3) in the case of divorce or probate causes by the full court of divorce (Judicature Act 1881, § 9); (4) in the case of admiralty causes by the king in council or the judicial committee of the privy council; (5) in the case of applications for new trials in jury actions by the king’s bench division (Judicature Act 1890, § 1).

The court never had jurisdiction to hear an appeal in any criminal cause or matter, but was able to review by writ of error decisions of the king’s bench division in such cases, unless the court for crown cases reserved had dealt with the question under the Crown Cases Act 1848. This procedure has been abolished by the Criminal Appeal Act 1907. Instances of procedure by writ of error were rare. Those best worth notice are the cases of the Tichborne claimant on his conviction of perjury, and the case of C. Bradlaugh on the sufficiency of the indictment against him for publishing the Fruits of Philosophy.

The appellate jurisdiction of the court as now exercised entitles the court to hear and determine (1) appeals from every judgment or decree of every division of the High Court in all civil cases in which such judgment is not declared final by statute; (2) applications for a new trial in civil cases tried in the king’s bench division by judge and jury which, until 1890, were dealt with by two or more judges in that division; (3) appeals in matters of civil practice and procedure from decisions of a single judge in chambers, which, until 1894, were dealt with in a divisional court or by a judge in open court; (4) appeals from the chancery courts of Durham (Palatine Court of Durham Act 1889) and Lancaster (act of 1890, c. 23) and the Liverpool court of passage (Anderson v. Dean, 1894, 2 Q.B. 222), and on error in a record of the mayor’s court of London (Le Blanche v. Heaton Telegram Co., 1876, 1 Ex.D. 408); and from county courts under the Agricultural Holdings Acts and Workmen’s Compensation Acts; (5) appeals on questions of law from decisions of the railway commissioners in England (Railway and Canal Traffic Act 1888).

The court of appeal also exercises the lunacy jurisdiction of the lord chancellor, but in regard to this the jurisdiction of the court is for the most part original and not appellate.

The jurisdiction of the court of appeal is excluded or limited in the following cases:—(1) judgments of the High Court—(a) where its jurisdiction is consultative only; (b) where there is an appeal to the High Court from an inferior court of civil jurisdiction; (c) where there is an appeal to the High Court from any court of person, unless in cases (b) and (c) leave be obtained of the court by which the order is made, or of the court of appeal; (2) orders of the High Court in registration and election cases except with the like leave; (3) orders made by consent of parties, or as to costs only which by law are left to the discretion of the court; (4) certain interlocutory orders mentioned in § 1 of the Supreme Court of Judicature (Procedure) Act 1894, except by leave of the judge appealed from or of the court of appeal (5) orders of the admiralty division in cases of prize, the appeal from which lies to His Majesty in Council; (6) where the decision of any court whose jurisdiction was transferred to the High Court is declared by statute to be final; (7) matters which from their nature were not appealable to any court before the Judicature Acts, or in which the court of appeal has no means of enforcing or executing its judgment. For example, it was held in the House of Lords, in Cox v. Hakes, 1890, 15 A.C. 506, that no appeal lies from the order of a judge discharging a prisoner under a writ of habeas corpus. “If,” said Lord Herschell, “the contention of the respondent is to prevail, the statute has effected a grave constitutional change”; and later, “if” the High Court “has inherited the combined powers of the courts whose functions were transferred to it, but none of them had any jurisdiction or authority to review a discharge by a competent court under a writ of habeas corpus, or to enforce the arrest of one thus freed from custody ... it seems to me to follow, that however wrong the court of appeal might think a discharge to have been, it would have been powerless to order a rearrest, or at least to enforce such an order.”

The procedure of the court of appeal is regulated by the rules of the Supreme Court. A distinction is drawn between appeals from a final judgment or order (which, unless the parties consent to a smaller quorum, must be heard by three judges) and an appeal from an interlocutory order (which may be determined by two judges of the court of appeal).

In the case of appeals from a final or interlocutory “judgment,” or from an order, including applications for a new trial, the appeal must be brought within three months from the time when the judgment or order is signed, entered or otherwise perfected, or in the case of refusal of an application from the date of refusal. The appeal is by notice of motion, which 214 except in cases of application for a new trial, need not state the grounds of appeal. Fourteen clear days’ notice of the motion must be given by the appellant to the other party, the respondent.

In the case of appeals from an interlocutory order, or from a final order, or from an order made in any matter which is not an action, or from an order made in chambers, the appeal must be brought within fourteen days by motion, of which four clear days’ notice must be given by the appellant to all parties directly affected by the appeal. Controversies have arisen as to the meaning of the term “interlocutory,” which (in the absence of any authoritative definition) the court of appeal settles as they arise. The test most generally accepted is that a judgment or order is final if, as made, it finally disposes of the rights of the parties in a manner equally conclusive between them. The court may by special leave allow appeals of either class to be brought after the time above limited. The respondent may by proper notice bring a cross appeal against any portion of the judgment or order made below with which he is dissatisfied. The court has power to order the appellant to find security for the costs of an appeal, if special circumstances, such as insolvency or poverty or foreign domicile or the like, make the giving of security desirable. The court of appeal “rehears” the case. Under ordinary circumstances it does not permit a new case to be set up inconsistent with the case as presented below; and it is content with the judges’ notes, or a transcript of the evidence given below, and with a note or transcript of the judgment appealed from, but has power on special grounds to receive fresh evidence either viva voce or on affidavit. The court may call in for its assistance assessors who are experts on the matters of fact or science involved in the appeal, and usually does so in cases arising out of collisions at sea.

The court of appeal may make any order which it deems just as to the costs of the whole or any part of an appeal, except possibly in the case of certain appeals in matters on the crown side of the High Court, as to which some doubt still exists. In practice the costs follow the event, unless the court in a particular case makes an order to the contrary.

A decision of the court of appeal is final in appeals from the High Court in bankruptcy, unless leave be given to appeal to the House of Lords (§ 104, Bankruptcy Act 1883), and in divorce appeals, except where the decision either is upon the grant or refusal of a decree for dissolution or nullity of marriage, or for a declaration of legitimacy, or is upon any question of law on which the court gives leave to appeal (Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1881, § 9); but no further appeal to the House of Lords lies, even with leave of the court of appeal, on appeals from the High Court sitting as a court of appeal from county courts in bankruptcy. With these exceptions there is now a right of appeal from every order of the court of appeal to the House of Lords.

The House of Lords.—The House of Lords has for centuries been the court of last resort, and is still the final court of appeal from the chief courts in the United Kingdom. The origin of the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords was undoubtedly of that partly feudal and partly popular character already alluded to, which made the suitor seek from the high court of parliament the justice denied elsewhere in the baronial courts or by the king’s judges. The lords exercised the mixed function of jurymen and judges, and, as in judgments on impeachment, might be influenced by private or party considerations, debating and dividing on the question before the House. A revolution was silently accomplished, however, by which the function of reviewing the decisions of the courts fell entirely to the lawyers raised to the peerage, while the unprofessional lords only attended to give the sanction of a quorum to the proceedings, and the House has always had the right to invoke the assistance of the judges of the superior courts to advise on the questions of law raised by an appeal. The letters and memoirs, so late as Queen Anne’s reign, show that party or personal influence and persuasion were employed to procure votes on appeals, as they have been in later times on railway or other local bills. The last instance probably in which a strong division of opinion was manifested among the unprofessional lords was the celebrated Douglas cause in 1769, when the House was addressed by the dukes of Newcastle and Bedford, but was led by the authoritative opinion of Lord Mansfield on the effect of the evidence—an opinion which was treated rather as that of a political partisan than of a judge. The case of Daniel O’Connell and others, brought up on writ of error from the queen’s bench in Ireland in 1844, may be said to have finally established the precedent that the judgments of the House of Lords were to be given solely by the law lords. On that occasion there was a difference of opinion among the law lords themselves. The judgment of the majority of the House was strongly against the political feeling of the government and of the peers as a body, while the law lords who carried the decision had been appointed by previous governments opposed in politics to the existing cabinet. But all these temptations to a party vote by the unprofessional members were resisted.

By § 20 of the act of 1873, the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords (so far as it affects England) was abolished, but this section was repealed by the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876. Under that act and an amending act of 1887, the appellate business of the House of Lords is conducted solely by the law lords, though lay peers may still sit (Bradlaugh v. Clarke, 1882, 8 App. Cas. 354). No appeal may be heard or determined except in the presence of not less than three of the following persons:—(1) the lord chancellor; (2) the lords of appeal, four of whom are appointed under the act from among persons who hold, or have held, high judicial office, or, at the date of appointment, have been in practice for not less than fifteen years as barristers in England or Ireland, or as advocates in Scotland; (3) such peers of parliament as hold, or have held, high judicial office. By “high judicial office” is meant the office of lord chancellor of Great Britain or Ireland, lord of appeal in ordinary, paid judge of the judicial committee or member of that committee, or judge of one of the superior courts of Great Britain or Ireland.

An appeal lies to the House of Lords (1) from any order or judgment of the court of appeal in England except as above stated; (2) from a judgment or order of any court in Scotland or Ireland from which error or an appeal to the House of Lords lay by common law or statute immediately before the 1st of November 1876. No appeals are heard from the decision of courts in criminal cases. The House of Lords has an indirect power by standing orders to admit appeals from Scotland or Ireland which under former law or practice could not be admitted (Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876, § 12). The procedure on appeals is regulated by standing orders of the House. The proceedings are commenced by petition of appeal, which must be lodged with the clerk of the parliaments within one year from the date of the last judgment it appealed from. Security for costs (£200) must be given by bond or lodgment of the money, unless dispensed with by the House on the ground of poverty (act of 1893). Each party lodges a printed case signed and certified by counsel, containing a resumé of the matters to be discussed and of the contentions for or against the allowance of the appeal. The hearing is before three or more law lords, who may call in nautical assessors in admiralty cases (acts of 1893 and 1894). It is not public in the full sense of the term, as persons not concerned in the appeal can attend only by consent of the House. The House pronounces the judgment which in the opinion of the majority of the law lords should have been pronounced below, and has jurisdiction in the case of all appeals to give or refuse costs to the successful party. The costs of the appeal if given are taxed by the officers of the House. The jurisdiction as to costs does not directly arise under any statute (see West Ham Guardians v. Bethnal Green Churchwardens, 1896, A.C. 477).

Appeals to the King in Council.—The decisions of ecclesiastical courts when acting within the limits of their jurisdiction, and the decisions of courts in the king’s dominions outside the United Kingdom, and of courts in foreign countries set up under the Foreign Jurisdiction Acts, cannot be dealt with by the 215 House of Lords or any of the ordinary tribunals of any part of the United Kingdom. The power once claimed by the court of king’s bench in England to control the courts of Ireland has lapsed, and its power to intervene in colonial cases is limited to the grant of the writ of habeas corpus to a possession in which no court exists having power to issue that writ or one of like effect (Habeas Corpus Act 1862). As regards all British possessions, the appeal to the king in council is in its origin and nature like that of the provincials unto Caesar, and flows from the royal prerogative to admit appeals. With the growth of the British empire it has been found necessary to create a comparatively constant and stable tribunal to advise the king in the exercise of this prerogative. For this purpose the judicial committee of the privy council was created in 1833. In 1851, and again in 1870, it was reorganized, and by acts of 1876, 1887 and 1898 it received its present form. The committee consists of the president of the council, and of the following persons, if privy councillors—the lord chancellor and ex-chancellors of Great Britain and of Ireland, the four lords of appeal in ordinary, the lords justices of appeal in England or retired lords justices of appeal in England, and persons who hold or have held the office (a) of judge of the High Court of Justice or the court of appeal in England or Ireland, or of the court of session in Scotland; (b) any person who is or has been chief justice or a judge of the Supreme Court of Canada or of a superior court of any province of Canada, of any of the Australian states (except Fiji and Papua), or of New Zealand or the Cape of Good Hope or Natal. The number of persons of this class who may be members at once is limited to five (1895, c. 44); (c) provision is also made for the payment of two privy councillors who have been judges in India who attend the privy council.

Numerous as are the members of the committee, the quorum is three. One or more of the lords of appeal in ordinary usually attend at every hearing, but the composition of the committee is very fluctuating. Appeals from the British dominions abroad lie in criminal as well as civil matters. The right of appeal is regulated as to most possessions by order in council, and in some cases is limited by imperial or colonial statute. Appeals are on fact as well as on law, but the committee rarely if ever disturbs the concurrent judgments on facts of two colonial courts. In the case of admiralty appeals from colonial or consular courts, naval assessors may be called in. The committee also hears (with the aid of ecclesiastical assessors) appeals from ecclesiastical courts. The judgment of the committee is in the form of a report and advice to the king, which is read by one of the members sitting, and no indication is given as to whether the members present are unanimous. Effect is given to the advice by orders in council dismissing or allowing the appeal, and giving direction as to the payment of costs and as to the further proceedings to be taken in the colonial courts.

The procedure of the committee is on the same lines as that on appeals to the House of Lords; no well-arranged code of practice existed however up to the end of 1908, and new rules were then being proposed on the subject. The appeal is commenced by a petition of appeal, and by the giving of security for costs. In colonial appeals printed cases are lodged containing a summary of the contentions of the parties, and with this a printed copy of the record of the proceedings and documents used in the courts appealed from. The hearing is in the privy council chamber and is not public. When an appeal is called on, the counsel and parties are summoned into the chamber, and when the arguments are concluded they are requested to retire. The appeals to the king in council from colonial states having a federal constitution, like Canada and Australia, stand in an exceptional position. The act creating the Supreme Court of Canada purports to make the decision of that court final. But it is still the practice to admit by special leave a prerogative appeal from the court, and to entertain appeals from courts of the provinces of Canada direct to the king in council, without requiring them to go to the Supreme Court. The constitution of the Australian Commonwealth contemplates (§ 73) the possibility of restricting appeals to the king in council from the supreme courts of Australia, and sec. 74 forbids appeals to the king in council except by leave of the High Court of Australia from decision of that court on any question however arising as to the limits inter se of the constitutional powers of the commonwealth and those of any state or states, or as to the limits inter se of the constitutional powers of any two or more states. The exact effect of these enactments and of Australian legislation under § 73 is a matter of controversy.

Scotland.—In Scotland the ordinary appellate tribunal for decisions of inferior courts and of the lords ordinary is the court of session, which for appellate purposes sits in two divisions. Appeals from inferior tribunals in criminal cases go before the judges of the court of session sitting in the High Court of Justiciary. The court of session was in its original constitution a committee of parliament for the performance of its judicial functions, and an appeal to parliament was consequently anomalous. In the reign of Charles II., however, the courts grew so intolerably corrupt that a determined effort was made to have their judgments overturned, by an appeal which was strictly of the old character of a cry for protection against flagrant injustice. It was called a “protest for remeid of law,” and was inserted as one of the national claims in the Petition of Right at the revolution. The treaty of union is silent as to appeals, though definitely excluding the right of English courts to interfere with Scottish courts or cases. The House of Lords has since the Union acted without challenge as the final appellate tribunal for Scotland in civil causes; but has always declined jurisdiction in Scottish criminal cases.

Ireland.—The Supreme Court of Judicature (Ireland) Acts have remodelled the courts and appellate system of Ireland on the same lines as those of England. The High Court of Justice in Ireland now consists of two divisions only, the chancery division, which has little or no appellate functions, and the king’s bench division, which has for Ireland substantially the same power of reviewing and correcting the decisions of inferior courts as has the corresponding court in England. To this there is one exception, that appeals from a county court in Ireland may be heard on circuit by a single judge of assize. In Ireland there is also a court of appeal, created in 1877, whose jurisdiction and procedure follow the same lines as that of the English court of appeal.

France.—The court of last resort in France for all cases, whether civil or criminal (en matière criminelle, correctionnelle et de police), is the cour de cassation, which sits in Paris. It is a court of error for the review of all judgments of tribunals of last resort (except juges de paix in certain cases), and for the transfer of causes from one court to another when justice so demands, and to determine conflicts of jurisdiction (Law 1 Dec. 1790). Ordinarily it is confined to errors of law and procedure, but where evidence not available below is brought before the court, it may send the case back for retrial or give the appropriate final judgment, as in the case of Dreyfus (1906). It also hears appeals from courts martial.

Next to the cour de cassation are the courts of appeal, which have jurisdiction to hear appeals (1) in civil matters from courts of first instance, juges de paix, and where the amount in dispute exceeds £60 from commercial courts, tribunaux de commerce (Civil Proc. Code, arts. 443-475); (2) in criminal matters from tribunaux correctionnels (Com. Proc. Code, arts. 202-235). The appeal is both on fact and on law, and applies to interlocutory or preparatory as well as to final judgments.

Spain.—In Spain the jurisdiction and procedure with reference to appeals is on the same lines as in France. As regards civil matters it is regulated by title 21 of the Civil Procedure Code. The appeal to the supreme court is for the most part on questions of law (por infraccion de ley o de doctrina); but the court has also power to review judgments on materials not available at the first hearing (arts. 1796, 1801).

British India.—In British India complete and systematic provision is made for appeals both in civil and in criminal cases by the Procedure Codes (Civil of 1882, with subsequent amendments, and Criminal of 1898), and also to some extent by the 216 charters of the high courts of Calcutta, Bombay and Madras (see Ilbert, Government of India, Oxford, 1898, p. 137). In addition, the decisions of subordinate tribunals may be revised by a superior tribunal proprio motu, or reviewed in a proper case by the tribunal which has given them; and provision is made for the consultation of a superior by an inferior tribunal in cases of legal difficulty. The policy of admitting so many appeals has been criticized. But with an enormous population which has no representative institutions it has been deemed wise to provide ample means of correcting judicial errors at the instance not only of the aggrieved person but also at the instance of the supervising judicial authorities, as a means of ensuring regularity and propriety in the conduct of judicial business by subordinate judges in out-of-the-way districts.

Civil Appeals.—(1) Except where otherwise expressly provided by the Civil Procedure Code, or by any other law for the time being in force, an appeal lies from the whole or part of any decree, whether made ex parte or inter partes, of a court exercising original jurisdiction (Civil Procedure Code, § 540). By “decree” is meant the final expression of an adjudication upon a right claimed or defence set up in a civil court, when such adjudication, so far as regards the court expressing it, decides the suit (§ 2). The appeal is both on facts and on law. The procedure on the appeal is prescribed by c. 41 of the Civil Procedure Code, and the directions of the code deal even with the language of the judgment on appeal and the matters to be stated therein. (2) Decrees passed on an appeal to any court in India subordinate to a High Court are as a general rule subject to appeal to the High Court on the grounds (a) that they are contrary to a specified law, or usage having the force of law; (b) that they have failed to determine some material issue of law, or usage having the force of law; (c) of substantial error or defect in procedure prescribed by the code or other law which might possibly have produced error or defect in the decision of the case upon the merits (§ 584). The procedure on these appeals is regulated by c. 42 of the Civil Procedure Code. (3) Appeals from orders which do not fall within the definition of decrees are allowed in the cases specified in § 588 of the code. The procedure with respect to these appeals is on the same lines as that on appeals against decrees (§ 590). Provision is made (by c. 44) for allowing appeals in forma pauperis after certain preliminary inquiries. In the High Courts appeals lie from the decision of one judge to two or more judges of the High Court, whose decision has effect as a judgment of the full court. Appeals, in civil cases, from the courts of India to the king in council are regulated by c. 45 of the Civil Procedure Code. The appealable amount is for most cases Rs. 10,000 or a claim or question as to property of like amount.

Besides the provisions stated as to appeals, Indian courts have power in certain contingencies to review their own decisions (§ 623). An inferior court may also refer cases of difficulty to the High Court on a statement of the facts as found in the referring court and of the opinion thereon of that Court (§§ 617-620); and in cases in which no appeal lies to the High Court, that court may call for the record of any case in which the court below appears to have acted without jurisdiction or failed to exercise its jurisdiction, or to have exercised its jurisdiction illegally or with material illegality (§ 622).

Criminal Matters.—Criminal jurisdiction in India is exercised by magistrates of the first, second and third class, by sessions courts, and the high or chief courts of the presidencies or provinces (Criminal Procedure Code of 1898). The higher judges in a district have the power of revising those decisions which are not absolutely summary of the judges of the classes below them in the same district; i.e. the sessions judge can revise the decisions of a first-class magistrate, and the High Court those of a sessions judge (§ 435). Inferior tribunals can also refer questions of law to the High Court (§§ 432, 433); and where a sentence of death is passed, or a sessions judge differs from the jury (§ 307), the matter must be referred to the High Court. On matters of reference or revision the parties have no right to be heard.

Provision is also made for appeals by c. 31 of the Code. Appeals from second- or third-class magistrates are dealt with by the district (first-class) magistrate (§ 407). Persons convicted on trial by assistant sessions judges or first-class magistrates, except in cases where the punishment is very small, have an appeal to the sessions judge (§§ 408, 413). A person convicted on trial by the sessions judge has an appeal to the High Court (§ 410), but where he has pleaded guilty the only point on which appeal is open is the legality or extent of sentence (§ 412). Special provision is made as to appeals by persons born in Europe (whether British subjects or not) and Americans (§§ 408, 415, and c. 33).

In criminal cases there is a right of appeal to the king in council in certain cases provided for by the charters of the chartered high courts (see Ilbert, Government of India, Oxford, 1898, p. 137).

An appeal also lies in certain cases from the courts of British officers in feudatory states of India to a high court in India, and from the courts of Aden and Zanzibar and British East Africa to the High Court of Bombay. Appeals do not lie from the courts of native states to British courts in India, though in some cases there is an appeal of a political rather than judicial nature from the judicial tribunals of feudatory states; e.g. in the case of Kathiawar (Hemchand Derchand v. Azam Sakarlal; 1906. L.R. A.C. 212).

Canada.—In Canada each province has the regulation of its own courts of justice. In Ontario the judiciary are organized, under the Provincial Judicature Acts, in much the same manner as in England; and the review of decisions of inferior courts (by appeal or other proceedings based on English practice) is in the hands of the High Court of Justice, subject to appeal to the provincial court of appeal. In Quebec the highest court (king’s bench), besides its original jurisdiction, has appellate jurisdiction over the superior court (see Quebec Civil Procedure Code, art. 1114 et seq.). The jurisdiction is exercised by writ of error or by appeal, according to the nature of the decision appealed from. The judges of the superior court have also, under art. 494, power to review before three judges decisions of a judge of that court or of a circuit court (arts. 494-504). Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba and British Columbia have supreme courts with appellate authority over decisions of single judges of the court and over inferior tribunals in the province. Appeals lie from the highest courts of each province, in civil matters, to the Supreme Court of Canada, or to the king in council in cases falling within the orders in council applying to each province, but in criminal matters to the king in council. From the Supreme Court of Canada no appeal lies as of right to the king in council (Dominion Act 1875, 38 Vic. c. 11, § 47), and the royal prerogative of granting special leave to appeal is sparingly exercised. The principles on which the judicial committee acts in advising for or against the grant of special leave in civil case& are stated in Daily Telegraph Newspaper Co. v. M‘Laughlin, 1904, L.R. A.C. 776. It is, however, as before, quite common for appeals to be brought direct to the privy council from the provincial courts without resort to the Dominion court (see Wheeler, Privy Council Law, p. 955).

Australia.—Each of the states of the Australian Commonwealth has its own supreme court. The Commonwealth parliament constituted in 1903 a High Court for Australia, which, besides its original federal jurisdiction, is also a court of appeal from the supreme courts of the constitutional states, or from any state court from which an appeal lay to the king in council at the establishment of the Commonwealth. The jurisdiction of the court is defined by the Judiciary Act of 1903, by which it is created. The right of appeal is given both as to criminal and civil matters.

South Africa.—In Cape Colony and Natal the appellate courts are the supreme courts, subject to further appeal in certain cases to the king in council. The superior courts of Cape Colony are empowered to review the proceedings of all inferior courts in the colony and its dependencies in cases where no appeal lies. There was for a time an appeal from the High Court of Orange 217 River Colony to the supreme court of the Transvaal, and from that court (whether acting for its own colony or on appeal from the Orange Colony), an appeal to the king in council. In other colonies the provisions as to appeal follow more or less closely the lines of English law and procedure as to appeals, and in all cases the ultimate appeal is to the king in council.

United States.—In the American courts the term “appeal” covers (1) a removal of a cause to a higher court for retrial on all the questions of law or fact involved, or (2) taking up points of law only by proceedings in error, for revision by a higher court. Decrees in admiralty, bankruptcy and equity, in the federal courts, are the subjects of an appeal; judgments in actions at law, of a writ of error. On an equity appeal the evidence taken at the original hearing is reported at length to the appellate court, and it has the right to review the conclusions of fact reached by the court below and come to different ones. This, however, is seldom done, the appeal being almost always decided on points of law based upon the conclusions of fact reached in the original hearing. In admiralty appeals the conclusions of fact reached by the trial court are specially set forth, and are final.

“Appeal” in many of the states is the general term for reviewing any judgment of an inferior court on assignments of error. It is also often used to signify a mode of reviewing proceedings of municipal bodies, affecting the interests of particular persons, e.g. in matters of licences or assessments.

In criminal prosecutions an appeal, or writ of error on points of law, is almost everywhere allowed by statute to the defendant, and often to the state. (United States v. Sanges, 144 United States Reports, 310; State v. Lee, 65 Connecticut Reports, 265.)

By the constitution of the United States the Supreme Court is vested with “appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations, as the Congress shall make.” This provision is held not to create but only to authorize the creation of the jurisdiction. In the words of Chancellor Kent, “If congress had not provided any rule to regulate the proceedings in appeal, the court could not exercise an appellate jurisdiction: and, if a rule be provided, the court could not depart from it.” In pursuance of this principle, the Supreme Court decided in Clarke v. Bazadone that a writ of error did not lie to that court from a court of the United States territory north-west of the Ohio, because the act had not authorized an appeal or writ of error from such a court (Commentaries, i. 324). The appellate jurisdiction of the court is now regulated by title 13 chap. ii. of the Revised Statutes of the United States (1873), §§ 690-710; and by the acts enumerated at p. 901 of the Revised Statutes, United States, 1873 to 1891. Under these statutes the Supreme Court may entertain appeals from the highest court of a state of the Union, but only (1) where the state court has decided against the validity of a treaty or statute of the United States, or of an authority exercised under the United States; (2) where a state court has affirmed the validity of a statute, or of an authority exercised which has been challenged on the ground of repugnance to the constitution, laws or treaties of the United States; (3) where the state court has decided against the existence of a title, right, privilege, or immunity claimed or set up under the constitution of, or under any statute, treaty, commission or authority of the United States.

The appeal from state courts is by writ of error, i.e. on law only; and applies as well in criminal as in civil cases. The Supreme Court will not act unless the federal question was raised in the court below (Chicago U.S. Mail Co. v. McGuire, 1904, 196, U.S. 128). The circuit court of appeals, established in 1891, deals with appeals from the district and circuit courts of the United States, except where other provision is made, e.g. where the jurisdiction of the court appealed from is in question; in prize causes and convictions of capital crimes (U.S. Statutes, 1801, c. 54. § 5); in cases involving the construction or application of the constitution; in cases arising in district or circuit courts involving the constitutional questions already stated as subject of appeal from state courts.

The review by the circuit court of appeals is effected by appeal or by writ of error, and its decision is final, with certain exceptions but with power to certify cases to the Supreme Court for instructions (1891, c. 511, § 6).

The Supreme Court hears appeals from the circuit court of appeals within the limits above stated, and appeals from the circuit and district courts in cases in which an appeal does not lie to the circuit court of appeals, and has power to issue a certiorari to transfer a case from the circuit court of Appeals.

APPEARANCE (from Lat. apparere, to appear), in law, the coming into court of either of the parties to a suit; the formal act by which a defendant submits himself to the jurisdiction of the court. The defendant in an action in the High Court of England enters his appearance to the writ of summons by delivering, either at the central office of the Supreme Court, or a district registry, a written memorandum either giving his solicitor’s name or stating that he defends in person. He must also give notice to the plaintiff of his appearance, which ought, according to the time limited by the writ, to be within eight days after service; a defendant may, however, appear any time before judgment. The Rules of the Supreme Court, orders xii. and xiii., regulate the procedure with respect to the entering of an appearance, the giving of notice, the limit of time, the setting aside and the general effect of default of appearance. In county courts there is no appearance other than the coming into court of the parties to the suit. In criminal cases the accused appears in person. In civil cases infants appear by their guardians ad litem; lunatics by their committee; companies by a solicitor; friendly societies by the trustee or other officer appointed to sue or be sued on behalf thereof.

APPENDICITIS, the modern medical term for inflammation of that part of the intestine which is known as the “appendix.” Though not a new disease, there can be no doubt that it is far commoner than it used to be, though the explanation of this increased frequency is not yet forthcoming. Amongst the virulent micro-organisms associated with the disease no one specific germ has hitherto been found. It may be remarked that the theories that influenza, or the use of preserved foods, may be connected with the disease as cause and effect, have supporters. Sometimes the disease is due to the impaction of a pin, shot-corn, tooth-brush bristle, or fish-bone in the appendix, which has set up inflammation and ulceration. In many cases a patch of mortification with perforation of the appendix is caused by the presence of a hard faecal concretion, or “stercolith,” which from its size, shape and appearance has been mistaken by a casual observer for a date-stone or cherry-stone.

Apart from the fact of the more frequent occurrence of appendicitis, the disease is now better understood and more promptly recognized. It was formerly included under the term “perityphlitis”—that is, inflammation connected with the caecum or blind portion of the large intestine. But in the vast majority of cases the inflammation begins in the appendix, not in the intestine proper. It is apt to extend and set up a localized peritonitis, which in the worst cases may become general.

Appendicitis is more often met with in the young than the old, and in boys rather than girls; and in some families there is a strange predisposition towards it. It is often started by a chill, or by over-exertion, and sometimes the attack follows a blow or strain, or some other direct injury, after which the virulent micro-organisms seize on the mucous membrane and involve the appendix in acute inflammation.

The appendix is a narrow tube, about the size of a goose-quill, with an average length of 3 in. It terminates in a blunt point, and from its worm-like shape is called vermiformis. It is an appendage of the large intestine, into which it opens, and is regarded as the degenerate relic, surviving in man and other mammals, of an earlier form of intestine. Foreign bodies passing down the intestinal canal may find their way into the appendix and lodge there. Frequently the diseased appendix is found blocked by hard faeces or undigested particles of food, such as nuts, fibrous vegetable matter, and other imperfectly masticated substances; inflammation may occur, however, without the presence of any impacted material. The appendix may be 218 twisted, bent, or otherwise strangulated, or its orifice may be blocked, so that the tube is distended with mucus which can find no outlet; or ulceration of tuberculous or malignant origin may occur. Inflammation started in the appendix is liable to spread to the peritoneum, and herein lies the gravity of the affection and the indication for treatment. The symptoms vary from “indigestion,” and slight pain and sickness, which pass off in a few short days, to an exceedingly violent illness, which may cause death in a few hours. Pain is usually first felt in the belly, low down on the right side or across the region of the navel; sometimes, however, it is diffuse, and at other times it is scarcely complained of. There is some fever, the temperature rising to 101° or 102° F., with nausea, and very likely with vomiting. The abdomen is tender to pressure, and the tenderness may be referred to the spot mentioned above. Some swelling may also be made out in that region. The attack may last for two, three or four days, and then subside. There are, however, other cases less well defined, in which the mischief pursues a latent course, producing little more than a vague abdominal uneasiness, until it suddenly advances into a violent stage. In some chronic cases the trouble continues, on and off, for months or even for years.

On paper it is easy to arrange cases of appendicitis into three classes—catarrhal, ulcerative and mortifying—but in actual practice this is neither desirable nor possible. Such classification is based upon the symptoms, and in appendicitis symptoms may be actually misleading. The three conditions to which the surgeon chiefly looks for guidance are the aspect of the patient, the rate of his pulse and the degree of fever as shown by the thermometer. But in certain cases of appendicitis, though the surgeon knows intuitively, or, at least, suspects, that the general condition is extremely serious, the patient looks fairly well and says that he is not in pain, his pulse-rate being but little quickened and his temperature being but slightly above normal. Nevertheless, when the surgeon has opened the belly in the appendix region, he finds the appendix swollen, perforated and mortified, and lying in a stinking abscess, whilst inflammation has already spread to the neighbouring coils of intestine. Unfortunately, the surgeon can no more tell what he is going to find at his operation in some of these cases than he can foretell the course which any particular case is going to run.

We may most usefully give here the symptoms as they are likely to be found in an ordinary case of appendicitis, and as they may be observed by one who is not a member of the medical profession, in a way that may prove helpful to him when circumstances have awakened his interest in the disease.

The case taken shall be that of a boy at school, for, as already stated, boys are more prone to the disease than girls. The boy has had, may be, occasional attacks of “indigestion” which have duly passed away under the influence of aperient medicines, and, being heated at play, he has sat down upon the cold ground. Or he has got wet through or over-tired during a long walk or ride. At any rate, his vital powers have been suddenly lowered, and the micro-organisms teeming in his bowel have seized upon the lining membrane of the appendix. He feels out of sorts, and if he manages to eat a meal he very likely vomits it soon after, for the whole nervous system of his abdomen is disturbed by the local inflammation. The act of vomiting gives slight relief, however, and probably he begins to complain of pains in his head as well as in his abdomen, and possibly he has an attack of shivering—the result of disturbance of his general nervous system. By this time he may be attacked with intense pain in the part of his abdomen a little above the middle of the right groin, and at that spot there may be a tenderness, and a feeling of resistance may be made out by the gentle pressure of the finger. In order to relax the pressure upon the tender area he probably lies with his right thigh slightly bent. By this time he may look ill, his face being slightly flushed, or pale and anxious. If the clinical thermometer is placed under his tongue, the index may rise a degree or two, perhaps several degrees, above normal, and his pulse may be quickened to 90 or 100 beats a minute. Perhaps it is a good deal quicker than this. Later, the skin of the lower part of the right side of the abdomen may be flushed or reddened.

This clinical picture leaves no room for doubt. The boy has an attack of acute septic inflammation of his appendix. Let it be that the symptoms have come on quickly, and that the affection is not more than ten or twelve hours old; no one can tell precisely what course the disease is going to run. It may be that with rest in bed, constant fomentations, and absolute starvation, the inflammation will subside; but it is just as likely that in spite of this judicious treatment the symptoms will go from bad to worse, and that a belated operation will fail to rescue the boy from a general peritonitis which may end fatally. But at present, so far as one can tell, the disease is still limited to the appendix. And what, at this moment, is the best line of treatment? Some practitioners would answer—“Let the acute attack settle down, and then, after a week or ten days, when everything is quiet, remove the appendix, for statistics show that when the operation is done in the quiet interval the results are extremely favourable, whilst if it is done in the acute stage the outlook is not so bright.” This is quite right. But one cannot be sure that the “quiet interval” will ever arrive. The case in question may be one of those which rapidly go on from bad to worse, and mortification and perforation of the appendix having taken place over some hard faecal concretion, general peritonitis is inevitable, with distension of the bowel and hopeless blood-poisoning. If it were certain that the attack of appendicitis would subside and become quiescent, it would be wise to wait. But it too often happens that the first attack is, indeed, the last. Acute appendicitis is one thing; relapsing appendicitis is another. The latter condition is very manageable.

Inasmuch, then, as it is impossible to know what direction the disease will take, whether to quiescence or to disaster, it is for the greatest good in the greatest number of cases that the inflamed appendix be removed by operation whilst the disease is still limited to the appendix. It is highly probable that if every available hospital surgeon were asked if he had ever had cause to regret having advised early operation in a case of appendicitis the answer would be “No”; on the other hand, every surgeon would be able to recall cases in which delay had been followed by disaster—which an early resort to operation would, in all probability, have prevented.

If the disease is going to assume the severe form, all the symptoms, as a rule, increase in severity. The facial expression becomes more anxious, and the accumulation of gas in the paralysed intestine causes an increase in the abdominal distension, so that the patient lies with his knees drawn up. The vomiting continues. The pulse quickens to 120 or 140 a minute, and the temperature rises, perhaps to 104° F. The swelling and tenderness increase on the right side of the abdomen, and if the abscess does not find escape externally it probably bursts into the general peritoneal cavity, and the patient becomes bathed in profuse sweat, the result of blood-poisoning. Death is likely to follow within two days, the result of blood-poisoning and exhaustion.

Catarrhal and Relapsing Appendicitis.—Some cases of appendicitis run a mild course, giving rise to no worse symptoms, perhaps, than those of “indigestion” and nausea, with a feeling of general discomfort in the abdomen, and, probably, some local tenderness. The attack may be preceded or accompanied by constipation. The administration of a mild aperient or an enema, rest, starvation and fomentation will probably put matters right again—at any rate for a time.

219

This form of the disease may be due to the presence of “bolted,” unchewed or indigestible food in that part of the large intestine into which the appendix opens. And these mild recurrent attacks may sometimes be got rid of altogether by having the teeth put in order, and by inducing the individual to choose his food with discretion, to chew it carefully, to take his meals regularly and to eat slowly.

Obviously, these attacks are very different from those of the acute septic form of the disease described above, though there is no telling that one of them may not develop into the acute form. Some of the mild attacks are due to a kink in the appendix, or to some other condition which temporarily prevents the secretions of the appendix from finding their way into the large intestine. Others of them are caused by a passing catarrhal inflammation of the lining of the appendix and have a distant resemblance to a recurring “sore throat.”

After undergoing one or two of these mild attacks the patient would be well advised to have his appendix removed when it has once more got into the “quiet stage.” Experience abundantly shows that the operation can then be performed with but slight disturbance of the patient, and with the smallest possible amount of risk. And until his vulnerable appendix has been removed he is never safe.

In the chronic form of the disease though the patient is never desperately ill he is never quite well. He has pains and discomfort in the abdomen, with slight tenderness and nausea, with “indigestion,” as he may call it. And as one can never tell when the smouldering inflammation may break out into conflagration, he is well advised to submit himself to operation without further delay. To carry about a diseased appendix is to run the constant risk of being laid up at a time most inconvenient, as when travelling or when staying in some place where skilled assistance is far distant or absolutely unobtainable. But having made up his mind that the appendix had better be removed, the patient can choose time, place and surgeon, and, having undergone a week’s careful training for the ordeal, can safely count on being back at work again in a month or six weeks’ time.

As regards treatment, the greatest safety consists in the prompt removal of the inflamed appendix, and statistics show that if the operation can be done in the first or second day of even an acute attack, the result is generally favourable—that is to say, if the appendix can be removed whilst the disease is still shut up within its tissues. But in some cases ulceration and perforation, or mortification, may have taken place over a hard faecal concretion within the first twenty-four or forty-eight hours, and, the septic germs having been let loose, peritonitis may have already set in, and operation may be followed by disappointment. Still, if the case had been left unoperated on, no other result could have been expected. It was not to the operation, but to the intensely acute disease that the calamity must be attributed.

Nature is marvellously clever in some of these cases in shutting off the area of the disease by glueing together the neighbouring coils of intestine, the limited local peritonitis causing the tissues to build themselves into a wall which securely shuts in the abscess cavity. But in other cases she seems helpless, no barrier being formed for limiting the area of disturbance. In such a case it is inevitable that disappointment must result from the surgeon delaying operation in the hope that delimitation might take place. And when at last he makes his incision he sees that the disease has had so long a start that his own chance of success is but a poor one. In a less severe attack, under the influence of rest, starvation and fomentation, and in cases of chronic and of relapsing disease, the surgeon may watch and wait and choose his own time for operating. But when the symptoms are steadily increasing in severity he should urge an immediate incision. When, as often happens, the inflammation begins suddenly and severely, and, under the influence of treatment, steadily quiets down, the surgeon does well to delay operation. But in a fortnight or so, when everything has become once more quiet, he will urge the removal of the appendix, for this one attack is more than likely to be the forerunner of other attacks if the diseased appendix is left.

The most serious cases are those in which the aspect, the pulse, and the temperature of the patient fail to give warning of a very advanced state of disease. Every surgeon of experience has met with cases in which, though there is nothing pointing to the fact that the patient is on the brink of a disaster, the operation has shown that the appendix is mortified, and that it is surrounded with abundant foul matter. It is then that he regrets not having operated a day or two earlier. Consequently it is a good rule to operate in all doubtful cases. In cases in which one happens to know that previous attacks have passed off under palliative treatment, there is no need for immediate operation; the quiet interval may be safely waited for. But in cases in which there is “no history,” and in which the surgeon has nothing to guide him, the greatest safety is in prompt operation.

If an attack of acute appendicitis is allowed to take its course unoperated on, abscess forms in the peritoneal cavity in the region of the appendix, but if already inflammation has happily glued the intestines together around that area, the pus is confined within definite limits. But as the abscess increases in size the demand for its evacuation becomes urgent. The pus, under the influence of a natural law, seeks its escape by the path of least resistance; sometimes this is into the intestine, and occasionally into the bladder. The most satisfactory course which it can take is through the wall of the abdomen and out above the right groin. As it is making its way in this direction the skin over that part becomes red, swollen, hot and tender, and the tissues between it and the skin become swollen and brawny. Rarely is fluctuation to be made out until the pus has worked its way close to the surface. Later, ulceration takes place in the undermined skin, and the stinking contents of the abscess escape, greatly to the relief of the patient. But long before this could happen the surgeon should have made an incision through the inflamed tissues in order to give nature some greatly needed help. For in many cases she allows the pus blindly to discover that the course of least resistance is not towards the surface of the abdomen but through the inflammatory barrier formed by the adherent coils of bowel, and so into the general peritoneal cavity. This unfortunate issue may give temporary relief to the patient, so that he says that he feels much better, and that his pain has nearly gone. But though his temperature may fall, his pulse is apt to quicken—an ominous coupling of symptoms; the paralysed bowels become further distended, so that the lungs are pressed upon and breathing is embarrassed; hiccough comes on; and whether operation is now resorted to or not, a fatal end is highly probable. In other cases, the escaping pus finds its way up towards the liver and forms an abscess below the base of the lungs.

If operation is performed when appendicitis has run on to the formation of abscess, and the diseased appendix presents itself, it should of course be removed; but if it does not present itself the surgeon should abstain from making a determined search for it, as in so doing he may break down the barrier which nature has provided, and thus himself become the means of spreading a septic peritonitis. Nor should he attempt to make clean the foul abscess cavity. All that he should do is to provide for efficient drainage. A large proportion of these cases do extremely well with incision and drainage, and in the subsequent healing of the cavity the wreckage of the appendix either undergoes disintegration or is rendered harmless for further anxiety.

In some cases, however, the damaged appendix remains as a smouldering ember, ready at any moment to cause further conflagration. This is made manifest by lingering pains, and by tenderness and warnings after the abscess has healed, and the patient will be well advised to have what is left of the appendix removed by operation at a time of quiescence. The operation, however, may turn out to be a very difficult one. Sometimes the wound by which the abscess has been evacuated, by nature or by art, refuses to heal completely, a little discharge of a faecal odour continuing to escape. The small wound leads into a 220 faecal fistula, and a bent probe passed along it would probably find its way into the bowel. The wound is likely to close of itself in due course; but if after many weeks of disappointment it still continues to discharge, the surgeon may advise an operation for its obliteration.

It occasionally happens that after operation the scar of the wound in the abdominal wall yields under the pressure from within, and a bulging of the intestines beneath the skin occurs. This is called a ventral hernia, and if the patient cannot be made comfortable by wearing a truss with a large flat pad, an operation may be deemed advisable.

If, in a case of appendicitis, for one reason or another operation is to be delayed, what treatment should be resorted to? The patient should be put to bed with his knees resting over a pillow, and a large fomentation under oil silk should be laid over the lower part of the abdomen. No food should be given beyond an occasional sip of hot water. Purgatives should not be administered, as this would be to set in movement an inflamed piece of bowel. If the case is not acute, a large enema of soap and water with turpentine may be given, or, possibly, a dose of castor oil by the mouth. As a rule, however, it is unwise to set the bowels in vigorous action until the diseased appendix has been removed. No opium should be given.

Acute intestinal obstruction, cancer of the intestine, inflammation of the ovary, typhoid fever and renal and gallstone colic, are affections which are apt to be mistaken for appendicitis. The first of these resembles it most closely, and diagnosis is sometimes impossible without resort to operation. And it is a fortunate thing that, when error of diagnosis has been made, the operation which was designed for dealing with an inflamed appendix may be directed with equal advantage to the morbid condition which is found on opening the abdomen. In typhoid fever the characteristic temperature, the general condition of the patient, and the presence of delirium are differentiating signs of importance; in renal and gallstone colic the situation and the more paroxysmal character of the pain are usually distinctive.

APPENDICULATA, a zoological name introduced by E. Ray Lankester (preface to the English edition of C. Gegenbaur’s Comparative Anatomy), and employed by the same writer in the 9th edition of this encyclopaedia (article “Zoology”) to denote the eighth phylum, or major division, of coelomate animals. The animals thus associated, the Rotifera, Chaetopoda and Arthropoda, are composed of a larger or smaller number of hollow rings, each ring possessing typically a pair of hollow lateral appendages, moved by intrinsic muscles and penetrated by blood-spaces.

APPENDINI, FRANCESCO MARIA (1768-1837), Italian historian and philologist, was born at Poirino, near Turin, on the 4th of November 1768. Educated at Rome, he took orders and was sent to Ragusa, where he was appointed professor of rhetoric. When the French seized Ragusa, Napoleon placed Appendini at the head of the Ragusan academy. After the Austrian occupation he was appointed principal of a college at Zara, where he died in 1837. Appendini’s chief work was his Notizie Istorico-critiche sulle Antichità, Storia, e Letteratura dei Ragusci (1802-1803).

APPENZELL, one of the cantons of north-east Switzerland, entirely surrounded by the canton of St Gall; both were formed out of the dominions of the prince abbots of St Gall, whence the name Appenzell (abbatis cello). It is an alpine region, particularly in its south portion, where rises the Alpstein limestone range (culminating in the Säntis, 8216 ft.), though towards the north the surface is composed rather of green hills, separating green hollows in which nestle neat villages and small towns. It is mainly watered by two streams that descend from the Säntis, the Urnasch joining the Sitter (on which is the capital, Appenzell), which later flows into the Thur. There are light railways from Appenzell to St Gall either (12½ m.) past Gais or (20½ m.) past Herisau, as well as lines from St Gall to Trogen (6 m.) and from Rorschach to Heiden (4¼ m.). Since 1597 it has been divided, for religious reasons, into two half-cantons, which are quite independent of each other, and differ in many points.

The north and west portion or Ausser Rhoden has a total area of 93.6 sq. m. (of which 90.6 are classed as “productive”; forests covering 22·5 sq. m. and glaciers .038 sq. m.), with a population (in 1900) of 55,281, mainly German-speaking, and containing 49,797 Protestants as against 5418 Romanists. Its political capital is Trogen (q.v.), though the largest town is Herisau (q.v.), while Teufen has 4595 inhabitants, and Heiden (3745 inhabitants) in the north-east corner is the most frequented of the many goats’ whey cure resorts for which the entire canton is famous (Urnäsch and Gais are also in Ausser Rhoden). This half-canton is divided into three administrative districts, comprising twenty communes, and is mainly industrial, the manufacture of cotton goods, muslins, and embroidery being very flourishing. It sends one member (elected by the Landsgemeinde) to the federal Ständerath and three to the federal Nationalrath (elected by a direct popular vote).

The south or more mountainous portion of Appenzell forms the half-canton of Appenzell, Inner Rhoden. It has a total area of 66.7 sq. m. (of which 62.8 sq. m. are classed as “productive,” forests covering 12.8 sq. m. and glaciers .38 sq. m.), and a total population of 13,499, practically all German-speaking, and all but 833 Romanists. Its political capital is Appenzell (q.v.), which is also the largest village, while Weissbad (near it) and Gonten are the best-known goats’ whey cure resorts. Embroidery and muslins are made in this half-canton, though wholly at home by the work-people. But it is very largely pastoral, containing 168 mountain pastures or “alps,” maintaining each summer 4000 cows, and of an estimated capital value of 2,682,955 francs (the figures for Ausser Rhoden are respectively 100 alps, 2800 cows, and 1,749,900 francs). Inner Rhoden is extremely conservative, and has the reputation of always rejecting any federal Referendum. For similar reasons it has preserved many old customs and costumes, those of the women being very elaborate and picturesque, while the herdsmen have retained their festival attire of red waistcoats, embroidered braces and canary-coloured shorts. It sends one member (named by the Landsgemeinde) to the federal Ständerath, and one also to the federal Nationalrath, while it forms but a single administrative district, though divided into six communes.

To the outer world the canton of Appenzell is best known by its institution of Landsgemeinden, or primitive democratic assemblies held in the open air, in which every male citizen (not being disqualified) over twenty years of age must (under a money penalty) appear personally: each half-canton has such an assembly of its own, that of Inner Rhoden always meeting at Appenzell, and that of Ausser Rhoden in the odd years at Hundwil (near Herisau) and in the even years at Trogen. This institution is of immemorial antiquity, and the meetings in either case are always held on the last Sunday in April. The Landsgemeinde is the supreme legislative authority, and elects both the executive (in Inner Rhoden composed of nine members and called Ständeskommission, and in Ausser Rhoden of seven members and called Regierungsrath) and the president or Landammann; in each half-canton there is also a sort of standing committee (composed of the members of the executive and representatives from the communes—in Inner Rhoden one member per 250 or fraction over 125 of the population, and in Ausser Rhoden one member per 1000 of the inhabitants) which prepares business for the Landsgemeinde and decides minor matters; in Inner Rhoden it is named the Grossrath and in Ausser Rhoden the Kantonsrath. As various old-fashioned ceremonies are observed at the meetings and the members each appear with his girded sword, the sight of a meeting of the Landsgemeinde is most striking and interesting. The existing constitution of Inner Rhoden dates mainly from 1872, and that of Ausser Rhoden from 1876.

By the middle of the 11th century the abbots of St Gall had established their power in the land later called Appenzell, which, too, became thoroughly teutonized, its early inhabitants having probably been romanized Raetians. But as early as 1377, this portion of the abbots’ domains formed an alliance with the Swabian free imperial cities and adopted a constitution of its own. The repeated attempts of the abbots to put down this 221 independence of their rule were defeated in the battles of Vögelinsegg (1403), north-west of Trogen, and of the Stoss (1405), the pass leading from Gais over to Altstätten in the Rhine valley. In 1411 Appenzell was placed under the “protection” of the Swiss Confederation, of which, in 1452, it became an “allied member,” and in 1513 a full member. Religious differences broke up the land after the Reformation into two portions, each called Rhoden, a term that in the singular is said to mean a “clearing,” and occurs in 1070, long before the final separation. From 1798 to 1803 Appenzell, with the other domains of the abbot of St Gall, was formed into the canton Säntis of the Helvetic Republic, but in 1803, on the creation of the new canton of St Gall, shrank back within its former boundaries. The oldest codes of the laws and customs of the land date from 1409 and 1585, the original MS. of the latter (called the “Silver Book” from its silver clasps) being still used in Inner Rhoden when, at the close of the annual Landsgemeinde, the newly elected Landammann first takes the oath of office, and the assembled members then take that of obedience to him, in either case with uplifted right hands.

APPENZELL, the political capital of the Inner Rhoden half of the Swiss canton of Appenzell. It is built in a smiling green hollow on the left bank of the Sitter stream, which is formed by the union of several mountain torrents descending from the Säntis. By light railways it is 12½ m. from St Gall past Gais or 20½ m. past Herisau. Its chief streets are paved, but it is rather a large village than a town, though in 1900 it had 4574 inhabitants, practically all German-speaking and Romanists. It has a stately modern parish church (attached to a Gothic choir), a small but very ancient chapel of the abbots of St Gall (whose summer residence was this village), and two Capuchin convents (one for men, founded in 1588, and one for women, founded in 1613). Among the archives, kept in the sacristy of the church, are several banners captured by the Appenzellers in former days, among them one taken in 1406 at Imst, near Lanedeck, with the inscription Hundert Teufel, though popularly this number is multiplied a thousandfold. In the principal square the Landsgemeinde (or cantonal democratic assembly) is held annually in the open air on the last Sunday in April. The inhabitants are largely employed in the production of embroidery, though also engaged in various pastoral occupations. About 2½ m. by road south-east of Appenzell is Weissbad, a well-known goat’s whey cure establishment, while 1½ hours above it is the quaint little chapel of Wildkirchli, built (1648) in a rock cavern, on the way to the Säntis.

APPERCEPTION (Lat. ad and percipere, perceive), in psychology, a term used to describe the presentation of an object on which attention is fixed, in relation to the sum of consciousness previous to the presentation and the mind as a whole. The word was first used by Leibnitz, practically in the sense of the modern Attention (q.v.), by which an object is apprehended as “not-self” and yet in relation to the self. In Kantian terminology apperception is (1) transcendental—the perception of an object as involving the consciousness of the pure self as subject, and (2) empirical,—the cognition of the self in its concrete existence. In (1) apperception is almost equivalent to self-consciousness; the existence of the ego may be more or less prominent, but it is always involved. According to J.F. Herbart (q.v.) apperception is that process by which an aggregate or “mass” of presentations becomes systematized (apperceptions-system) by the accretion of new elements, either sense-given or product of the inner workings of the mind. He thus emphasizes in apperception the connexion with the self as resulting from the sum of antecedent experience. Hence in education the teacher should fully acquaint himself with the mental development of the pupil, in order that he may make full use of what the pupil already knows.

Apperception is thus a general term for all mental processes in which a presentation is brought into connexion with an already existent and systematized mental conception, and thereby is classified, explained or, in a word, understood; e.g. a new scientific phenomenon is explained in the light of phenomena already analysed and classified. The whole intelligent life of man is, consciously or unconsciously, a process of apperception, inasmuch as every act of attention involves the appercipient process.

APPERLEY, CHARLES JAMES (1777-1843), English sportsman and sporting writer, better known as “Nimrod,” the pseudonym under which he published his works on the chase and the turf, was born at Plasgronow, near Wrexham, in Denbighshire, in 1777. Between the years 1805 and 1820 he devoted himself to fox-hunting. About 1821 he began to contribute to the Sporting Magazine, under the pseudonym of “Nimrod,” a series of racy articles, which helped to double the circulation of the magazine in a year or two. The proprietor, Mr Pittman, kept for “Nimrod” a stud of hunters, and defrayed all expenses of his tours, besides giving him a handsome salary. The death of Mr Pittman, however, led to a law-suit with the proprietors of the magazine for money advanced, and Apperley, to avoid imprisonment, had to take up his residence near Calais (1830), where he supported himself by his writings. He died in London on the 19th of May 1843. The most important of his works are: Remarks on the Condition of Hunters, the Choice of Horses, &c. (1831); The Chase, the Turf, and the Road (originally written for the Quarterly Review), (1837); Memoirs of the Life of the Late John Mytton (1837); Nimrod’s Northern Tour (1838); Nimrod Abroad (1842); The Horse and the Hound (a reprint from the seventh edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica) (1842); Hunting Reminiscences (1843).

APPERT, BENJAMIN NICOLAS MARIE (1797-1847), French philanthropist, was born in Paris on the 10th of September 1797. While a young man he introduced a system of mutual instruction into the regimental schools of the department of the Nord. The success which it obtained induced him to publish a Manual setting forth his system. While engaged in teaching prisoners at Montaigu, he fell under the suspicion of having connived at the escape of two of them, and was thrown into the prison of La Force. On his release he resolved to devote the rest of his life to bettering the condition of those whose lot he had for a time shared, and he travelled much over Europe for the purpose of studying the various systems of prison discipline, and wrote several books on the subject. After the revolution of 1830 he became secretary to Queen Marie Amélie, and organized the measures taken for the relief of the needy. He was decorated with the Legion of Honour in 1833.

His brother, François Appert (d. 1840), was the inventor of the method of preserving food by enclosing it in hermetically sealed tins; he left a work entitled Art de conserver les substances animales et végétables.

APPIAN (Gr. Άππιανός), of Alexandria, Roman historian, flourished during the reigns of Trajan, Hadrian and Antoninus Pius. He tells us that, after having filled the chief offices in his native place, he repaired to Rome, where he practised as an advocate. When advanced in years, he obtained, by the good offices of his friend Fronto, the dignity of imperial procurator— it is supposed in Egypt. His work (Ῥωμαικά) in twenty-four books, written in Greek, is rather a number of monographs than a connected history. It gives an account of various peoples and countries from the earliest times down to their incorporation 222 into the Roman empire. Besides a preface, there are extant eleven complete books and considerable fragments. In spite of its unattractive style, the work is very valuable, especially for the period of the civil wars.

APPIANI, ANDREA (1754-1817), the best fresco painter of his age, was born at Milan. He was made pensioned artist to the kingdom of Italy by Napoleon, but lost his allowance after the events of 1814 and fell into poverty. Correggio was his model, and his best pieces, which are in the church of Santa Maria presso San Celso and the royal palace at Milan, almost rival those of his great master. He also painted Napoleon and the chief personages of his court. Among the most graceful of his oil-paintings are his “Venus and Love,” and “Rinaldo in the Garden of Armida.” He is known as “the elder,” to distinguish him from his great-nephew Andrea Appiani (1817-1865), an historical painter at Rome. Other painters of the same name were Niccolo Appiani (fl. 1510) and Francesco Appiani (1704-1792).

APPIA, VIA, a high-road leading from Rome to Campania and lower Italy, constructed in 312 B.C. by the censor Appius Claudius Caecus. It originally ran only as far as Capua, but was successively prolonged to Beneventum, Venusia, Tarentum and Brundusium, though at what dates is unknown. Probably it was extended as far as Beneventum not long after the colonization of this town in 268 B.C., and it seems to have reached Venusia before 190 B.C. Horace, in the journey to Brundusium described in Sat. i. 5, followed the Via Appia as far as Beneventum, but not beyond.

The original road was no doubt only gravelled (glarea strata); in 298 B.C. a footpath was laid saxo quadrato from the Porta Capena, by which it left Rome, to the temple of Mars, about 1 m. from the gate. Three years later, however, the whole road was paved with silex from the temple to Bovillae, and in 191 B.C. the first mile from the gate to the temple was similarly treated. The distance from Rome to Capua was 132 m. For the first few miles the road is flanked by an uninterrupted series of tombs and other buildings (see L. Canina, Via Appia, Rome, 1853). As far as Terracina it ran in an almost entirely straight line, even through the Alban Hills, where the gradients are steep. A remarkably fine embankment belonging to it still exists at Aricia. At Forum Appii it entered the Pomptine Marshes; that this portion (19 m. long, hence called Decennovium) belonged to the original road was proved by the discovery at Ad Medias (Mesa) of a milestone of about 250 B.C. (Ch. Hülsen, in Römische Mitteilungen, 1889, 83; 1895, 301). A still older road ran along the foot of the Volscian mountains past Cora, Norba and Setia; this served as the post road until the end of the 18th century. At the time of Strabo and Horace, however, it was the practice to travel by canal from Forum Appii to Lucus Feroniae; to Nerva and Trajan were due the paving of the road and the repair of the bridges along this section. Theodoric in A.D. 486 ordered the execution of similar repairs, the success of which is recorded in inscriptions, but in the middle ages it was abandoned and impassable, and was only renewed by Pius VI. The older road crossed the back of the promontory at the foot of which Terracina stands; in imperial times, probably, the rock was cut away perpendicularly for a height of 120 ft. to allow the road to pass. Beyond Fundi it passed through the mountains to Formiae, the engineering of the road being noteworthy; and thence by Minturnae and Sinuessa (towns of the Aurunci which had been conquered in 314 B.C.)1 to Capua. The remains of the road in this first portion are particularly striking.

Between Capua and Beneventum, a distance of 32 m., the road passed near the defile of Caudium (see Caudine Forks). The modern highroad follows the ancient line, and remains of the latter, with the exception of three well-preserved bridges, which still serve for the modern highroad, are conspicuous by their absence. The portion of the road from Rome to Beneventum is described by Sir R. Colt Hoare, Classical Tour through Italy, 57 seq. (London, 1819). He was accompanied on his journey, made in 1789, by the artist Carlo Labruzzi, who executed a series of 226 drawings, the greater part of which have not been published; they are described by T. Ashby in Mélanges de l’École Française de Rome (1903), p. 375 seq., and Atti del Congresso Internazionale per le Scienze Storiche, vol. v. (Rome, 1904), p. 125 seq.

From Beneventum to Brundusium by the Via Appia, through Venusia and Tarentum, was 202 m. A shorter route, but more fitted for mule traffic, though Horace drove along part of it,2 ran by Aequum Tuticum, Aecae, Herdoniae, Canusium, Barium, and Gnatia (Strabo vi. 282); it was made into a main road by Trajan, and took the name Via Traiana. The original road, too, adopted in imperial times a more devious but easier route by Aeclanum instead of by Trevicum. This was restored by Hadrian for the 15 m. between Beneventum and Aeclanum. Under Diocletian and Maximian a road (the Via Herculia) was constructed from Aequum Tuticum to Pons Aufidi near Venusia, where it crossed the Via Appia and went on into Lucania, passing through Potentia and Grumentum, and joining the Via Popilia near Nerulum. Though it must have lost much of its importance through the construction of the Via Traiana, the last portion from Tarentum to Brundusium was restored by Constantine about A.D. 315.

APPIN, a coast district of Argyllshire, Scotland, bounded W. by Loch Linnhe, S. by Loch Creran, E. by the districts of Benderloch and Lorne, and N. by Loch Leven. It lies north-east to south-west, and measures 14 m. in length by 7 m. in breadth. The scenery of the coast is extremely beautiful, and inland the country is rugged and mountainous. The principal hills are the double peaks of Ben Vair (3362 ft. and 3284 ft.) and Creag Ghorm (2372 ft.) in the north, and Fraochie (2883 ft.), Meall Ban (2148 ft.) and Ben Mhic na Ceisich (2093 ft.) near the right flank of Glen Creran. The chief streams are the Coe and Laroch, flowing into Loch Leven, the Duror and Salachan flowing into Loch Linnhe, and the lola and Creran flowing into Loch Creran. The leading industries comprise slate and granite quarries and lead mining. Ballachulish, Duror, Portnacroish, Appin and Port Appin are the principal villages. Ballachulish and Port Appin are ports of call for steamers, and the Caledonian railway company’s branch line from Connel Ferry to Ballachulish runs through the coast land and has stations at Creagan, Appin, Duror, Kentallen and Ballachulish Ferry. Appin was the country of a branch of the Stewarts.

APPLAUSE (Lat. applaudere, to strike upon, clap), primarily the expression of approval by clapping of hands, &c.; generally any expression of approval. The custom of applauding is doubtless as old and as widespread as humanity, and the variety of its forms is limited only by the capacity for devising means of making a noise. Among civilized nations, however, it has at various times been subject to certain conventions. Thus the Romans had a set ritual of applause for public performances, expressing degrees of approval: snapping the finger and thumb, clapping with the flat or hollow palm, waving the flap of the toga, 223 for which last the emperor Aurelian substituted a handkerchief (orarium), distributed to all Roman citizens (see Stole). In the theatre, at the close of the play, the chief actor called out “Valete et plaudite!”, and the audience, guided by an unofficial choregus, chaunted their applause antiphonally. This was often organized and paid for (Böttiger, Über das Applaudieren im Theater bei den Alten, Leipz., 1822). When Christianity became fashionable the customs of the theatre were transferred to the churches. Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. vii. 30) says that Paul of Samosata encouraged the congregation to applaud his preaching by waving linen cloths (ὀθόναις), and in the 4th and 5th centuries applause of the rhetoric of popular preachers had become an established custom. Though, however, applause may provide a healthy stimulus, its abuse has led to attempts at abolishing or restricting it even in theatres. The institution of the claque, people hired by performers to applaud them, has largely discredited the custom, and indiscriminate applause has been felt as an intolerable interruption to serious performances. The reverential spirit which abolished applause in church has tended to spread to the theatre and the concert-room, largely under the influence of the quasi-religious atmosphere of the Wagner performances at Baireuth. In Germany (e.g. the court theatres at Berlin) applause during the performance and “calling before the curtain” have been officially forbidden, but even in Germany this is felt to be in advance of public opinion. (See also Acclamation and Cheering.)

APPLE (a common Teut. word, A.S. aepl, aeppel, O.H.G. aphul, aphal, apfal, mod. Ger. Apfel), the fruit of Pyrus Malus, belonging to the sub-order Pomaceae, of the natural order Rosaceae. It is one of the most widely cultivated and best-known and appreciated of fruits belonging to temperate climates. In its wild state it is known as the crab-apple, and is found generally distributed throughout Europe and western Asia, growing in as high a latitude as Trondhjem in Norway. The crabs of Siberia belong to different species of Pyrus. The apple-tree as cultivated is a moderate-sized tree with spreading branches, ovate, acutely serrated or crenated leaves, and flowers in corymbs. The fruit is too well known to need any description of its external characteristics. The apple is successfully cultivated in higher latitudes than any other fruit tree, growing up to 65° N., but notwithstanding this, its blossoms are more susceptible of injury from frost than the flowers of the peach or apricot. It comes into flower much later than these trees, and so avoids the night frost which would be fatal to its fruit-bearing. The apples which are grown in northern regions are, however, small, hard, and crabbed, the best fruit being produced in hot summer climates, such as Canada and the United States. Besides in Europe and America, the fruit is now cultivated at the Cape of Good Hope, in northern India and China, and in Australia and New Zealand.

Apples have been cultivated in Great Britain probably since the period of the Roman occupation, but the names of many varieties indicate a French or Dutch origin of much later date. In 1688 Ray enumerated seventy-eight varieties in cultivation in the neighbourhood of London, and now it is calculated that about 2000 kinds can be distinguished. According to the purposes for which they are suitable, they can be classed as— 1st, dessert; 2nd, culinary; and 3rd, cider apples. The principal dessert apples are the Pippins (pepins, seedlings), of which there are numerous varieties. As culinary apples, besides Rennets and other dessert kinds, Codlins and Biffins are cultivated. In England, Herefordshire and Devonshire are famous for the cultivation of apples, and in these counties the manufacture of cider (q.v.) is an important industry. Cider is also extensively prepared in Normandy and in Holland. Verjuice is the fermented juice of crab apples.

A large trade in the importation of apples is carried on in Britain, imports coming chiefly from French, Belgian and Dutch growers, and from the United States and British North America. Dried and pressed apples are imported from France for stewing, under the name of Normandy Pippins, and similarly prepared fruits come also from America.

The apple may be propagated by seeds to obtain stocks for grafting, and also for the production of new varieties. The established sorts are usually increased by grafting, the method called whip-grafting being preferred. The stocks should be at least as thick as the finger; and should be headed back to where the graft is to be fixed in January, unless the weather is frosty, but in any case before vegetation becomes active. The scions should be cut about the same time, and laid in firmly in a trench, in contact with the moist soil, until required.

The tree will thrive in any good well-drained soil, the best being a good mellow calcareous loam, while the less iron there is in the subsoil the better. The addition of marl to soils that are not naturally calcareous very much improves them. The trees are liable to canker in undrained soils or those of a hot sandy nature. Where the soil is not naturally rich enough, it should be well manured, but not to the extent of encouraging over-luxuriance. It is better to apply manure in the form of a compost than to use it in a fresh state or unmixed.

To form an orchard, standard trees should be planted at from 25 to 40 ft. between the rows, according to the fertility of the soil and other considerations. The trees should be selected with clean, straight, self-supporting stems, and the head should be shapely and symmetrical, with the main branches well balanced. In order to obtain such a stem, all the leaves on the first shoot from the graft or bud should be encouraged to grow, and in the second season the terminal bud should be allowed to develop a further leading shoot, while the lateral shoots should be allowed to grow, but so that they do not compete with the leader, on which the growth of leaves should be encouraged in order that they may give additional strength to the stem below them. The side shoots should be removed gradually, so that the diminution of foliage in this direction may not exceed the increase made by the new branches and shoots of the upper portion. Dwarf pyramids, which occupy less space than open dwarfs, if not allowed to grow tall, may be planted at from 10 to 12 ft. apart. Dwarf bush trees may be planted from 10 to 15 ft. apart, according to the variety and the soil. Dwarf bushes on the Paradise stock are both ornamental and useful in small gardens, the trees being always conveniently under control. These bush trees, which must be on the proper stock—the French Paradise—may be planted at first 6 ft. apart, with the same distance between the rows, the space being afterwards increased, if desired, to 12 ft. apart, by removing every alternate row.

“Cordons” are trees trained to a single shoot, the laterals of which are kept spurred. They are usually trained horizontally, at about 1½ ft. from the ground, and may consist of one stem or of two, the stems in the latter case being trained in opposite directions. In cold districts the finer sorts of apples may be grown against walls as upright or oblique cordons. From these cordon trees very fine fruit may often be obtained. The apple may also be grown as an espalier tree, a form which does not require much lateral space. The ordinary trained trees for espaliers and walls should be planted 20 ft. apart.

The fruit of the apple is produced on spurs which form on the branchlets of two years old and upwards, and continue fertile for a series of years. The principal pruning should be performed in summer, the young shoots if crowded being thinned out, and the superabundant laterals shortened by breaking them half through. The general winter pruning of the trees may take place any time from the beginning of November to the beginning of March, in open weather. The trees are rather subject to the attacks of the American blight, the white cottony substance found on the bark and developed by an insect (Eriosoma, mali), somewhat similar to the green-fly of the garden, but not a true aphis. It may be removed by scrubbing with a hard brush, by painting the affected spots with any bland oil, or by washing them with dilute paraffin and soft soap.

The apple-blossom weevil (Anthonomus pomorum), a small reddish-brown beetle, often causes serious damage to the flowers. The female bores and lays an egg in the unopened bud, and the maggot feeds on the stamens and pistil. The weevil hibernates in the crannies of the bark or in the soil at the base of the trees, 224 and bandages of tarred doth placed round the stem in spring will prevent the female from crawling up.

The codlin moth (Carpocapsa pomonana) lays its eggs in May in the calyx of the flowers. The young caterpillar, which is white with black head and neck, gnaws its way through the fruit, and pierces the rind. When nearly full grown it attacks the core, and the fruit soon drops. The insect emerges and spins its cocoon in a crack of the bark.

To check this disease the apples which fall before ripening should be promptly removed. A loosely made hay-band twisted round the stem about a foot from the ground is of use. The grubs will generally choose the bands in which to make their cocoon; at the end of the season the bands are collected and burned.

The following are a few of the most approved varieties of the apple tree, arranged in order of their ripening, with the months in which they are in use:—

Apples for table use should have a sweet juicy pulp and rich aromatic flavour, while those suitable for cooking should possess the property of forming a uniform soft pulpy mass when boiled or baked. In their uncooked state they are not very digestible, but when cooked they form a very safe and useful food, exercising a gentle laxative influence.

According to Hutchison their composition is as follows:—

Many exotic fruits, having nothing in common with the apple; are known by that name, e.g. the Balsam apple, Momordica Balsamina; the custard apple (q.v.), Anona reticulata; the egg apple, Solanum esculentum; the rose apple, various species of Eugenia; the pineapple (q.v.), Ananas sativus; the star apple, Chrysophyllum Cainito; and the apples of Sodom, Solanum sodomeum.

APPLEBY, a market town and municipal borough, and the county town of Westmorland, England, in the Appleby parliamentary division, 276 m. N.N.W. from London, on the Midland and a branch of the North Eastern railways. Pop. (1901) 1764. It is picturesquely placed in the valley of the Eden, which is richly wooded, and flanked on the north-east by spurs of Milburn Forest and Dufton and other fells, which rise up to 2600 ft. On a hill above the town stands the castle, retaining a fine Norman keep and surrounded by a double moat, now partly laid out as gardens. The remainder of the castle was rebuilt as a mansion in the 17th century. It was held for the royalists in the civil wars by Sir Philip Musgrave, and was the residence of Anne, countess of Pembroke, the last of the family of Clifford, which had great estates in this part of England. St Ann’s hospital for thirteen poor women (1654) was of her foundation. The grammar school (1453) was refounded by Queen Elizabeth. The modern incorporation dates from 1885, with a mayor, four aldermen and twelve councillors. Area, 1876 acres.

Appleby is not mentioned in any Saxon records, but after the Conquest it rose to importance as the head of the barony of Appleby which extended over the eastern portion of the present county of Westmorland. This barony formed part of the province of Carlisle granted by Henry I. to Ranulf Meschin, who erected the castle at Appleby and made it his place of residence. Appleby is a borough by prescription, and the old charter of incorporation, granted in the first year of James II., was very shortly abandoned. In 1292 we find the mayor and commonalty claiming the right to elect a coroner and to have tolls of markets and fairs. In 1685 the governing body comprised a mayor, aldermen, a town clerk, burgesses of the common council, a coroner and subordinate officers. An undated charter from Henry II. conceding to the burgesses the customs of York, Was confirmed in 1 John, 16 Henry III., 14 Edward I., and 5 Edward III. John granted the borough to the burgesses for a fee-farm rent. The impoverishment caused by the Scottish raids led to its seizure by Edward II. for arrears of payment, but Edward III. restored it on the same terms as before. Henry VIII. reduced the fee-farm rent from 20 marks to 2 marks, after an inquisition which found that Appleby was burnt by the Scots in 1388 and that part of it still lay in ruins. The town, however, never seems to have regained its prosperity, and 16th and 17th century writers speak of it as a poor and insignificant village. Appleby returned two members to parliament from 1295 until disfranchised by the Reform Act of 1832. The market and the St Lawrence fair are held by prescription. James I. granted an additional fair on the second Thursday in April. In the early 18th century Appleby was celebrated for the best corn-market in the country.

APPLETON, NATHAN (1770-1861) American merchant and politician, was born in New Ipswich, New Hampshire, on the 6th of October 1779. He was educated in the New Ipswich Academy, and in 1794 entered mercantile life in Boston, in the employment of his brother, Samuel (1766-1853), a successful and benevolent man of business, with whom he was in partnership 225 from 1800 to 1809. He co-operated with Francis C. Lowell and others in introducing the power-loom and the manufacture of cotton on a large scale into the United States, a factory being established at Waltham, Massachusetts, in 1814, and another in 1822 at Lowell, Massachusetts, of which city he was one of the founders. He was a member of the general court of Massachusetts in 1816, 1821, 1822, 1824 and 1827, and in 1831-1833 and 1842 of the national House of Representatives, in which he was prominent as an advocate of protective duties. He died in Boston on the 14th of July 1861.

His son, Thomas Gold Appleton (1812-1884), who graduated at Harvard in 1831, had some reputation as a writer, an artist and a patron of the fine arts, but was better known for his witticisms, one of which, the oft-quoted “Good Americans, when they die, go to Paris,” is sometimes attributed to Oliver Wendell Holmes. He published some poems and, in prose, Nile Journal (1876), Syrian Sunshine (1877), Windfalls (1878), and Chequer-Work (1879).

APPLETON, a city and the county-seat of Outagamie county, Wisconsin, U.S.A., on the lower Fox river, about 90 m. N. of Milwaukee. Pop. (1890) 11,869; (1900) 15,085, of whom 3605 were foreign-born; (1910, census) 16,773. It is served by the Chicago & North-Western, and the Chicago, Milwaukee & St Paul railways, and by steamboats on the Fox river, by means of which it meets lake transportation at De Pere and Green Bay. Appleton was one of the first cities in the United States to have an electric street railway line in operation; and electric street railways now traverse the entire Fox river valley as far as Fond du Lac on the south and Green Bay on the north. The city is attractively laid out on high bluffs above the river. It has several beautiful parks, two hospitals, a number of fine churches and school buildings, and a public library. The city is the seat of Lawrence college (changed from university in 1908), an interdenominational (originally a Methodist Episcopal) co-educational institution, founded in 1847 as the Lawrence Institute of Wisconsin and named in honour of Amos Adams Lawrence (1814-1886) of Boston, son of Amos Lawrence, and giver of $10,000 for the founding of the Institute. The college comprises an academy, a college of liberal arts, a school of expression, a school of commerce, schools of music and of art, and a school of correspondence; and in 1907-1908 had 33 instructors, 575 students and a library of 24,400 volumes. The Fox river furnishes about 10,000 h.p., which is largely utilized for the manufacture of paper (of which Appleton is one of the largest producers in the United States), wood-pulp, sulphite fibre, machinery, wire screens, woollen goods, knit goods, furniture, dyes and flour. The total value of factory products in 1905 was $6,672,457, an increase of 72.8% over the product value of 1900. Appleton was first permanently settled in 1833, and was named in honour of Samuel Appleton of Massachusetts, who owned part of the original town plot. It was incorporated as a village in 1853, and received in 1857 a city charter, which was revised in 1887 and in 1905.

APPOGGIATURA (from Ital. appoggiare, to lean upon), a musical term for a melodic ornament, a grace-note prefixed to a principal note and printed in small character. The effect is to suspend the principal note, by taking away the time-value of the appoggiatura prefixed to it. There are two kinds, the long appoggiatura, now usually printed as played, and the short, where the suspension of the principal note is scarcely perceptible; this is often called acciatura, a word properly applied to an ornament now obsolete, in which a principal note in a melody is struck together with the note immediately below, the lower note being at once released and the other held on.

APPOINTMENT, POWER OF, in English law, an authority reserved by or limited to a person, to dispose, either wholly or partially, of real or personal property, either for his own benefit or for that of others. Thus if A settle property upon trustees to such uses as B shall by deed or will appoint and in default of and until such appointment to the use of C and his heirs, B, though he has no interest in the property, can at any time appoint the property to any one he pleases, including himself, and C’s interest which has hitherto been vested in him will be divested. In the above case A is said to be the donor, B the donee, and the persons in whose favour the appointment is exercised are called the appointees. Such powers are either general or limited. A general power is one which the appointor may exercise in favour of any person he pleases. It is obvious that such a power is very nearly equivalent to ownership, and consequently property which is the subject of a general power has been made to share the liabilities of ownership. By the Judgments Act 1838 all hereditaments over which a judgment debtor has such a power may be seized by the sheriff under a writ of elegit, and by the Bankruptcy Act 1883 similar property will vest in the trustees of a bankrupt. By the Finance Act 1894 property of which the deceased had a general power of appointment is subject to the payment of estate duty, even though the power has not been exercised. A limited power is one which can only be exercised in favour of certain specified persons or classes; such a power is frequently inserted in marriage settlements in which after life estates to the husband and wife a power is given to appoint among the children of the marriage. In such a case no appointment to any one but children of the marriage is valid. Formerly it was held that the intention of the donor of such a power was that each of the class which are the objects of the power should take some part of the fund, and from this arose the equitable doctrine of illusory appointments, by which the courts of equity set aside an appointment which was good at law on the ground that a merely nominal share had been appointed to one of the objects. The great difficulty of deciding what was a nominal or illusory share caused the passing of the Illusory Appointments Act of 1830, whereby it was enacted that no appointment should be set aside merely on the ground that a share appointed was illusory. It was still necessary, however, that some share should be appointed to each object, and consequently it was possible in the popular phrase to be “cut off with a shilling,” but now by the Powers Amendment Act 1874 the appointor is no longer obliged to appoint a share to each object of the power.

It is a general rule that every circumstance required by the instrument creating the power to accompany the execution of it must be strictly observed. Thus it might be required that the appointment should be by an instrument witnessed by four witnesses, or that the consent in writing of some third party should be signified. The general rule, however, has been modified both by statute and by the rules of equity. By the Wills Act 1837 a will made pursuant to the requirements of that statute shall be a valid execution of a power of appointment by will, notwithstanding that some additional form or solemnity shall have been required by the instrument creating the power, and by the Wills Act 1861 a will made out of the United Kingdom by a British subject according to the forms required by the law of the place where the will was made shall, as regards personal estate, be held to be well executed and admitted to probate; consequently it has been held that an appointment made by such a will is a valid exercise of the power. As regards appointments by deed the Law of Property Amendment Act 1859 enacts that a deed attested by two witnesses shall, so far as execution and attestation go, be a valid exercise of a power to appoint by deed. The courts of equity also will interfere in some cases of defective execution in order to carry out the intentions of the settlor. The principle upon which the court acts is obscure, but the rule has been thus stated:—“Whenever a man having power over an estate, whether ownership or not, in discharge of moral or natural relations, shows an intention to execute such power, the court will operate upon the conscience of the heir (or of the persons entitled in default) to make him perfect this intention.” Equity, however, only relieves against defects not of the essence of the power, such as the absence of seal or execution by will instead of deed, but where the defect is of the essence of the power, as where a consent is not obtained, equity will not assist, 226 nor will it relieve where a power to appoint by will is purported to be exercised by deed. A power of appointment if exercised must be exercised bona fide, otherwise it will be void as fraudulent; thus it has been frequently decided that where a father, having a limited power of appointment among his children, appoints the whole fund to an infant child, who is in no need of the appointment and who is ill, in the expectation of the death of the child whereby the fund will come to him as next of kin, such appointment is void as a fraud upon the power. Where an execution is partly fraudulent and partly valid the court will, if possible, separate the two and only revoke that which is fraudulent; if, however, the two parts are not separable the whole is void. The same rule is applied in cases of excessive execution where the power is exercised in favour of persons some of whom are and some of whom are not objects of the power. The doctrine of Election (q.v.) applies to appointments under powers, but there must be a gift of free and disposable property to the persons entitled in default of appointment.

The appointment must in law be read into the instrument creating the power in lieu of the power itself. Thus an appointor under a limited power cannot appoint to any person to whom the donor could not have appointed by reason of the rule against perpetuities, but this is not so in the case of a general power, for there the appointor is virtually owner of the property appointed. In applying this rule to appointments a distinction arises between powers created by deed and will, for a deed speaks from the date of its execution but a will from the death of the testator, and so limitations bad when the will was made may have become good when it comes into operation. Since the Conveyancing Act 1881 all powers may be released by the donees thereof, unless the power is coupled with a trust in respect of which there is a duty cast on the donee to exercise it; and this is so even though the donee gets a benefit by such release as one entitled in default of appointment, for this is not a fraud upon the power.

APPOMATTOX COURT HOUSE, a village of Appomattox county, Virginia, U.S.A., 25 m. E. of Lynchburg, in the S. part of the state. It is served by the Norfolk & Western railway. The village was the scene of the surrender of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia under General Robert E. Lee to the Federal forces under Lieutenant-General U.S. Grant on Sunday the 9th of April 1865. The terms were: “the officers to give their individual paroles not to take up arms against the government of the United States until properly exchanged, and each company or regimental commander to sign a like parole for the men of their commands,” ... neither “side arms of the officers nor their private horses or baggage” to be surrendered; and, as many privates in the Confederate Army owned horses and mules, all horses and mules claimed by men in the Confederate Army to be left in their possession.

APPONYI, ALBERT, Count (1846-  ), Hungarian statesman, the most distinguished member of an ancient noble family, dating back to the 13th century, and son of the chancellor Gyorgy Apponyi (1808-1899) and the accomplished and saintly Countess Julia Sztáray, was born at Pesth on the 29th of May 1846. Educated at the Jesuit seminary at Kalksburg and at the universities of Vienna and Pesth, a long foreign tour completed his curriculum, and at Paris he made the acquaintance of Montalembert, a kindred spirit, whose influence on the young Apponyi was permanent. He entered parliament in 1872 as a liberal Catholic, attaching himself at first to the Deák party; but the feudal and ultramontane traditions of his family circle profoundly modified, though they could never destroy, his popular ideals. On the break up of the Deák party he attached himself to the conservative group which followed Baron Pál Senynyey (1824-1888) and eventually became its leader. Until 1905 Count Albert was constantly in opposition, but in May of that year he consented to take office in the second Wekerle ministry. A lofty and magnetic orator, his speeches were published at Budapest in 1896; and he is the author of an interesting dissertation, Esthetics and Politics, the Artist and the Statesman (Hung.) (Budapest, 1895).

APPORTIONMENT (Fr. apportionement; Med. Lat. apportionamentum; derived from Lat. portio, share), distribution or allotment in proper shares; a term used in law in a variety of senses, (1) Sometimes it is employed roughly and with no technical meaning to indicate the distribution of a benefit (e.g. salvage or damages under the Fatal Accidents Act 1846, § 2), or liability (e.g. general average contributions, or tithe rent-charge), or the incidence of a duty (e.g. obligations as to the maintenance of highways). (2) In its strict legal interpretation apportionment falls into two classes, “apportionment in respect of estate” and “apportionment in respect of time.”

1. Apportionment in respect of Estate may result either from the act of the parties or from the operation of law. Where a lessee is evicted from, or surrenders or forfeits possession of part of the property leased to him, he becomes liable at common law to pay only a rent apportioned to the value of the interest which he still retains. So where the person entitled to the reversion of an estate assigns part of it, the right to an apportioned part of the rent incident to the whole reversion passes to his assignee. The lessee is not bound, however, by an apportionment of rent made upon the grant of part of the reversion unless it is made either with his consent or by the verdict of a jury. The assignee of the reversion of part of demised premises could not, at common law, re-enter for breach of a condition, inasmuch as a condition of re-entry in a lease could not at common law be apportioned. But this has now been altered by statute both in England (Law of Property Amendment Act 1859, § 3; Conveyancing Act 1881, § 12) and in many of the British colonies (e.g. Ontario, Rev. Stats., 1897, c. 170, § 9; Barbados, No. 12 of 1891, § 9). In the cases just mentioned there is apportionment in respect of estate by act of the parties.

2. Apportionment in respect of Time.—At common law, there was no apportionment of rent in respect of time. Such apportionment was, however, in ceftain cases allowed in England by the Distress for Rent Act 1737, and the Apportionment Act 1834, and is now allowed generally under the Apportionment Act 1870. Under that statute (§ 2) all rents, annuities, dividends and other periodical payments in the nature of income are to be considered as accruing from day to day and to be apportionable in respect of time accordingly. It is provided, however, that the apportioned part of such rents, &c., shall only be payable or recoverable in the case of a continuing payment, when the entire portion of which it forms part itself becomes payable, and, in the case of a payment determined by re-entry, death or otherwise, only when the next entire portion would have been payable if it had not so determined (§ 3). Persons entitled to apportioned parts of rent have the same remedies for recovering them when payable as they would have had in respect of the entire rent; but a lessee is not to be liable for any apportioned part specifically. The rent is recoverable by the heir or other person who would, but for the apportionment, be entitled to the entire rent, and he holds it subject to distribution (§ 4). The Apportionment Act 1870 extends to payments not made under any instrument in writing (§ 2), but not to annual sums made payable in policies of insurance (§ 6). Apportionment under the act can be excluded by express stipulation.

The apportionment created by this statute is “apportionment in respect of time.” The cases to which it applies are mainly cases of either (A) apportionment of rent due under leases where at a time between the dates fixed for payment the lessor or lessee dies, or some other alteration in the position of parties occurs; or (B) apportionment of income between the representatives of a limited owner and the remainder-man when the limited interest 227 determines at a time between the date when such income became due.

The Apportionment Act 1870 extends to Scotland and Ireland. It has been followed in many of the British colonies (e.g. Ontario, Rev. Stats., 1897, c. 170, §§ 4-8; New Zealand, No. 4 of 1886; Tasmania, No. 8 of 1871; Barbados, No. 12 of 1891, §§ 9-12). Similar legislation has been adopted in many of the states of the American Union, where, as in England, rent was not, at common law, apportionable as to time (Kent, Comm. iii. 469-472).

An equitable apportionment, apart from statute law, arises where property is bequeathed on trust to pay the income to a tenant for life and the reversion to others, and the realization of the property in the form of a fund capable of producing income is postponed for the benefit of the estate. In such cases there is an ultimate apportionment between the persons entitled to the income and those entitled to the capital of the accumulations for the period of such postponement. The rule followed is this: the proceeds, when realized, are apportionable between capital and income by ascertaining the sum which, put out and accumulated at 3% per annum from the day of the testator’s death (with yearly rents and deducting income tax) would have produced at the day of receipt the sum actually received. The sum so ascertained should be treated as capital and the residue as income. (In re Earl of Chesterfield’s Trusts, 1883, 24 Ch.D. 643; In re Goodenough, 1895, 2 Ch. 537; Rowlls v. Bebb, 1900, 2 Ch. 107.)

APPORTIONMENT BILL, an act passed by the Congress of the United States after each decennial census to determine the number of members which each state shall send to the House of Representatives. The ratio of representation fixed by the original constitution was 1 to 30,000 of the free population, and the number of the members of the first House was 65. As the House would, at this ratio, have become unmanageably large, the ratio, which is first settled by Congress before apportionment, has been raised after each census, as will be seen from the accompanying table.

The same term is applied to the acts passed by the state legislatures for correcting and redistributing the representation of the counties. Such acts are usually passed at decennial intervals, more often after the federal census, but the dates may vary in different states. The state representatives are usually apportioned among the several counties according to population and not by geographical position. The electoral districts so formed are expected to be equal in proportion to the number of inhabitants; but this method has led to much abuse in the past, through the making of unequal districts for partisan purposes. (See Gerrymander.)

If a state has received an increase in the number of its representatives and its legislature does not pass an apportionment bill before the next congressional election, the votes of the whole state elect the additional members on a general ticket and they are called “congressmen-at-large.”

APPRAISER (from Lat. appretiare, to value), one who sets a value upon property, real or personal. In England the business of an appraiser is usually combined with that of an auctioneer, while the word itself has given place, to a great extent, to that of “valuer.” (See the articles Auctions and Auctioneers, and Valuation and Valuers.)

In the United States appraiser is a term often used to describe a person specially appointed by a judicial or quasi-judicial authority to put a valuation on property, e.g. on the items of an inventory of the estate of a deceased person or on land taken for public purposes by the right of eminent domain. Appraisers of imported goods and boards of general appraisers have extensive functions in administering the customs laws of the United States. Merchant appraisers are sometimes appointed temporarily under the revenue laws to value where there is no resident appraiser without holding the office of appraiser (U.S. Rev. Stats. § 2609).

APPREHENSION (Lat. ad, to; prehendere, to seize), in psychology, a term applied to a mode of consciousness in which nothing is affirmed or denied of the object in question, but the mind is merely aware of (“seizes”) it. “Judgment” (says Reid, ed. Hamilton, i. p. 414) “is an act of the mind specifically different from simple apprehension or the bare conception of a thing”; and again, “Simple apprehension or conception can neither be true nor false.” This distinction provides for the large class of mental acts in which we are simply aware of or “take in” a number of familiar objects, about which we in general make no judgment unless our attention is suddenly called by a new feature. Or again two alternatives may be apprehended without any resultant judgment as to their respective merits. Similarly G.F. Stout points out that while we have a very vivid idea of a character or an incident in a work of fiction, we can hardly be said in any real sense to have any belief or to make any judgment as to its existence or truth. With this mental state may be compared the purely aesthetic contemplation of music, wherein apart from, say, a false note, the faculty of judgment is for the time inoperative. To these examples may be added the fact that one can fully understand an argument in all its bearings without in any way judging its validity.

Without going into the question fully, it may be pointed out that the distinction between judgment and apprehension is relative. In every kind of thought there is judgment of some sort in a greater or less degree of prominence. Judgment and thought are in fact psychologically distinguishable merely as different, though correlative, activities of consciousness. Professor Stout further investigates the phenomena of apprehension, and comes to the conclusion that “it is possible to distinguish and identify a whole without apprehending any of its constituent details.” On the other hand, if the attention 228 focuses itself for a time on the apprehended object, there is an expectation that such details will as it were emerge into consciousness. Hence he describes such apprehension as “implicit,” and in so far as the implicit apprehension determines the order of such emergence he describes it as “schematic.” A good example of this process is the use of formulae in calculations; ordinarily the formula is used without question; if attention is fixed upon it, the steps by which it is shown to be universally applicable emerge and the “schema” is complete in detail.

With this result may be compared Kant’s theory of apprehension as a synthetic act (the “synthesis of apprehension”) by which the sensory elements of a perception are subjected to the formal conditions of time and space.

APPRENTICESHIP (from Fr. apprendre, to learn), a contract whereby one person, called the master, binds himself to teach, and another, called the apprentice, undertakes to learn, some trade or profession, the apprentice serving his master for a certain time.

Roman law is silent on the subject on this contract, nor does it seem to have had any connexion with the division of the Roman citizens into tribes or colleges. So far as can be seen it arose in the middle ages, and formed an integral part of the system of trade gilds and corporations by which skilled labourers of all kinds sought protection against the feudal lords, and the maintenance of those exclusive privileges with which in the interests of the public they were favoured. In those times it was believed that neither arts nor sciences would flourish unless such only were allowed to practise them as had given proofs of reasonable proficiency and were formed into bodies corporate, with certain powers of self-government and the exclusive monopoly of their respective arts within certain localities; and the medieval universitas (corporation)—whether of smiths and tailors or of scholars—included both such as were entitled to practise and teach and such as were in course of learning. The former were the masters, the latter the apprentices. Hence the term apprentice was applied indifferently to such as were being taught a trade or a learned profession, and even to undergraduates or scholars who were qualifying themselves for the degree of doctor or master in the liberal arts. When barristers were first appointed by Edward I. of England they were styled apprenticii ad legem—the serjeants-at-law being servientes ad legem; and these two terms corresponded respectively to the trade names of apprentices and journeymen. During the middle ages the term of apprenticeship was seven years, and this period was thought no more than sufficient to instruct the learner in his profession, craft or mystery under a properly qualified master, teacher or doctor—for these names were synonymous—and to reimburse the latter by service for the training received. After this the apprentice became himself a master and a member of the corporation, with full rights to practise the business and to teach others in his turn; so also it would seem that undergraduates had to pass through a curriculum of seven years before they could attain the degree of doctor or master in the liberal arts. On the continent of Europe these rules were observed with considerable rigour, both in the learned professions and in those which we now designate as trades. In England they made their way more slowly and did not receive much countenance, there being always a jealousy of anything savouring of interference with the freedom of trade. Nevertheless the formation of gilds and companies of tradesmen in England dates probably from the 12th century, and the institution of apprenticeships cannot be of much later date. In 1388 and 1405 it is noticed in acts of parliament. By various subsequent statutes provisions were made for the regulation of the institution, and from them it appears that seven years was its ordinary and normal term in the absence of special arrangement. By a statute of 1562 this was made the law of the land, and it was enacted that no person should exercise any “trade or mystery” without having served a seven years’ apprenticeship. In no place did the apprentices become so formidable by their numbers and organization as in London. During the Great Rebellion they took an active part as a political body, and were conspicuous after the Restoration by being frequently engaged in tumults. It was probably owing to this circumstance, quite as much as to economic considerations of freedom of trade, that the act of Elizabeth never found much favour with the courts of law. Soon after the Great Rebellion we find the apprentice laws strongly reprobated by the judges, who endeavoured, on the theory that the act of Elizabeth could apply to no trades which were not in existence at its date, to limit its operation as far as possible. Such limitation of the act gave rise to many absurd anomalies and inconsistencies, e.g. that a coachmaker could not make his own wheels but must buy them of a wheelwright, while the latter might make both wheels and coaches, because coach-making was not a trade in England when the act of Elizabeth was passed. For the like reason the great textile and metal manufactures which arose at Manchester and Birmingham were held exempt from the operation of the statute. Concurrently with the dislike to the apprentice laws which such anomalies generated, the doctrines of Adam Smith, that all monopolies or restrictions on the freedom of trade were injurious to the public interest, had gradually been making their way, and notwithstanding much opposition an act was passed in 1814 by which the statute of Elizabeth, in so far as it enacts that no person shall engage in any trade without a seven years’ apprenticeship, was wholly repealed. The effect of this act was to give every person the fullest right to exercise any occupation or calling of a mechanical or trading kind for which he deemed himself qualified.

Apprenticeship, therefore, which was formerly a compulsory, now became a voluntary contract. In the case of the learned professions the principles and theories which gave birth to corporations with monopolies, and required apprenticeship or its equivalents, have—contrary to what has taken place in trade— been not only maintained but intensified; that is to say, not only have such bodies retained and even extended in some cases their exclusive privileges, but in general no one is allowed to practise in such professions unless his capabilities have been tested and approved by public authority. Thus no man is allowed to practise law or medicine in any of their branches who has not undergone the appropriate training by attendance at a university or by apprenticeship—sometimes by both combined— and passed certain examinations. Entrance to the church is guarded by similar checks. In such instances the old principle— now generally abandoned in trade—of granting a monopoly to those possessing a certain standard of qualification is maintained in greater vigour than ever.

In some kinds of manufacture the old conditions have been modified by the subdivisions of labour or by the introduction of machinery, which have reduced the amount of skill which formerly was requisite, and thus they have passed out of the category of the higher skilled handicrafts, as only a very slight or short training is necessary to make an efficient worker; but a large number of the higher skilled trades remain which require a long period of training at the bench, and a careful inquiry into this subject has shown that in nearly all of such trades there is a scarcity of skilled workers, which is due to the falling off in the number of apprenticeships. Many persons qualified to form an opinion deplore that something in the nature of the old standard of qualification is not still applied to those trades, and consider that the only method of restoring a high standard of skill is by apprenticeship. The decay of apprenticeship in these trades is due, not to any inherent defect in the system, nor to its having been superseded by any other form of technical education, but to difficulties, especially in London and some other large towns, which place it beyond the reach of that class of persons who have the greatest need of it. Among these difficulties are:—first, insufficient organization, and secondly, want of funds to pay premiums where such are required. These difficulties are 229 accentuated in London and some other large towns, but in many other districts apprenticeship is actively proceeded with. Efforts are being made, notably by the National Institution of Apprenticeship, to meet these difficulties. The Charity Commissioners in their report for 1905 recognized the value of this institution, and stated that they would in future enable the trustees of charity endowments for apprenticeship to avail themselves of the practical co-operation of the institution. The modern trade unions, on the other hand, have done nothing to assist in restoring apprenticeship to its proper place; on the contrary, they have hampered it by restrictions which they have imposed, limiting the number of apprentices who may be taken. The result of fewer apprentices has been not only to lower the standard of skill in the higher trades, but to reduce the productive capacity of the artisans. The altered conditions now attending apprenticeship are, mainly, that the apprentice does not live with the master, and that the term is generally five years instead of a longer period; but the principle remains precisely the same, and the fact that it is applied more and more largely in Austria, Germany and other countries is an evidence of its necessity.

The contract of apprenticeship is generally created by indenture, but any writing properly expressed and attested will do. The full consideration must be set out, and the instrument, whether a premium is paid or not, must be duly stamped, except in the case of parish apprentices and apprentices to the sea service (see Seamen, Laws Relating to). Where a charity or institution intervenes, it retains control over the indentures until the end of the term of apprenticeship, when the indenture should be cancelled and given up to the apprentice. Any one who is capable of making a contract can take an apprentice, and the law does not limit the number which may be taken by any master. Any person of legal capacity can bind himself as an apprentice, provided he is over seven years of age, though, as he is by the common law exempt from all liability ex contractu, it is usual for the apprentice’s relations or friends to become bound for his service and good conduct during the period of his apprenticeship. The consent of the apprentice, however, must be expressed by his executing the indenture. No child under nine can be bound as a parish apprentice. The master must teach the apprentice the agreed trade or trades; should the master exercise two trades (which he has agreed to teach) and give up one, it would be good ground for dissolving the contract by the apprentice. An apprentice is not bound to work on Sundays, but he may be required to work on bank holidays. He cannot become a volunteer (soldier) without his master’s consent. It is usual in the indenture to state whether the apprentice is to be paid wages or otherwise. If the contract is to pay wages, no deduction can be made owing to illness or accident, unless it has been so provided for in the indentures. Nor is the apprentice liable for breakages or similar faults. The master has been supposed to have a right to administer moderate corporal punishment, though he may not delegate it. But this right is really obsolete. According to old custom a master provided proper food for his apprentices, and medical attendance when required; but the modern practice is for apprentices to reside with their parents or friends who maintain them. A master cannot assign indentures without the approval of the apprentice or such parties as are named in the contract for this purpose, even if he should transfer his business. The contract of apprenticeship may be dissolved by (1) efflux of time; (2) by death (if the master dies, some part of the premium is usually returnable, but if the apprentice dies no part is returnable); (3) by consent; (4) in case of grave misconduct; (5) under the Bankruptcy Act 1883, providing for discharge of the indentures of apprenticeship and for payment on account of premium. Disputes between master and apprentice, in cases where no premium has been paid, or where the premium does not exceed £25, are dealt with by courts of summary jurisdiction. Apprentices bound according to the “custom of London,” who are infants above the age of fourteen years and under twenty-one and unmarried, are responsible upon covenants contained in indentures executed by them just as if they were of full age. The term of apprenticeship is usually not less than four years. Apprentices by the custom of London in agreements made at the Guildhall are subject to the jurisdiction of the chamberlain of London.

Parish apprentices are those bound out by guardians of the poor in England. By the Poor Relief Act 1601, overseers of the poor were empowered, with the consent of two justices, to put out poor children as apprentices “where they shall be convenient.” Owing to the disinclination to receive such apprentices it became necessary to make the reception compulsory (1696), but this compulsion to receive them was abolished in 1844. Many statutes have been passed from time to time regulating the apprenticing of parish children, but it is now under the control of the Local Government Board, which issues rules specifying fully the manner in which such children are to be bound, assigned and maintained.

APPROPRIATION (from Lat. appropriare, to set aside), the act of setting apart and applying to a particular use to the exclusion of all other. In ecclesiastical law, appropriation is the perpetual annexation of an ecclesiastical benefice to the use of some spiritual corporation, either aggregate or sole. In the middle ages in England the custom grew up of the monasteries reserving to their own use the greater part of the tithes of their appropriated benefices, leaving only a small portion to their vicars in the parishes. On the dissolution of the monasteries these “great tithes” were often granted, with the monastic lands, to laymen, whose successors, known as “lay impropriators” or “lay rectors,” still hold them, the system being known as impropriation. Appropriation may be severed and the church become disappropriate, by the presentation of a clerk, properly instituted and inducted, or by the dissolution of the corporation possessing the benefice.

In the law of debtor and creditor, appropriation of payments is the application of a particular payment for the purpose of paying a particular debt. When a creditor has two debts due to him from the same debtor on distinct accounts, the general law as to the appropriation of payments made by the debtor is that the debtor is entitled to apply the payments to such account as he thinks fit; solvitur in modum solventis. In default of appropriation by the debtor the creditor is entitled to determine the application of the sums paid, and may appropriate them even to the discharge of debts barred by the Statute of Limitations. In default of appropriation by either debtor or creditor, the law implies an appropriation of the earlier payments to the earlier debts.

In constitutional law, appropriation is the assignment of money for a special purpose. In the United Kingdom an Appropriation Bill is a bill passed at the end of each session of parliament, enumerating the money grants made during the session, and appropriating the various sums, as voted by committee of supply, to the various purposes for which it is to be applied. The United States constitution (art. I. § 9) says: “No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.” Bills for appropriating money originate in the House of Representatives, but may be amended in the Senate.

APPURTENANCES (from late Lat. appertinentia, from appertinere, to appertain), a legal term for what belongs to and goes with something else, the accessories or things usually conjoined with the substantive matter in question.

APRAKSIN, THEDOR MATVYEEVICH (1671-1728), Russian soldier, began life as one of the pages of Tsar Theodore III., after whose death he served the little tsar Peter in the same capacity. The playfellowship of the two lads resulted in a lifelong friendship. In his twenty-first year Apraksin was appointed governor of Archangel, then the most important commercially of all the Russian provinces, and built ships capable of weathering storms, to the great delight of the tsar. He won his colonelcy at the siege of Azov (1696). In 1700 he was appointed chief of the admiralty, 230 in which post (from 1700 to 1706) his unusual technical ability was of great service. While Peter was combating Charles XII., Apraksin was constructing fleets, building fortresses and havens (Taganrog). In 1707 he was transferred to Moscow. In 1708 he was appointed commander-in-chief in Ingria, to defend the new capital against the Swedes, whom he utterly routed, besides capturing Viborg in Carelia. He held the chief command in the Black Sea during the campaign of the Pruth (1711), and in 1713 materially assisted the conquest of Finland by his operations from the side of the sea. In 1710-1720 he personally conducted the descents upon Sweden, ravaging that country mercilessly, and thus extorting the peace of Nystad, whereby she surrendered the best part of her Baltic provinces to Russia. For these great services he was made a senator and admiral-general of the empire. His last expedition was to Reval in 1726, to cover the town from an anticipated attack by the English government, with whom the relations of Russia at the beginning of the reign of Catharine I. were strained almost to breaking-point. Though frequently threatened with terrible penalties by Peter the Great for his incurable vice of peculation, Apraksin, nevertheless, contrived to save his head, though not his pocket, chiefly through the mediation of the good-natured empress, Catharine, who remained his friend to the last, and whom he assisted to place on the throne on the death of Peter. Apraksin was the most genial and kind-hearted of all Peter’s pupils. He is said to have never made an enemy. He died on the 10th of November 1728.

APRICOT (from the Lat. praecox, or praecoquus, ripened early, coquere, to cook, or ripen; the English form, formerly “apricock” and “abrecox,” comes through the Fr. abricot, from the Span. albaricoque, which was an adaptation of the Arabic al-burquk, itself a rendering of the late Gr. πρεκόκκια or πραικόκιον, adapted from the Latin; the derivation from in aprico cactus is a mere guess), the fruit of Prunus armeniaca, also called Armeniaca vulgaris. Under the former name it is regarded as a species of the genus to which the plums belong, the latter establishes it as a distinct genus of the natural order Rosaceae. The apricot is, like the plum, a stone fruit, cultivated generally throughout temperate regions, and used chiefly in the form of preserves and in tarts. The tree has long been cultivated in Armenia (hence the name Armeniaca); it is a native of north China and other parts of temperate Asia. It flowers very early in the season, and is a hardy tree, but the fruit will scarcely ripen in Britain unless the tree is trained against a wall. A great number of varieties of the apricot, as of most cultivated fruits, are distinguished by cultivators. The kernels of several varieties are edible, and in Egypt those of the Musch-Musch variety form a considerable article of commerce. The French liqueur Eau de noyaux is prepared from bitter apricot kernels. Large quantities of fruit are imported from France into the United Kingdom.

The apricot is propagated by budding on the mussel or common plum stock. The tree succeeds in good well-drained loamy soil, rather light than heavy. It is usually grown as a wall tree, the east and west aspects being preferred to the south, which induces mealiness in the fruit, though in Scotland the best aspects are necessary. The most usual and best mode of training is the fan method. The fruit is produced on shoots of the preceding year, and on small close spurs formed on the two-year-old wood. The trees should be planted about 20 ft. apart. The summer pruning should begin early in June, at which period all the irregular foreright and useless shoots are pinched off; and, shortly afterwards, those which remain are fastened to the wall. At the winter pruning all branches not duly furnished with spurs and fruit buds are removed. The young bearing shoots are moderately pruned at the points, care being, however, taken to leave a terminal shoot or leader to each branch. The most common error in the pruning of apricots is laying in the bearing shoots too thickly; the branches naturally diverge in fan training, and when they extend so as to be about 15 in. apart, a fresh branch should be laid in, to be again subdivided as required. The blossoms of the apricot open early in spring, but are more hardy than those of the peach; the same means of protection when necessary may be employed for both. If the fruit sets too numerously, it is thinned out in June and in the beginning of July, the later thinnings being used for tarts. In the south of England, where the soil is suitable, the hardier sorts of apricot, as the Breda and Brussels, bear well as standard trees in favourable seasons. In such cases the trees may be planted from 20 to 25 ft. apart.

The ripening of the fruit of the apricot is accelerated by culture under glass, the trees being either planted out like peaches or grown in pots on the orchard-house system. They must be very gently excited, since they naturally bloom when the spring temperature is comparatively low. At first a maximum of 40° only must be permitted; after two or three weeks it may be raised to 45°, and later on to 50° and 55°, and thus continued till the trees are in flower, air being freely admitted, and the minimum or night temperature ranging from 40° to 45°. After the fruit is set the temperature should be gradually raised, being kept higher in clear weather than in dull. When the fruit has stoned, the temperature may be raised to 60° or 65° by day and 60° by night; and for ripening off it may be allowed to reach 70° or 80° by sun heat.

The Moorpark is one of the best and most useful sorts in cultivation, and should be planted for all general purposes; the Peach is a very similar variety, not quite identical; and the Hemskerk is also similar, but hardier. The Large Early, which ripens in the end of July and beginning of August, and the Kaisha, a sweet-kernelled variety, which ripens in the middle of August, are also to be recommended. For standard trees in favourable localities the Breda and Brussels may be added.

APRIES (Άπρίης), the name by which Herodotus (ii. 161) and Diodorus (i. 68) designate Uehabrē‛, Οὐαφρής (Pharaoh-Hophra), the fourth king (counting from Psammetichus I.) of the twenty-sixth Egyptian dynasty. He reigned from 589 to 570 B.C. See Egypt and Amasis.

APRIL, the second month of the ancient Roman, and the fourth of the modern calendar, containing thirty days. The derivation of the name is uncertain. The traditional etymology from Lat. aperire, “to open,” in allusion to its being the season when trees and flowers begin to “open,” is supported by comparison with the modern Greek use of ἅνοιξις (opening) for spring. This seems very possible, though, as all the Roman months were named in honour of divinities, and as April was sacred to Venus, the Festum Veneris et Fortunae Virilis being held on the first day, it has been suggested that Aprilis was originally her month Aphrilis, from her Greek name Aphrodite. Jacob Grimm suggests the name of a hypothetical god or hero, Aper or Aprus. On the fourth and the five following days, games (Ludi Megalenses) were celebrated in honour of Cybele; on the fifth there was the Festum Fortunae Publicae; on the tenth (?) games in the circus, and on the nineteenth equestrian combats, in honour of Ceres; on the twenty-first—which was regarded as the birthday of Rome—the Vinalia urbana, when the wine of the previous autumn was first tasted; on the twenty-fifth, the Robigalia, for the averting of mildew; and on the twenty-eighth and four following days, the riotous Floralia. The Anglo-Saxons called April Oster-monath or Eostur-monath, the period sacred to Eostre or Ostara, the pagan Saxon goddess of spring, from whose name is derived the modern Easter. St George’s day is the twenty-third of the month; and St Mark’s Eve, with its superstition that the ghosts of those who are doomed to die within the year will be seen to pass into the church, falls on the twenty-fourth. In China the symbolical ploughing of the earth by the emperor and princes of the blood takes place in their third month, which frequently corresponds to our April; and in Japan the feast of Dolls is celebrated in the same month. The “days of April” (journées d’avril) is a name appropriated in French history to a series of insurrections at Lyons, Paris and elsewhere, against the government of Louis Philippe in 1834, which led to violent repressive measures, and to a famous trial known as the procès d’avril.

231

APRIL-FOOLS’ DAY, or All-Fools’ Day, the name given to the 1st of April in allusion to the custom of playing practical jokes on friends and neighbours on that day, or sending them on fools’ errands. The origin of this custom has been much disputed, and many ludicrous solutions have been suggested, e.g. that it is a farcical commemoration of Christ being sent from Annas to Caiaphas, from Caiaphas to Pilate, from Pilate to Herod, and from Herod back again to Pilate, the crucifixion having taken place about the 1st of April. What seems certain is that it is in some way or other a relic of those once universal festivities held at the vernal equinox, which, beginning on old New Year’s day, the 25th of March, ended on the 1st of April. This view gains support from the fact that the exact counterpart of April-fooling is found to have been an immemorial custom in India. The festival of the spring equinox is there termed the feast of Huli, the last day of which is the 31st of March, upon which the chief amusement is the befooling of people by sending them on fruitless errands. It has been plausibly suggested that Europe derived its April-fooling from the French. They were the first nation to adopt the reformed calendar, Charles IX. in 1564 decreeing that the year should begin with the 1st of January. Thus the New Year’s gifts and visits of felicitation which had been the feature of the 1st of April became associated with the first day of January, and those who disliked the change were fair butts for those wits who amused themselves by sending mock presents and paying calls of pretended ceremony on the 1st of April. Though the 1st of April appears to have been anciently observed in Great Britain as a general festival, it was apparently not until the beginning of the 18th century that the making of April-fools was a common custom. In Scotland the custom was known as “hunting the gowk,” i.e. the cuckoo, and April-fools were “April-gowks,” the cuckoo being there, as it is in most lands, a term of contempt. In France the person befooled is known as poisson d’avril. This has been explained from the association of ideas arising from the fact that in April the sun quits the zodiacal sign of the fish. A far more natural explanation would seem to be that the April fish would be a young fish and therefore easily caught.

A PRIORI (Lat. a, from, prior, prius, that which is before, precedes), (1) a phrase used popularly of a judgment based on general considerations in the absence of particular evidence; (2) a logical term first used, apparently, by Albert of Saxony (14th century), though the theory which it denotes is as old as Aristotle. In the order of human knowledge the particular facts of experience come first and are the basis of generalized laws or causes (the Scholastic notiora nobis); but in the order of nature the latter rank first as the self-existent, fundamental truths of existence (notiora naturae). Thus to Aristotle the a priori argument is from law or cause to effect, as opposed to what we call a posteriori (posterior, subsequent, derived), from effect to cause. Since Kant the two phrases have become purely adjectival (instead of adverbial) with a technical controversial sense, closely allied to the Aristotelian, in relation to knowledge and judgments generally. A priori is applied to judgments which are regarded as independent of experience, and belonging to the essence of thought; a posteriori to those which are derived from particular observations. The distinction is analogous to that between analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction (but there may be a synthesis of a priori judgments, cf. Kant’s “Synthetic Judgment a priori”). Round this distinction a rather barren controversy has raged, and almost all modern philosophers have labelled themselves either “Intuitionalist” (a priori) or “Empiricist” (a posteriori) according to the view they take of knowledge. In fact, however, the rival schools are generally arguing at cross purposes; there is a knowledge based on particulars, and also a knowledge of laws or causes. But the two work in different spheres, and are complementary. The observation of isolated particulars gives not necessity, but merely strong probability; necessity is purely intellectual or “transcendental.” If the empiricist denies the intellectual element in scientific knowledge, he must not claim absolute validity for his conclusions; but he may hold against the intuitionalist that absolute laws are impossible to the human intellect. On the other hand, pure a priori knowledge can be nothing more than form without content (e.g. formal logic, the laws of thought). The simple fact at the bottom of the controversy is that in all empirical knowledge there is an intellectual element, without which there is no correlation of empirical data, and every judgment, however simple, postulates a correlation of some sort if only that between the predicate and its contradictory.

APRON (a corruption arising from a wrong division of “a napron” into “an apron,” from the Fr. naperon, napperon, a diminutive of nappe, Lat. mappa, a napkin), an article of costume used to protect the front of the clothes. It forms part of the ceremonial dress of Freemasons. The “apron” worn by church dignitaries is a shortened cassock (q.v.). The word has many technical uses, as for the protecting slope in front of the sill of dock-gates, or at the foot of weirs.

APSARAS, in Hindu mythology, a female spirit of the clouds and waters. In the Rig-Veda there is one Apsaras, wife of Gandharva; in the later scriptures there are many Apsaras who act as the handmaidens of Indra and dance before his throne. They are able to change their form, and specially rule over the fortunes of gaming. One of their duties is to guide to paradise the heroes who fall in battle, whose wives they then become. They are distinguished as daivika (“divine”) or laukika (“worldly”).

APSE (Gr. ἁψίς, a fastening, especially the felloe of a wheel; Lat. absis), in architecture, a semicircular recess covered with a hemispherical vault. The term is applied also to the termination to the choir, transept or aisle of any church which is either semicircular or polygonal in plan, whether vaulted or covered with a timber roof; a church is said to be “apsidal” when it terminates in an apse.

The earliest example of an apse is found in the temple of Mars Ultor at Rome (2 B.C.), and it formed afterwards the favourite feature terminating the rear of any temple, and one which gave importance to the statue of the deity to whom the temple was dedicated. Its use by the Romans was not confined to the temples, as it is found in the palaces on the Palatine Hill, the great Thermae (Baths) and other monuments. In the civil basilicas the apse was screened off by columns, and constituted the court of justice. In the Ulpian (Trajan’s) Basilica the apses at each end were of such great dimensions as to come better under the definition of hemicycles (q.v.). In these apses the floor was raised, and had an altar placed in the centre of its chord, where sacrifices were made prior to the sittings. The only other two Roman basilicas in which the semicircular apse can still be traced are that commenced by Maxentius and completed by Constantine at Rome and the basilica at Trier (Trèves).

In the earliest Christian basilica, St Peter’s at Rome, built 330 A.D., the apse, 57 ft. in diameter, raised above the confessio or crypt, was placed at the west end of the church. This orientation was originally followed in the churches of St Paul and St Lawrence (S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura), both outside the walls of Rome, and is found in most of the churches at Rome. On the other hand, in the Byzantine church, the apse was built at the east end of the church.

During the reign of Justin the Second (A.D. 565-574), owing to a change in the liturgy, two more apses were added, one on each side of the central apse. These in the Greek Church were provided not to hold altars but for ceremonial purposes. One of the earliest examples is found in the church of St Nicholas at Myra of the 6th century, and the basilica erected in the great court of the temple at Baalbek shows the triple apse. The earliest example in Rome is found in the church of Sta Maria in Cosmedin (772-795), built probably by Greek craftsmen, who had been exiled by the Iconoclasts. Other triapsal choirs are found in the cathedral of Parenzo (542 A.D.), in St Mark’s, Venice, in Sta Fosca and the Duomo at Torcello, and in numerous examples throughout Italy and Germany. In central Syria there is one example only, at Kalat Seman, where the side apses were a later addition.

232

There is one important distinction to be drawn between the Byzantine and the Latin apses; they are both semicircular internally, but externally the former are nearly always polygonal. It follows, therefore, that in those churches in Italy where the apse is polygonal externally, it is a sign of direct Byzantine influence. This is found in St Mark’s, Venice; Sta Fosca, Torcello; Murano; nearly all the churches at Ravenna; and in the Crusaders’ churches throughout Syria.

In the Coptic church in Egypt we find other characteristics; in the churches of the Red and White Monasteries, attributed to St Helena, an unusual depth is given to the apse, in the walls of which niches are sunk; in the church of St John at Antinoë there are no fewer than seven. Similar niches are found in the apses of St Mark’s, Venice, built in A.D. 828, it is said in imitation of St Mark’s in Alexandria, to receive the relics of St Mark brought over from there.

In a large number of the apses in the Coptic churches the seats round the apse with the bishop’s throne in the centre are still preserved; of these the best examples are at Abu Sargah, Al ‛Adra and Abu-s-Sifain. Unfortunately there are no remains of the fittings in the tribunes of the ancient Roman basilicas, but those in St Peter’s at Rome, which were probably copied from them, are recorded in drawings, there being two or three rows of stone seats with the papal throne in the centre. It is possible also that some may still exist in the other early Christian basilicas at Rome, but there have been so many changes that it is not possible to trace them. In the cathedral of Parenzo in Istria (A.D. 532-535), the hemicycle of marble seats for the clergy with the episcopal chair in the centre still exists. A similar arrangement is found in the apse of the church of the 6th century attached to the church of St Helena in the island of Paros, where there are eight steep grades of semicircular stone seats with the bishop’s chair in the centre. The aspect of the interior of this apse has in consequence very much the appearance of a Roman theatre. A third example, better known, exists at Torcello, with six concentric seats rising one above the other, and in the centre the episcopal chair with a flight of thirteen steps down in front of it.

In the basilica at Bethlehem, the east end of which was reconstructed probably in the 5th century, apses of similar dimensions to the eastern apse were built at the north and south end of the transept. The same disposition is found in the Coptic churches of the Red and White Monasteries just referred to, in the church of St Elias at Salonica (c. 1012), the cathedral of Echmiadzin in Armenia, at Vatopedi, Mt. Athos, and some other Byzantine churches. An early example in France exists in the church of Germigny-des-Prés on the Loire (806; rebuilt 1868), where the three apses are horseshoe on plan, and the same is found in the church at Oberzell in the island of Reichenau, Lake of Constance, except that the eastern apse there is square. Small examples also are found at Querqueville and at St Wandrille near Caudebec, both in Normandy, but the finest development takes place in the church of St Maria im Capitol at Cologne, where the aisles are carried round both the northern and southern apses. The same feature exists in the cathedral of Tournai in Belgium and the churches at Cambrai, Soissons and Valenciennes (the last destroyed at the Revolution) in France, and also in the cathedrals of Como and of Pisa in Italy. Without aisles, there are examples in the churches of the Apostles and of St Martin at Cologne; St Quirinus at Neuss; at Roermond; St Cross, Breslau; the cathedral of Bonn; and, at a later date, in the Marienkirche at Trier; S. Elizabeth at Marburg; the church of Sta Maria-del-Fiore at Florence; and the cathedral of Parma.

In consequence of a change made in the orientation of apses in the 6th or 7th century, others were subsequently added at the west end of existing churches, and this is considered to have been the case at Canterbury; but in the German churches sometimes apses were built from the first at both ends, such as are shown on the manuscript plan of St Gall, of the 9th century. Western apses exist at Gernrode; Drübeck; Huyseburg; the Obermünster of Regensburg; St Godehard in Hildesheim; the cathedrals of Worms and Trier; the Abbey church of Laach; the Minster at Bonn; and in St Pietro-in-Grado near Pisa.

The triapsal churches, to which we have referred, are those in which the side apses form the termination of the side aisles; but where there are transepts, the aisles are sometimes not continued beyond them, and the expansion of the transept to north and south gives more ample space for apses; of these there are many examples, as in the Abbey church of Laach in Germany; at Romsey; Christchurch, Hants; Gloucester, Ely, Norwich and Canterbury cathedrals, in England; and at St Georges de Boscherville in France; sometimes there being space for two apses on each side.

In the beginning of the 13th century in France, the apses became radiating chapels outside the choir aisle, henceforth known as the chevet. These radiating chapels would seem to have been suggested in Norwich and Canterbury cathedrals, but the feature is essentially a French one and in England is found only in Westminster Abbey, into which it was introduced by Henry III., to whom the chevets of Amiens, Beauvais and Reims were probably well known.

APSE and APSIDES, in mechanics, either of the two points of an orbit which are nearest to and farthest from the centre of motion. They are called the lower or nearer, and the higher or more distant apsides respectively. The “line of apsides” is that which joins them, forming the major axis of the orbit.

APSINES of Gadara, a Greek rhetorician, who flourished during the 3rd century A.D. After studying at Smyrna, he taught at Athens, and gained such a reputation that he was raised to the consulship by the emperor Maximinus (235-238). He was the friend of Philostratus, the author of the Lives of the Sophists, who speaks of his wonderful memory and accuracy. Two rhetorical treatises by him are extant: Τέχνη ῥητορική, a handbook of rhetoric greatly interpolated, a considerable portion being taken from the Rhetoric of Longinus; and a smaller work, Περὶ ἐσχηματισμένων προβλημάτων, on Propositions maintained figuratively.

APT, a town of south-eastern France, in the department of Vaucluse, on the left bank of the Coulon, 41 m. E. of Avignon by rail. Pop. (1906) 4990. The town was formerly surrounded by massive ancient walls, but these have now been for the most part replaced by boulevards; many of its streets are narrow and irregular. The chief object of interest is the church of Sainte-Anne (once the cathedral), the building of which was begun about the year 1056 on the site of a much older edifice, but not completed until the latter half of the 17th century. Many Roman remains have been found in and near the town. A fine bridge, the Pont Julien, spanning the Coulon below the town, dates from the 2nd or 3rd century. A tribunal of first instance and a communal college are the chief public institutions. The chief manufactures are silk, confectionery and earthenware; and there is besides a considerable trade in fruit, grain and cattle. Apt was at one time the chief town of the Vulgientes, a Gallic tribe; it was destroyed by the Romans about 125 B.C. and restored by Julius Caesar, who conferred upon it the title Apta Julia; it was much injured by the Lombards and the Saracens, but its fortifications were rebuilt by the counts of Provence. The bishopric, founded in the 3rd century, was suppressed in 1790.

APTERA (Greek for “wingless”), a term in zoological classification applied by Linnaeus to various groups of wingless arthropods, including some of the insects, the centipedes, the millipedes, the Arachnida (scorpions, spiders, &c.) and the Crustacea. In 233 modern zoology the term has become restricted to the lowest order of the class Hexapoda or true insects. This order includes the bristle-tails and the springtails.

Many wingless insects—such as lice, fleas and certain earwigs and cockroaches—are placed in various orders together with winged insects to which they show evident relationships. In such cases the absence of wings must be regarded as secondary—due to a parasitic or other special manner of life. But the bristle-tails and springtails, which form the modern order Aptera, are all without any trace of wings, and, on account of several remarkable archaic characters which they exhibit, there is reason for believing that they are primitively wingless—that they represent an early offshoot which sprang from the ancestral stock of the Hexapoda before organs of flight had been acquired by the class.

Characters.—In addition to the complete absence of wings and of metamorphosis, the Aptera are characterized by peculiar elongate mandibles (figs. 1, Mn.; 2, 4), with toothed apex and sub-apical grinding surface, like those of certain Crustacea; by the presence between the mandibles and maxillae of a pair of appendages (superlinguae or maxillulae), fig. 1, Mxl., which are absent or vestigial in all other insects; and, in most genera, by the presence in the adult of abdominal appendages used for locomotion, these latter varying in number from one to nine pairs. Among peculiarities of the internal organs the segmental arrangement of the ovaries in most members of the order is noteworthy. Many Aptera are covered with flattened scales like those of moths.

Classification.—The Aptera are divided into two divergent sub-orders, the Thysanura (q.v.) or bristle-tails, and the Collembola or springtails.

Thysanura.—The bristle-tails have an abdomen of eleven segments, the tenth usually carrying a pair of long many-jointed tail-feelers (cerci, fig. 1, x.); sometimes a median, jointed tail-appendage is also present. To these feelers the popular name is due. There may also be abdominal appendages—in the form of simple unjointed stylets (fig. 1, ii.-ix.), accompanied by paired eversible sacs, probably respiratory in function—on eight (or fewer) other abdominal segments. The head of a bristle-tail carries a pair of compound eyes and a pair of elongate many-jointed feelers.

The air-tube system is developed in varying degree in different bristle-tails, the number of pairs of spiracles being three (Campodea), nine (Machilis), ten (Lepisma), or eleven (Japyx).

Four families of Thysanura are usually recognized. In the Machilidae and Lepismidae (these two families are known as the Ectotrophi) the maxillae are like those of typical biting insects, and there is a median tail-bristle in addition to the paired cerci; while in the Campodeidae and Japygidae (which form the group Entotrophi) the jaws are apparently sunk in the head, through a deep inpushing at the mouth, and there is no median tail-bristle. The cerci in Japyx are not, as usual, jointed feelers, but strong, curved appendages forming a forceps as in earwigs.

Collembola.—In springtails, or Collembola, the jaws are sunk into the head, as in the entotrophous Thysanura; the head carries a pair of feelers with not more than six (usually four) segments, and there are eight (or fewer) distinct simple eyes on each side of the head (fig. 2, 1, 2). These are in some genera like the single elements (ommatidia) of a compound insect eye, in others like simple ocelli. The abdomen consists of six segments only. The first of these usually carries a ventral tube, furnished with paired eversible sacs which assist the insects in walking on smooth surfaces, and perhaps serve also as organs for breathing. From the researches of V. Willem it appears that the viscid fluid which causes the adherence of the ventral tube is secreted by a pair of glands in the head whose ducts open into a superficial groove leading from the second maxillae backward to the tube on the first abdominal segment. The third abdominal segment usually carries a pair of short appendages whose basal segments are fused together; this is the “catch” (fig. 2, 7), whose function is to hold in place the “spring,” which is formed by the fourth pair of abdominal appendages—also with fused basal segments. In most Collembola the spring appears to belong to the fifth abdominal somite, but Willem, by study of the muscles, has shown that it really belongs to the fourth. The fused basal segments of the appendages form the “manubrium” of the spring, which carries the two “dentes” (usually elongate 234 and flexible), each with a “mucro” at its tip (fig. 2, 5). The fifth abdominal segment is the genital, and the sixth the anal somite.

The spring serves the Collembola which possess it as an efficient leaping-organ (see Springtail). But in some genera it is greatly reduced and in many quite vestigial.

Most springtails are without air-tubes, and breathe through the general cuticle of the body. But in one family (Sminthuridae) a spiracle, opening on either side between the head and the prothorax, leads to a branching system of air-tubes. The Sminthuridae are further characterized by the globular abdomen, which shows but little external trace of segmentation, and by the well-developed spring.

In the Entomobryidae the body is elongate and clearly segmented, but the dorsal region (tergum) of the prothorax is much reduced and the head downwardly directed; the spring is well developed. In the Achorutidae the head is forwardly directed, the tergum of the prothorax conspicuous, and the spring small or vestigial.

In many genera of springtails a curious post-antennal organ, consisting of sensory structures (often complex in form) surrounded by a firm ring, is to be noticed on the cuticle of the head between the eyes and the feelers. It may be of use as an organ of smell. Other sensory organs occur on the third and fourth antennal segments in the Achorutidae and Entomobryidae (fig. 2, 3).

Distribution and Habits.—The Aptera are probably the most widely distributed of all insects. Among the bristle-tails we find the genus Machilis, represented in Europe (including the Faeroe Islands) and in Chile; while Campodea lives high on the mountains and in the deepest caves. The springtails have even a wider distribution. The genus Isotoma, for example, has some of its numerous species in regions so remote as Alaska, Franz Josef Land, the Sandwich Islands, the South Orkneys, Graham Land, Kerguelen and South Victoria Land. As it is unlikely that these delicate insects could be transported across sea-channels, their wide and discontinuous range suggests both their great antiquity and the former existence of continental tracts over which they may have travelled to their present stations.

Springtails and bristle-tails live in damp concealed places—under stones or tree-bark, in moss, and in the decaying vegetable or animal matter which serves as food for most of them. Some species, however, eat fresh plant-tissues. A species of bristle-tail (Machilis maritima) and quite a number of springtails haunt the sea-coast at or below high-water mark. In such localities many thousands of individuals may sometimes be found associated together. The insect fauna of limestone caves both in Europe and North America is largely composed of Aptera, especially Collembola.

Geological History.—A supposed Thysanuran from the Silurian of New Brunswick has been described by G.F. Matthew, and another genus from the French Carboniferous by C. Brongniart. Not till the Tertiary do we find remains of Aptera in any quantity, species both of living and extinct genera being represented in the amber.

Development.—The embryonic development of several genera of Aptera, which has been carefully studied, will be more suitably described in comparison with that of other insects than here (see Hexapoda).

APTERAL (from the Gr. ἄπτερος, wingless, ἀ-, privative and πτερός, a wing), an architectural term applied to amphiprostyle temples which have no columns on the sides; in the Ionic temple on the Acropolis at Athens known as Nike Apteros, the adjective is used, not as applying to the goddess of victory but to the absence of any peristyle on the sides.

APTIAN (Fr. Aptien, from Apt in Vaucluse, France), in geology, the term introduced in 1843 by A. d’Orbigny (Pal. France Crét. ii.) for the upper stage of the Lower Cretaceous rocks. In England it comprises the Lower Greensand and part of the Speeton beds; in France it is divided into two sub-stages, the lower, “Bedoulian,” of Bedoule in Provence, with Hoplites deshayesei and Ancyloceras Matheroni; and an upper, “Gargasian,” from Gargas near Apt, with Hoplites furcatus (Dufrenoyi) and Phylloceras Guettardi. To this stage belong the Toucasia limestone and Orbitolina marls of Spain; the Schrattenkalk (part) of the Alpine and Carpathian regions; and the Terebrirostra limestone of the same area. Parts of the Flysch of the eastern Alps, the Biancone of Lombardy, and argile scagliose of Emilia, are of Aptian age; so also are the “Trinity Beds” of North America. Deposits of bauxite occur in the Aptian hippurite limestone at Les Baux near Aries, and in the Pyrenees. The Aptian rocks are generally clays, marls and green glauconitic sands with occasional limestones. (See Greensand and Cretaceous.)

APULEIUS, LUCIUS, Platonic philosopher and rhetorician, was born at Madaura in Numidia about A.D. 125. As the son of one of the principal officials, he received an excellent education, first at Carthage and subsequently at Athens. After leaving Athens he undertook a long course of travel, especially in the East, principally with the view of obtaining initiation into religious mysteries. Having practised for some time as an advocate at Rome, he returned to Africa. On a journey to Alexandria he fell sick at Oea (Tripoli), where he made the acquaintance of a rich widow, Aemilia Pudentilla, whom he subsequently married. The members of her family disapproved of the marriage, and indicted Apuleius on a charge of having gained her affections by magical arts. He easily established his innocence, and his spirited, highly entertaining, but inordinately long defence (Apologia or De Magia) before the proconsul Claudius Maximus is our principal authority for his biography. From allusions in his subsequent writings, and the mention of him by St. Augustine, we gather that the remainder of his prosperous life was devoted to literature and philosophy. At Carthage he was elected provincial priest of the imperial cult, in which capacity he occupied a prominent position in the provincial council, had the duty of collecting and managing the funds for the temples of the cult, and the superintendence of the games in the amphitheatre. He lectured on philosophy and rhetoric, like the Greek sophists, apparently with success, since statues were erected in his honour at Carthage and elsewhere. The year of his death is not known.

The work on which the fame of Apuleius principally rests has little claim to originality. The Metamorphoses or Golden Ass (the latter title seems not to be the author’s own, but to have been bestowed in compliment, just as the Libri Rerum Quotidianarum of Gaius were called Aurei) was founded on a narrative in the Metamorphoses of Lucius of Patrae, a work extant in the time of Photius. From Photius’s account (impugned, however, by Wieland and Courier), this book would seem to have consisted of a collection of marvellous stories, related in an inartistic fashion, and in perfect good faith. The literary capabilities of this particular narrative attracted the attention of Apuleius’s contemporary, Lucian, who proceeded to work it up in his own manner, adhering, as Photius seems to indicate, very closely to the original, but giving it a comic and satiric turn. Apuleius 235 followed this rifacimento, making it, however, the groundwork of an elaborate romance, interspersed with numerous episodes, of which the beautiful story of Cupid and Psyche is the most celebrated, and altering the dénouement to suit the religious revival of which he was an apostle.

The adventures of the youthful hero in the form of an ass are much the same in both romances, but in Apuleius he is restored to human shape by the aid of Isis, into whose mysteries he is initiated, and finally becomes her priestess. The book is a remarkable illustration of the contemporary reaction against a period of scepticism, of the general appetite for miracle and magic, and of the influx of oriental and Egyptian ideas into the old theology. It is also composed with a well-marked literary aim, defined by Kretzschmann as the emulation of the Greek sophists, and the transplantation of their tours de force into the Latin language. Nothing, indeed, is more characteristic of Apuleius than his versatility, unless it be his ostentation and self-confidence in the display of it. The dignified, the ludicrous, the voluptuous, the horrible, succeed each other with bewildering rapidity; fancy and feeling are everywhere apparent, but not less so affectation, meretricious ornament, and that effort to say everything finely which prevents anything being said well. The Latinity has a strong African colouring, and is crammed with obsolete words, agreeably to the taste of the time. When these defects are mitigated or overlooked, the Golden Ass will be pronounced a most successful work, invaluable as an illustration of ancient manners, and full of entertainment from beginning to end. The most famous and poetically beautiful portion is the episode of Cupid and Psyche, adapted from a popular legend of which traces are found in most fairy mythologies, which explains the seeming incongruity of its being placed in the mouth of an old hag. The allegorical purport he has infused into it is his own, and entirely in the spirit of the Platonic philosophy. Don Quixote’s adventure with the wine-skins, and Gil Blas’s captivity among the robbers, are palpably borrowed from Apuleius; and several of the humorous episodes, probably current as popular stories long before his time, reappear in Boccaccio.

Of Apuleius’s other writings, the Apology has been already mentioned. The Florida (probably meaning simply “anthology,” without any reference to style) consists of a collection of excerpts from his declamations, ingenious but highly affected, and in general perfect examples of the sophistical art of saying nothing with emphasis. They deal with the most varied subjects, and are intended to exemplify the author’s versatility. The pleasing little tract On the God of Socrates expounds the Platonic doctrine of beneficent daemons, an intermediate class between gods and men. Two books on Plato (De Platone et Ejus Dogmate) treat of his life, and his physical and ethical philosophy; a third, treating of logic, is generally considered spurious. The De Mundo is an adaptation of the Περὶ κόσμόυ wrongly attributed to Aristotle. Apuleius informs us that he had also composed numerous poems in almost all possible styles, and several works on natural history, some in Greek. In the preparation of these he seems to have attended more closely to actual anatomical research than was customary with ancient naturalists. Some other works—dealing with theology, the properties of herbs, medical remedies and physiognomy, are wrongly attributed to him.

The character of Apuleius, as delineated by himself, is attractive; he appears vehement and passionate, but devoid of rancour; enterprising, munificent, genial and an enthusiast for the beautiful and good. His vanity and love of display are conspicuous, but are extenuated by a genuine thirst for knowledge and a surprising versatility of attainments. He prided himself on his proficiency in both Greek and Latin. His place in letters is accidentally more important than his genius strictly entitles him to hold. He is the only extant example in Latin literature of an accomplished sophist in the good sense of the term. The loss of other ancient romances has secured him a peculiar influence on modern fiction; while his chronological position in a transitional period renders him at once the evening star of the Platonic, and the morning star of the Neo-Platonic philosophy.

APULIA (sometimes Appulia in manuscripts but never in inscriptions), the district inhabited in ancient times by the Apuli. Strictly a Samnite tribe (see Samnites) settled round Mount Garganus on the east coast of Italy (Strabo vi. 3. 11), the Apuli mingled with the Iapygian tribes of that part of the coast (Dauni, Peucetii, Poediculi) who, like the Messapii, had come from Illyria, so that the name Apulia reached down to the border of the ancient Calabria. Almost the only monument of Samnite speech from the district is the famous Tabula Bantina from Bantia, a small city just inside the Peucetian part of Apulia, on the Lucanian border. This inscription is one of the latest and in some ways the most important monument of Oscan, though showing what appear to be some southern peculiarities (see Osca Lingua). Its date is almost certainly between 118 and 90 B.C., and it shows that Latin had not even then spread over the district (cf. Lucania). Far older than this are some coins from Ausculum and Teate (later known as Teanum Apulum), of which the earliest belong to the 4th century B.C. Roman or Latin colonies were few, Luceria (planted 314 B.C.) in the north and Brundisium (soon after 268) being the chief. (See R.S. Conway, Italic Dialects, xxviii.-xxx. pp. 15 f.; and Mommsen’s introduction to the opening sections of C.I.L. ix.)

The wars of the 4th and 3rd centuries B.C. brought a great part of the pastures of the Apulian plain into the hands of the Roman state, and a tax was paid on every head of cattle and every sheep, at first to the tax farmer and later to the imperial procurator. It was under the Romans that the system of migration for the flocks reached its full development, and the practice is still continued; the sheep-tracks (tratturi), 350 ft. wide, leading from the mountains of the Abruzzi to the plain of Apulia date in the main at least from the Roman period, and are mentioned in inscriptions. The plain, however, which once served as winter grazing ground for a million sheep, now gives pasture to about one-half of that number.1 The shepherds, who were slaves, often gave considerable trouble; we hear that some 7000 of them, who had made the whole country unsafe, were condemned to death in 185 B.C. (Livy xxxix. 29). Sheep-farming on a large scale was no doubt detrimental to the interests of the towns. We hear of repeated risings, for the last time in the Social War. Even in the 4th century B.C. the then chief town of Apulia, Teate or Teanum Apulum (see above), suffered in this way. Luceria subsequently took its place, largely owing to its military importance; but under the Empire it was succeeded by Canusium.

The road system of Apulia, which touched all the important towns, consisted of three main lines, the Via Appia (see Appia, Via), the Via Traiana, and the coast road, running more or less parallel in an east-south-east direction. The first (the southernmost), coming east from Beneventum, entered Apulia at the Pons Aufidi, and ran through Venusia to Tarentum, and thence, 236 turning north-east, to Brundusium. The second, coming north-east from Beneventum, turned east at Aecae, and ran through Herdoniae, Canusium, Butuntum, Barium and Gnathia (Gnatia) to Brundusium. There was also a short cut from Butuntum to Gnathia through Caelia, keeping inland. The third parallel line ran to the north of the Via Traiana, in continuation of the road along the north-east coast of Picenum and Samnium; it entered Apulia near Larinum (whence a branch ran south to Bovianum Undecimanorum), and thence, keeping in the plain to the south of the Mons Garganus, rejoined the coast at Sipontum, where it received a branch road from the Via Traiana at Aecae, passing through Luceria and Arpi. It then passed through Barduli (where it was joined by a road from Canusium by way of Cannae) to Barium, where it joined the Via Traiana. From Barium a road probably ran direct to Caelia, and thence south-south-east to join the Via Appia some 25 m. north-west of Tarentum.

Barium was an important harbour, though less so than Brundusium and Tarentum, which, however, belonged to Calabria in the Roman sense. Apulia, with Calabria, formed the second region of Augustus, though we once find Calabria treated as a part of the third region, Lucania (C.I.L. ix. 2213). The Hannibalic and later wars had, Strabo tells us, destroyed the former prosperity of the country; in imperial times we hear little or nothing of it. Both were governed by a corrector from the time of Constantine onwards, but in 668 the Lombards conquered Calabria and Apulia, and it was then that the former name was transferred to Bruttium, the meaning of the latter being extended to include Calabria also. In the 10th century the greater part of this territory was recovered by the Byzantine emperors, whose governor was called Καταπανός, a name which, under the corrupt form Capitanata, belonged to the province of Foggia till 1861. It was conquered by the Normans under William Bras-de-fer, who took the title of comes Apuliae in 1042; it was raised to a dukedom with Calabria by Robert Guiscard in 1059, and united to the Sicilian monarchy in 1127. Many of the important towns possess fine Romanesque cathedrals, constructed under the Normans and the Hohenstaufen rulers. It shared the subsequent fate of Sicily, becoming a part of the kingdom of the Two Sicilies in 1734, and being united with Italy in 1861.

Modern Apulia comprises the three provinces of Foggia, Bari and Lecce (the latter corresponding roughly with the ancient Calabria, which, however, extended somewhat farther north inland), and is often known as Le Puglie; it Modern Apulia. stretches from Monte Gargano to the south-east extremity of Italy, with an area of 7376 sq. m.; it is bounded on the north and east by the Adriatic, on the south-east by the Gulf of Taranto, on the south by Basilicata and on the west by Campania and the Abruzzi. The three provinces correspond to the three natural divisions into which it falls. That of Foggia, though it has mountains on the west and south-west boundary, and the Monte Gargano at its north-east extremity, is in the main a great plain called the Tavoliere (chessboard) di Puglia, with considerable lagoons on its north and east coast. That of Bari, east-south-east of Foggia and divided from it by the Ofanto (Aufidus), the only considerable river of Apulia, 104 m. long, is a hilly district with a coast strip along which are the majority of the towns—the lack of villages is especially noticeable; in the circondario of Barletta, the north-east portion of the province, there are only eleven communes, with a total population of 335,934. That of Lecce, to the east-south-east again, is a low flat limestone terrace.

The industries of Apulia are mainly pastoral or agricultural. Besides sheep, a considerable number of horses, cattle and swine are bred; while despite the lack of water, which is the great need of modern Apulia (in 1906 arrangements were made for a great aqueduct, to supply the three provinces from the headwaters of the Sele), cultivation is actively carried on, especially in the province of Bari, where grain, wine, olives, almonds, lemons, oranges, tobacco, &c., are produced in abundance, and the export of olive oil is attaining considerable importance. The salt works of Margherita di Savoia produce large quantities of salt, and nitre is extracted near Molfetta.

Railway communications are fairly good, the main line from Bologna to Brindisi passing through the whole length of Apulia, by way of Foggia and Bari, and having branches from Foggia (the main railway centre of Apulia) to Benevento and Caserta, to Manfredonia, to Lucera and to Rocchetta S. Antonio (and thence to either Avellino, Potenza or Gioia del Colle), from Ofantino to Margherita di Savoia, from Barletta to Spinazzola (between Rocchetta S. Antonio and Gioia del Colle), from Bari to Putignano, and via Gioia del Colle to Taranto, and from Brindisi to Taranto, and to Lecce and Otranto; besides which, there is a steam tramway from Barletta to Bari via Andria.

The most important harbours of Apulia are Brindisi, Bari, Taranto, Barletta, Molfetta and Gallipoli. The export of olive oil to foreign countries from the province of Lecce in 1905 amounted to 1048 tons, as against 3395 in 1901; but that to home ports increased from 7077 to 9025 tons in the same period. The production of wine was 358,953 tons in 1905 as against 203,995 tons in 1901 (an exceptionally bad year) and 284,156 tons in 1902. Of this 211,872 tons were forwarded by rail and sea, in the proportion of five to two respectively, the rest being used for home consumption and as a reserve. The cultivation of oriental tobacco is extending in the province (see Consular Report, No. 3672, July 1906).

The population of the province of Foggia was 425,450 (1901) as against 322,755 in 1871, the chief towns being Foggia (53,151), Cerignola (34,195), S. Severo (30,040), Monte S. Angelo (21,870), S. Marco in Lamis (17,309), Lucera (17,515); that of Bari, 827,698 (1901) as against 604,540 in 1871, the chief towns being Bari (77,478), Andria (49,569), Barletta (42,022), Corato (41,573), Molfetta (40,135), Trani (31,800), Bisceglie (30,885), Bitonto (30,617), Canosa (24,169), Ruvo (23,776), Terlizzi (23,232), Altamura(22,729), Monopoli (22,545), Gioia del Colle (21,721); that of Lecce, 706,520 (1901) as against 493,594 in 1871, the chief towns being Taranto (60,733), Lecce (32,687), Brindisi (25,317), Martina Franca (25,007), Ostuni (22,997), Francavilla Fontana (20,422), Ceglie Messapica (16,867), Nardo (14,387), Galatina (14,071), Gallipoli (13,552), Manduria (13,113).

APURÉ, a river of western Venezuela, formed by the confluence of the Sarare and Uribante at 6° 45′ N. lat. and 71° W. long., and flowing eastward across the Venezuelan llanos to a junction with the Orinoco at about 7° 40′ N. lat. and 66° 45′ W. long. Its drainage area includes the slopes of both the Colombian and Venezuelan Andes. It has a sluggish course across the llanos for about 300 m., and is navigable throughout its length. Its principal tributaries are the Caparro, Portuguesa and Guarico on the north, and the Caucagua on the south. Its lateral channels on the south mingle with those of the Arauca for many miles, forming an extensive district subject to annual inundations.

APURIMAC, a river of central Peru, rising in the Laguna de Villafra in the western Cordilleras, 7 m. from Caylloma, a village in the department of Arequipa, and less than 100 m. from the Pacific coast. It flows first north-easterly, then north-westerly past Cuzco to the mouth of the Perené tributary, thence east and north to its junction with the Ucayali at 10° 41′ S. lat., and 73° 34′ W. long. It is known as the Apurimac only down to the mouth of the Mantaro tributary, 11° 45′ S. lat. and 1325 ft. above sea-level. Thence to the mouth of the Perene (984 ft.) it is known as the Ené, and from that point to its junction with the Ucayali (859 ft.) as the Tambo.

APURIMAC, an interior department of southern Peru, bounded N. by the department of Ayacucho, E. by Cuzco, S. and W. by Cuzco and Ayacucho. Area, 8187 sq. m.; pop. (1896) 177,387. The department was created in 1873 and comprises five provinces. Its physical features and productions are very similar to those of Ayacucho (q.v.), with the exception that sugar-cane is cultivated with noteworthy success in the low valley of the province of Abancay. The capital, Abancay, 110 m. south-west of Cuzco, which is only a village in size but is rich in historical associations and Andahuaylas, in the north-west part of the department, are its principal towns.

237

APYREXIA (Gr. ἀπυρεξία, from ἀ-, privative, πυρέσσειν, to be in a fever, πῦρ, fire, fever), in pathology, the normal interval or period of intermission in a fever.

‛AQĪBA BEN JOSEPH (c. 50-132), Jewish Palestinian rabbi, of the circle known as tana (q.v.). It is almost impossible to separate the true from the false in the numerous traditions respecting his life. He became the chief teacher in the rabbinical school of Jaffa, where, it is said, he had 24,000 scholars. Whatever their number, it seems certain that among them was the celebrated Rabbi Meir, and that through him and others ‛Aqība exerted a great influence on the development of the doctrines embodied in the Mishnah. He sided with Bar Cochebas in the last Jewish revolt against Rome, recognized him as the Messiah, and acted as his sword-bearer. Being taken prisoner by the Romans under Julius Severus, he was flayed alive with circumstances of great cruelty, and met his fate, according to tradition, with marvellous steadfastness and composure. He is said by some to have been a hundred and twenty years old at the time of his death. He is one of the ten Jewish martyrs whose names occur in a penitential prayer still used in the synagogue service. ‛Aqība was among the first to systematize the Jewish tradition, and he paved the way for the compilation of the Mishnah. From his school emanated the Greek translation of the scriptures by Aquila.

AQUAE (Lat. for “waters”), a name given by the Romans to sites where mineral springs issued from the earth. Over a hundred can be identified, some declaring by their modern names their ancient use: Aix-les-Bains in Savoy (Aquae Sabaudicae), Aix-en-Provence (Aquae Sextiae), Aix-la-Chapelle or Aachen (Aquae Grani), &c. Only two occur in Britain: Aquae Sulis—less correctly Aquae Solis—at Bath in Somerset, which was famous, and Buxton (called Aquae simply), which seems to have been far less important. Aquae Sulis was occupied by the Romans almost as soon as they entered the island in A.D. 43, and flourished till the end of the Roman period. It was frequented by soldiers quartered in Britain, by the Britons, and by visitors from north Gaul, and its name was known in Italy, though patients probably seldom travelled so far. Like most mineral springs known to the ancients, it was under the protection of a local deity, the Celtic Sul, whom the Romans equated with their Minerva. Stately remains of its baths and temple have been found at various times, especially in 1790 and 1878-1895, and may still be seen there.

AQUAE CUTILIAE, a mineral spring in Italy, near the modern Cittaducale, 9 m. E. of Rieti. The lake near it was supposed by classical writers to be the central point of Italy, and was renowned for its floating islands, which, as in other cases, were formed from the partial petrification of plants by the mineral substances contained in the water. Considerable remains of baths may still be seen there—they were apparently resorted to by both Vespasian and Titus in their last illnesses, for both died there.

AQUAMARINE (Lat. aqua marina, “water of the sea”), a transparent variety of beryl (q.v.), having a delicate blue or bluish-green colour, suggestive of the tint of sea-water. It occurs at most localities which yield ordinary beryl, some of the finest coming from Russia. The gem-gravels of Ceylon contain aquamarine. Clear yellow beryl, such as occurs in Brazil, is sometimes called aquamarine chrysolite. When corundum presents the bluish tint of typical aquamarine, it is often termed Oriental aquamarine.

AQUARELLE (from Ital. acquarella, water-colour), a form of painting with thin water-colour or ink.

AQUARII, a name given to the Christians who substituted water for wine in the Eucharist. They were not a sect, for we find the practice widely in vogue at an early time, even among the orthodox. In Greek they were called Hydroparastatae, or those who offer water. Theodosius, in his persecuting edict of 382, classes them as a special sect with the Manicheans, who also eschewed wine. See Eucharist.

AQUARIUM (plural aquaria), the name given to a receptacle for a marine flora and fauna. Until comparatively recently, aquaria were little more than domestic toys, or show-places of a popular character, but they have now not only assumed a profound scientific importance for the convenient study of anatomical and physiological problems in marine botany and zoology, but have also attained an economic value, as offering the best opportunities for that study of the habits and environment of marketable food-fish without which no steps for the improvement of sea-fisheries can be safely taken. The numerous “zoological stations” which have sprung up, chiefly in Europe and the United States, but also in the British colonies and Japan, often endeavour to unite these two aims, and have in many cases become centres of experimental work in problems relating to fisheries, as well as in less directly practical subjects. Of these stations, the oldest and the most important is that at Naples, which, though designed for purely scientific objects, also encourages popular study by means of a public aquarium. The following account (1902) of this station by Dr W. Giesbrecht, a member of the staff, will serve to show the methods and aims, and the complex and expensive equipment, of a modern aquarium:—

“The zoological station at Naples is an institution for the advancement of biological science—that is, of comparative anatomy, zoology, botany, physiology. It serves this end by providing the biologist with the various objects of his study and the necessary appliances; it is not a teaching institution. The station was founded by Dr Anton Dohrn, and opened in the spring of 1874; it is the oldest and largest of all biological stations, of which there are now about thirty in existence. Its two buildings are situated near the seashore in the western town park (Villa Nazionale) of Naples. The older and larger one, 33 metres long, 24 m. deep, 16 m. high, contains on the ground floor the aquarium, which is open to the public. On the first floor there is, facing south, the principal library, ornamented with fresco paintings, and, facing north, a large hall containing twelve working tables, several smaller rooms and the secretarial offices. On the second floor is the physiological laboratory, and on the third floor the small library, a hall with several working tables, and the dark rooms used in developing photographs. The ground floor of the smaller building, which was finished in 1887, contains the rooms in which the animals are delivered, sorted and preserved, and the fishing tackle kept, together with the workshop of the engineer; on the first and second floors are workrooms, amongst others the botanical laboratory; on the third floor are store-rooms. In the basement of both buildings, which is continued underneath the court, there are sea-water cisterns and filters, engines and store-rooms. The materials for study which the station offers to the biologist are specimens of marine animals and plants which abound in the western part of the Mediterranean, and especially in the Gulf of Naples. To obtain these, two screw-steamers and several rowing boats are required, which are moored in the harbour of Mergellina, situated close by. The larger steamer, ‘Johannes Müller’ (15 m. long, 2½ m. wide, 1 m. draught), which can steam eight to ten English miles per hour, is provided with a steam dredge working to a depth of eighty fathoms. From the small steamer, ‘Frank Balfour,’ and the rowing boats, the fishing is done by means of tow-nets. Besides these there are fishermen and others who daily supply living material for study. The plankton (small floating animals) is distributed in the morning, other animals as required. The animals brought in by the fishermen are at once distributed amongst the biologists, whereas the material brought up by the dredges is placed in flat revolving wooden vessels, so as to give the smaller animals time to come out of their hiding-places. The students who work in the station have the first claim on specimens of plants and animals; but specimens are also supplied to museums, laboratories and schools, and to individuals engaged in original research elsewhere. Up to the present time about 4000 such parcels have been despatched, and not infrequently live specimens of animals are sent to distant places. This side of the work has been of very great value to science. The principal appliances for study with which the station provides the biologist are workrooms furnished with the apparatus 238 and chemicals necessary for anatomical research and physiological experiments and tanks. Every student receives a tank for his own special use. The large tanks of the principal aquarium are also at his disposal for purposes of observation and experiment if necessary.

“The water in the tanks is kept fresh by continual circulation, and is thus charged with the oxygen necessary to the life of the organisms. It is not pumped into the tanks directly from the sea, but from three large cisterns (containing 300 cubic metres), to which it again returns from the tanks. The water wasted or evaporated during this process is replaced by new water pumped into the cisterns directly from the sea. The water flows from the large cisterns into a smaller cistern, from which it is distributed by means of an electric pump through vulcanite or lead pipes to the various tanks. The water with which the tanks on the upper floors are filled is first pumped into large wooden tanks placed beneath the roof, thence it flows, under almost constant pressure, into the tanks. The water circulated in this manner contains by far the largest number of such animals as are capable of living in captivity in good condition. Some of them even increase at an undesirable rate, and it sometimes happens that young Mytilus or Ciona stop up the pipes; in laying these, therefore, due regard must be had to the arrangements for cleaning. For the cultivation of very delicate animals it is necessary to keep the water absolutely free from harmful bacteria; for this purpose large sand-filters have lately been placed in the system, through which the water passes after leaving the cisterns. Each of the smaller cisterns, which are fixed in the workrooms, consist of two water-tanks, placed one above the other; their frames are of wrought iron and the walls generally of glass. Vessels containing minute animals can be placed between these two tanks, receiving their water through a siphon from the upper tank; the water afterwards flows away into the lower tank.

“The twenty-six tanks of the public aquarium (the largest of which contains 112 cubic metres of water) have stone walls, the front portion alone being made of glass. As the tanks hold a very large number of animals in proportion to the quantity of water, they require to be well aerated. The pipes through which the water is conducted are therefore placed above the surface of the water, and the fresh supply is driven through them under strong pressure. A large quantity of air in the form of fine bubbles is thus taken to the bottom of the tank and distributed through the entire mass of water. Should the organisms which it is desired to keep alive be very minute, there is a danger of their being washed away by the circulating water. To obviate this, either the water which flows away is passed through a strainer, or the water is not changed at all, air being driven through it by means of an apparatus put into motion by the drinking-water supply.

“The library contains about 9000 volumes, which students use with the help of a slip catalogue, arranged according to authors. The station has published at intervals since 1879 two periodicals treating of the organisms of the Mediterranean. One is Fauna und Flora des Golfes van Neapel, the other Mittheilungen aus der zoologischen Station zu Neapel. The former consists of monographs in which special groups of animals and plants are most exhaustively treated and the Mediterranean species portrayed according to life in natural colours; up to the present time twenty-one zoological and five botanical monographs have appeared, making altogether 1200 4to sheets with about 400 plates. Of the Mittheilungen, which contain smaller articles on organisms of the Mediterranean, fourteen volumes in 8vo have been published. The station also publishes a Zoologischer Jahresbericht, which at first treated of the entire field of zoology, but since 1886 has been confined principally to comparative anatomy and ontogeny; it appears eight to nine months after the end of the year reported. The Guide to the Aquarium, with its descriptions and numerous pictures, is meant to give the lay visitor an idea of the marine animal world.

“There are about forty officials, amongst them six zoologists, one physiologist, one secretary, two draughtsmen, one engineer. The station is a private institution, open to biologists of all nations under the following conditions: there are agreements with the governments of Austria, Baden, Bavaria, Belgium, Hamburg, Holland, Hesse, Italy, Prussia, Russia, Saxony, Switzerland, Hungary, Württemberg, the province of Naples, and the universities of Cambridge, Oxford, Strassburg, Columbia College (New York), and the British Association for the Advancement of Science, the Smithsonian Institution, and a society of women in the United States of North America (formerly also with Bulgaria, Rumania, Spain, the Academy of Sciences in Berlin, Williams College, University of Pennsylvania), by virtue of which the governments and corporate bodies named have the right, on payment of £100 per annum, to send a worker to the station; this places at his disposal a ‘table’ or workplace, furnished with all the necessary appliances and materials as set down in the agreement. At present there are agreements for thirty-three tables, and since the foundation of the station nearly 1200 biologists have worked there. The current expenses are paid out of the table-rents, the entrance fees to the public aquarium, and an annual subvention paid by the German empire.”

In England a station on similar lines, but on a smaller scale, is maintained at Plymouth by the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, with the help of subsidies from the government and the Fishmongers’ Company.

Little difficulty is experienced in maintaining, breeding and rearing fresh-water animals in captivity, but for many various reasons it is only by unremitting attention and foresight that most marine animals can be kept even alive in aquaria, and very few indeed can be maintained in a condition healthy enough to breed. Much experience, however, has been gained of late years at considerable expense, both in England and abroad. In starting a marine aquarium of whatever size, it should be obvious that the first consideration must be a supply of the purest possible water, as free as may be, not only from land-drainage and sewage, but also from such suspended matters as chalk, fine sand or mud. This is most ideally and economically secured by placing the station a few feet above high-water mark, in as sheltered a position as possible, on a rocky coast, pumping from the sea to a large reservoir above the station, and allowing the water to circulate gently thence through the tanks by gravity (Banyuls). At an inland aquarium (Berlin, Hamburg), given pure water in the first instance, excellent if less complete results may nevertheless, be obtained. The next consideration is the method by which oxygen is to be supplied to the organisms in the aquarium. Of the two methods hitherto in use, that of pumping a jet of air into tanks otherwise stagnant or nearly so (Brighton), while supplying sufficient oxygen, has so many other disadvantages, that it has not been employed regularly in any of the more modern aquaria. It is, however, still useful in aerating quite small bodies of water in which hardy and minute organisms can be isolated and kept under control. In the other method, now in general use, a fine jet of water under pressure falls on to the surface of the tank; this carries down with it a more than sufficient air-supply, analysis showing in some cases a higher percentage of oxygen in aquarium water than in the open sea.

The water supply is best effected by gravity from reservoirs placed above the tanks, but may be also achieved by direct pumping from low reservoirs or from the sea to the tanks. Provided that an unlimited supply of pure water can be obtained cheaply, the overflow from the tanks is best run to waste; but in aquaria less fortunately placed, it returns to a storage low-level reservoir, from which it is again pumped, thus circulating round and round (Naples, Plymouth). The storage reservoirs should be in all cases very large in comparison with the bulk of water in circulation; if practicable, they should be excavated in rock, and lined with the best cement. Thera is no reason why they should not be shallow, exposed to light and air, and cultivated as rock-pools by the introduction of seaweeds and small animals, but they must then be screened from rain, cold and dust. The pumps used in circulation will be less likely to kill minute animals if of the plunger or ram type, rather than 239 rotary, and should be of gun-metal or one of the new bronze-alloys which take a patina in salt water. For the circulating pipes many materials have been tried. Vulcanite is not only expensive and brittle, but has other disadvantages; common iron pipes, coated internally with cement or asphalt or glazed internally, with all unions and joints cemented, have been used with more or less success. Probably best of all is common lead piping, the joints being served with red-lead; water should be circulated through such pipes till they become coated with insoluble carbonate, for some time before animals are put into the tanks. For small installations glass may be used, the joints being made with marine glue or other suitable cement.

In building the tanks themselves, regard must be had to their special purposes. If intended for show-tanks for popular admiration, or for the study of large animals, they must be large with a plate-glass front; for ordinary scientific work small tanks with all sides opaque are preferable from every point of view. According to their character, size and position, fixed tanks may be of brickwork, masonry or rock, coated in each case with cement; asphalting the sides offers no particular advantages, and often gives rise to great trouble and expense. All materials, and especially the cements, must be of the finest quality procurable. For smaller and movable tanks, slate slabs bolted or screwed together have some disadvantages, notably those of expense, weight and brittleness, but are often used. Better, cheaper and lighter, if less permanent, are tanks of wood bolted together, pitched internally. Glass bell-jars, useful in particular cases, should generally have their sides darkened, except when required for observation. Provision should always be made for cleaning every part of the tanks, pipes and reservoirs; all rock-work in tanks should therefore be removable. As regards the lighting of fixed tanks, it should always be directly from above. In all tanks with glass sides, whether large or small, as much light as possible should be kept from entering through the glass; otherwise, with a side-light, many animals become restless, and wear themselves out against the glass, affected by even so little light as comes through an opposite tank.

In cases where distance from the sea or other causes make it impracticable to allow the overflow from the tanks to run to waste, special precautions must be taken to keep the water pure. Chemically speaking, the chief character of the water in an aquarium circulation, when compared with that of the open sea, lies in the excessive quantity of nitrogen present in various forms, and the reduced alkalinity; these two being probably connected. The excess of nitrogen is referable to dead animals, to waste food and to the excreta of the living organisms. The first two of these sources of contamination may be reduced by care and cleanliness, and by the maintenance of a flow of water sufficient to prevent the excessive accumulation of sediment in the tanks. The following experiment shows the rapid rise of nitrogen if unchecked. A tank with a considerable fauna was isolated from the general circulation and aerated by four air-jets, except during hours 124-166 of the experiment; column I. shows per 100,000 the nitrogen estimated as ammonia, column II. the total inorganic nitrogen:—

During this time the alkalinity was reduced to the equivalent of 30 mg. CaCO3 per litre, ocean water having an alkalinity equivalent to 50-55 mg. per litre. It has been suggested that the organic nitrogen becomes oxidized into nitrous, then into nitric acid, which lowers the carbonate values. A great deal of reduction of this nitrogenous contamination can be effected by filtration, a method first introduced successfully at Hamburg, where a most thriving aquarium has been maintained by the local Zoological Society for many years on the circulation principle, new water being added only to compensate for waste and evaporation. The filters consist of open double boxes, the inner having a bottom of perforated slate on which rests rough gravel; on the latter is fine gravel, then coarse, and finally fine sand. Filtration may be either upwards or downwards through the inner box to the outer. Such filters, intercalated between tanks and reservoir, have been shown by analysis to stop a very large proportion of nitrogenous matter. It is doubtful whether aquarium water will not always show an excess of nitrogenous compounds, but they must be kept down in every way possible. In small tanks, well lighted, seaweeds can be got to flourish in a way that has not been found practicable in large tanks with a circulation; these, with Lamellibranchs and small Crustacea as scavengers, will be found useful in this connexion. Slight or occasional circulation should be employed here also, to remove the film of dust and other matters, which otherwise covers the surface of the water and prevents due oxygenation.

In such small tanks for domestic use the fauna must be practically limited to bottom-living animals, but for purposes of research it is often desired to keep alive larval and other surface-swimming animals (plankton). In this case a further difficulty is presented, that of helping to suspend the animals in the water, and thus to avoid the exhaustion and death which soon follow their unaided efforts to keep off the bottom; this duty is effected in nature by specific gravity, tide and surface current. In order to deal with this difficulty a simple but efficient apparatus has been devised by Mr E.T. Browne; a “plunger,” generally a glass plate or filter funnel, moves slowly up and down in a bell-jar or other small tank, with a period of rest between each stroke; the motive power is obtained through a simple bucket-and-siphon arrangement worked by the overflow from other tanks. This apparatus (first used at the Plymouth Laboratory of the Marine Biological Association in 1897, and since introduced into similar institutions), by causing slight eddies in the water, keeps the floating fauna in suspension, and has proved very successful in rearing larvae and in similar work.

AQUARIUS (the “Water-bearer” or “Cup-bearer”), in astronomy, the eleventh sign of the zodiac (q.v.), situated between Capricornus and Pisces. Its symbol is , representing part of a stream of water, probably in allusion to the fact that when the sun is in this part of the heavens (January, February) the weather is rainy. It is also a constellation mentioned by Eudoxus (4th century B.C.) and Aratus (3rd century B.C.); Ptolemy catalogued forty-five stars, Tycho Brahe forty-one, Hevelius forty-seven. ζ Aquarii is a well-defined binary, having both components of the fourth magnitude; it is probably of long period.

AQUATINT (Lat. aqua, water, and tincta, dyed), a kind of etching (q.v.) which imitates washes with a brush. There are many ways of preparing a plate for aquatint, the following being recommended by P.G. Hamerton. Have three different solutions of rosin in rectified alcohol, making them of various degrees of strength, but always thin enough to be quite fluid, the weakest solution being almost colourless. First pour the strongest solution on the plate. When it dries it will produce a granulation; and you may now bite as in ordinary etching for your darker tones, stopping out what the acid is not to operate upon, or you may use a brush charged with acid, perchloride of iron being a very good mordant for the purpose. After cleaning the plate, you proceed with the weaker solutions in the same way, the weakest giving the finest granulation for skies, distances, &c. The process requires a good deal of stopping-out, and some burnishing, scraping, &c., at last. Aquatint may be effectively used in combination with line etching, and still more harmoniously with soft ground etching in which the line imitates that of the lead pencil.

AQUAVIVA, CLAUDIO (1542-1615), fifth general of the Jesuits, the youngest son of the duke d’Altri, was born at Naples. He joined the Jesuits at Rome in 1567, and his high administrative 240 gifts marked him out for the highest posts. He was soon nominated provincial of Naples and then of Rome; and during this office he offered to join the Jesuit mission to England that set out under Robert Parsons (q.v.) in the spring of 1580. The following year, being then only thirty-seven years old, he was elected, by a large majority, general of the society in succession to Mercurian, to the great surprise of Gregory XIII.; but the extraordinary political ability he displayed, and the vast increase that came to the Society during his long generalate, abundantly justified the votes of the electors. He, together with Lainez, may be regarded as the real founder of the Society as it is known to history. A born ruler, he secured all authority in his own hands, and insisted that those who prided themselves on their obedience should act up to the profession. In his first letter “On the happy increase of the Society” (25th of July 1581), he treats of the necessary qualifications for superiors, and points out that government should be directed not by the maxims of human wisdom but by those of supernatural prudence. He successfully quelled a revolt among the Spanish Jesuits, which was supported by Philip II., and he made use in this matter of Parsons. A more difficult task was the management of Sixtus V., who was hostile to the Society. By consummate tact and boldness Aquaviva succeeded in playing the king against the pope, and Sixtus against Philip. For prudential reasons, he silenced Mariana, whose doctrine on tyrannicide had produced deep indignation in France; and he also appears to have discountenanced the action of the French Jesuits in favour of the League, and was thus able to secure solid advantages when Henry IV. overcame the confederacy. To him is due the Jesuit system of education in the book Ratio atque institutio studiorum (Rome, 1586). But the Dominicans denounced it to the Inquisition, and it was condemned both in Spain and in Rome, on account of some opinions concerning the Thomist doctrines of the divine physical premotion in secondary causes and predestination. The incriminated chapters were withdrawn in the edition of 1591. In the fierce disputes that arose between the Jesuit theologians and the Dominicans on the subject of grace, Aquaviva managed, under Clement VIII. and Paul V., to save his party from a condemnation that at one time seemed probable. He died at Rome on the 31st of January 1615, leaving the Society numbering 13,000 members in 550 houses and 15 provinces. The subsequent influence exercised by the Jesuits, in their golden age, was largely due to the far-seeing policy of Aquaviva, who is undoubtedly the greatest general that has governed the Society.

AQUEDUCT (Lat. aqua, water, and ducere, to lead; Gr. ὑδραγωγεῖον, ὑδραγώγιον, ὑπόνομος), a term properly including artificial works of every kind by means of which water is conveyed from one place to another, but generally used in a more limited sense. It is, in fact, rarely employed except in cases where the work is of considerable magnitude and importance, and where the water flows naturally by gravitation. The most important purpose for which aqueducts are constructed is that of conveying pure water, from sources more or less distant, to large masses of population. Aqueducts are either below ground, on the surface, or raised on walls either solid or pierced with arches; to the last the term is often confined in popular language. The choice of method naturally depends on the contour of the country.

I. Ancient Aqueducts.—In Egypt, Babylonia and Assyria—flat countries traversed by big rivers and subject to floods—water was supplied by means of open canals with large basins. In Persia devices of all kinds were adopted according Phoenician. to the nature of the country. In relation to the achievements of Greece and Rome, the Phoenicians are the most important among pre-classical engineers. In Cyprus water was supplied to temples by rock-cut subterranean conduits carried across intervening valleys in siphons. Such conduits have been found near Citium, Amathus, &c. (Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 187, 341). In Syria the most striking of Phoenician waterworks is the well of Ras-el-Ain near Tyre, which consisted of four strong octagonal towers through which rises to a height of 18 to 20 ft. the water from four deep artesian wells. The water thus accumulated was carried off in conduits to reservoirs near the shore, and thence in vessels or skins to the island. The aqueduct across to the island is, of course, of Roman work.

It is not possible in all cases to find a satisfactory date for the numerous conduits which have supplied Jerusalem; some probably go back to the times of the kings of Judah. The principal reservoir consists of the three Pools of Jerusalem. Solomon which supplied the old aqueduct; the highest is about 20 ft. above the middle one and 40 above the lowest. These pools collected the water from Ain Saleh and other springs, and sent it to the city by two conduits. The higher of these— probably the older—was partly a rock-cut canal, partly carried on masonry; the siphon-pipe system was adopted across the lower ground near Rachel’s Tomb, where the pipe (15 in. wide) is formed of large pierced stones embedded in rubble masonry. The lower conduit is still complete; it winds so much as to be altogether some 20 m. long. Near the Birket-es-Sultan it passes over the valley of Hinnom on nine low arches and reaches the city on the hill above the Tyropeon valley. It enters the Haram enclosure at the Gate of the Chain (Bāb es-Silsila), outside which is a basin 84 ft. by 42 by 24 deep. It is interesting to note in the case of the underground tunnel which brought water from the Virgin’s Fountain to the pool of Siloam, that the two boring parties had no certain means of keeping the line; there is evidence that they had to make shafts to discover their position, and that ultimately the parties almost passed one another. Though the direct distance is 1100 ft., the length of the conduit is over 1700 ft. Perrot and Chipiez incline to attribute the Pools of Solomon to the Asmonaeans, followed by Roman governors, whereas the earlier tunnels of the Kedron and Tyropeon valley may be Punic-Jewish (see also Palest. Explor. Fund Mem., “Jerusalem,” pp. 346-365). Besides these conduits excavation has discovered traces of many other cisterns, tunnels and conduits of various kinds. Many of them point to periods of great prosperity and engineering enterprise which gave to the city a water-supply far superior to that which exists at present.

The earliest attempts in Europe to solve the problems of water-supply were made by the Greeks, who perhaps derived their ideas from the Phoenicians. It has generally been held, partly on the strength of a passage in Strabo Greek (v. 3. 8, p. 235), and partly owing to the comparative unimportance of the remains discovered, that the Greek works were altogether inferior to the Roman. Research in the Greek towns of Asia Minor, together with a juster appreciation of the remains as a whole, must be held to modify this view. Among the earliest examples of Greek work are the tunnels or emissaria which drained Lake Copais in Boeotia; these, though not strictly aqueducts, were undoubtedly the precursors of such works, consisting as they did of subterranean tunnels (ὑπόνομοι) with vertical shafts (φρεατίαι), sixteen of which are still recognizable, the deepest being about 150 ft. They may be compared with that described by Polybius as conveying water from Taurus to Hecatompylos, and with numerous other remains in Asia Minor, Syria, Phoenicia and Palmyra. Popular legend ascribed them to Cadmus, just as Argos referred the irrigation of its lands to Danaüs. They are undoubtedly of great antiquity.

The insufficiency of water, supplied by natural springs and cisterns hewn in the rock, which in an early age had satisfied the small communities of Greece, had become a pressing public question by the time of the Tyrants, of whom Polycrates of Samos and Peisistratus of Athens were distinguished for their wisdom and enterprise in this respect. The former obtained the services of Eupalinus, an engineer celebrated for the skill with which he had carried out the works for the water-supply of Megara (see Athen. Mittheil. xxv., 1900, 23) under the direction of the Tyrant Theagenes (c. 625 B.C.). At Samos the difficulty lay in a hill which rose between the town and the water source. Through this hill Eupalinus cut a tunnel 8 ft. broad, 8 ft. high 241 and 4200 ft. long, building within the tunnel a channel 3 ft. broad and 11 ells deep. The water, flowing by an accurately reckoned declivity, and all along open to the fresh air, was received at the lower end by a conduit of masonry, and so led into the town, where it supplied fountains, pipes, baths, cloacae, &c., and ultimately passed into the harbour (Herod, iii. 60). In Athens, under the rule of the Peisistratids (c. 560-510 B.C.), a similarly extensive, if less difficult, series of works was completed to bring water from the neighbouring hills to supplement the inadequate supply from the springs. From Hymettus were two conduits passing under the bed of the Ilissus, most of the course being cut in the rock. Pentelicus, richer in water, supplied another conduit, which can still be traced from the modern village of Chalandri by the air shafts built several feet above the ground, and at a distance apart of 130-160 ft.; the diameter of these shafts is 4-5 ft., and the number of them still preserved is about sixty. Tributary channels conveyed into the main stream the waters of the district through which it passed. Outside Athens, those two conduits met in a large reservoir, from which the water was distributed by a ramification of underground channels throughout the city. These latter channels vary in form, being partly round, partly square, and generally walled with stone; the chief one is sufficiently large for two men to pass in it. The precise location of the reservoir depends on the value of Dr Wilhelm Dörpfeld’s theory as to the site of the Enneacrunus of Thucydides and Pausanias (see Athens: Topography and Antiquity). Dörpfeld places it south-west of the Acropolis, where there is a cistern connected with an aqueduct which passed under the theatre of Dionysus and on towards the Ilissus (see map under Athens). Others have placed it south of the Olympieum in the Ilissus bed. Beside these works water was brought from Pentelicus in an underground conduit begun by the emperor Hadrian and completed by Antoninus Pius. This aqueduct is still in use, having been repaired in 1869.

In Sicily, the works by which Empedocles, it is said, brought the water into the town of Selinus, are no longer visible; but it is probable that, like those of Syracuse, they consisted chiefly of tunnels and pipes laid under the ground. Syracuse was supplied by two aqueducts, one of which the Athenians destroyed (Thuc. vi. 100). One was fed by an affluent (the mod. Buttigliara) of the Anapus (mod. Anapo); it carried the water up to the top of Epipolae, where the channel was open, and thence down to the city and finally into the harbour. The other also ascends to the top of Epipolae, skirts the city on the north, and then proceeds along the coast. Its course is marked by rectangular shafts (spiragli) at the bottom of which water is still visible.

An example of what appears to have been the earliest form of aqueduct in Greece was discovered in the island of Cos beside the fountain Burinna (mod. Fountain of Hippocrates) on Mount Oromedon. It consists of a bell-shaped chamber, built underground in the hill-side, to receive the water of the spring and keep it cool; a shaft from the top of the chamber supplied fresh air. From this reservoir the water was led by a subterranean channel, 114 ft. long and 6½ ft. high.

In comparing Greek and Roman aqueducts, many writers have enlarged on the greatness of the latter as an example of Roman contempt for natural obstacles, or even of Roman ignorance of the laws of nature. Now, in the Roman. first place, the Romans were not unacquainted with the law that water finds its own level (see Pliny, Hist. Nat. xxxi. 57, “subit altitudinem exortus sui”), and took full advantage of it in the construction of lofty fountains and the supplying of the upper floors of houses. That they built aqueducts across valleys in preference to carrying pipes underground was due simply to economy. Pipes had to be made of lead which was weak, or of bronze which was expensive; and the Romans were not sufficiently expert in the casting of large pipes which would stand a very great pressure to employ them for the whole course of a great aqueduct. Secondly, the water was so extremely hard that it was important that the channels should be readily accessible for repair as well as for the detection of leakage.1 Moreover, as we shall see, the Roman aqueducts did not, in fact, preserve a straight line regardless of the configuration of the country. A striking example is the aqueduct of Nemausus (Nîmes), the springs of which are some 10 m. from the town, though the actual distance traversed is about 25. Other devices, such as changing the level and then modifying the slope, and siphon arrangements of various kinds, were adopted (as in the aqueduct at Aspendus).

Sextus Julius Frontinus, appointed curator aquarum in A.D. 97, mentions in his treatise de aquaeductibus urbis Romae (on the aqueducts of the city of Rome) nine aqueducts as being in use in his time (the lengths of the aqueducts as given here follow his measurements). These are: (1) Aqua Appia, which took its rise between the 6th and 7th milestones of the Via Collatina, and measured from its source to the Porta Trigemina 11 Roman miles, of which all but about 300 ft. were below ground. It appears to have been the first important enterprise of the kind at Rome, and was the work of the censor Appius Claudius Caecus, from whom it derived its name. The date of its construction was 312 B.C. (2) Anio Vetus, constructed in 272-269 B.C. by the censor Manius Curius Dentatus. From its source near Tivoli, on the left side of the Anio, it flowed some 43 m.,2 of which only 1100 ft. was above ground. At the distance of 2 m. from Rome (Frontinus, i. 21), it parted into two courses, one of which led to the horti Asiniani, and was thence distributed; while the other (rectus ductus) led by the temple of Spes to the Porta Esquilina. (3) Aqua Marcia, reconstructed in 1869-1870 under the name of Acqua Pia or Marcia-Pia after Pius IX. (though from Tivoli to Rome the modern aqueduct takes an entirely different course), rising on the left side of the Via Valeria near the 36th milestone. It traversed 61¾ m., of which 54¼ were underground, and for the remaining distance was carried partly on substructions and partly on arches. It was the work of the praetor Quintus Marcius Rex (144-140 B.C.), not of Ancus Marcius, the fourth king of Rome, as Pliny (N.H. xxxi. 3) fancied, and took its name from its constructor. Its waters were celebrated for their coolness and excellent quality. Its volume was largely increased by Augustus, who added to it the Aqua Augusta; and it was repaired and restored by Titus, Septimus Severus, Caracalla and Diocletian. (4) Aqua Tepula, from its source (now known as Sorgente Preziosa) in the district of Tusculum, to Rome, was some 11 m. in length. The first portion of its course must have been almost entirely subterranean and is not now traceable. For the last 6½ m. it ran on the same series of arches that carried the Aqua Marcia, but at a higher level. It was the work of the censors Cn. Servilius Caepio and L. Cassius Longinus, and was completed in the year 125 B.C. Its water is warm (about 63° Fahr.) and not of the best quality. (5) The Aqua Julia, from a source 2 m. from that of the Tepula, joined its course at the 10th milestone of the Via Latina. The combined stream, after a distance of 4 m., was received in a reservoir, and then once more divided into two channels. The entire length of the Julia was 15½ m. It was constructed in the year 33 B.C. by M. Vipsanius Agrippa, who also built the (6) Aqua Virgo which, from its origin at a copious spring in a marsh on the Via Collatina, measured 14 m. in length; it was conveyed in a channel, partly under and partly above ground. It was begun in the year 33 B.C. and was celebrated for the excellence of its waters. It was restored to use by Pius V. in 1570. (7) Aqua Alsietina or Augusta, the source of which is the Lacus Alsietinus (mod. Lago di Martignano), to the north of Rome, was over 22 m. in length, of which 358 paces were on arches. It was the work of Augustus, probably with the object of furnishing water for his naumachia (a basin for sham sea-fights), and not for drinking purposes. Its course is 242 unknown, as no remains of it exist, but an inscription relating to it is given in Notizie d. Scant (1887), p. 182. (8, 9) The Aqua Claudia and Anio Novus were two aqueducts begun by Caligula in A.D. 38 and completed by Claudius in A.D. 52. The springs of the former belonged to the same group as those of the Marcia, and were situated near the 38th milestone of the Via Sublacensis, not far from its divergence from the Via Valeria, while the original intake of the latter from the river Anio was 4 m. farther along the same road. As the water was thick it was collected in a purifying tank, and 4 m. below, a branch stream, the Rivus Herculaneus, was added to it. According to Frontinus, over 10 m. of the course of the Claudia and nearly 9½ of that of the Anio Novus were above ground. Seven miles out of Rome they united and ran from that point into Rome, following a natural isthmus formed by a lava stream from the Alban volcano, upon a line of arches, which still forms one of the most conspicuous features of the Campagna. The original inscription of Claudius (A.D. 52) on the Porta Maggiore, by which the Aqua Claudia and Anio Novus crossed the Via Praenestina and the Via Labicana, gives the length of the Aqua Claudia as 45 m., and that of the Anio Novus as 62 m. Frontinus, on the other hand, gives 46.406 m. (i.e. about 43 English miles) and 58.700 m. (i.e. about 54 English miles). Albertini (Mélanges de l’École Française, 1906, 305) explains the difference as due to the fact that Frontinus was calculating the length of the Claudia from the farthest spring, the Fons Albudinus, and that of the Anio Novus from the new intake constructed by Trajan in one of the three lakes constructed by Nero for the adornment of his villa above Subiaco. Two other inscriptions on the Porta Maggiore record restorations by Vespasian in A.D. 70, and by Titus in A.D. 80. That the aqueducts should be spoken of as vetustate dilapsi so soon after their construction is not a little surprising, and may be attributed either to hasty construction in order to complete them by a fixed date, or to jobbery by the imperial freedmen who under Claudius were especially powerful, or to the fact that a line of arches intended originally in all probability for the Aqua Claudia alone was made to carry the Anio Novus as well.

The size of the channels (specus) of the principal aqueducts varies considerably at different points of their course. The Anio Novus has the largest of them all, measuring 3 to 4 ft. wide and 9 ft. high to the top of the roof, which is pointed. They are lined with hard cement (opus signinum) containing fragments of broken brick. Those aqueducts of which the most conspicuous remains exist in the neighbourhood of Rome are the four from the upper valley of the Anio, the two which took their supply and their name from the river itself, and the Marcia and the Claudia, which originated from the same group of springs, in the floor of the Anio valley 6 m. below Subiaco. Those of the Anio Vetus, which travelled at a considerably lower level than the other three, are the least conspicuous, while the Claudia and Anio Novus as a rule kept close together, the latter at the highest level of all. The ruins of bridges and substructions in the Anio valley down to Tivoli, though comparatively little known, are of great importance. In all the aqueducts the original construction of the bridges was in opus quadratum (masonry), while the substructions are in brick-faced concrete; but the bridges are as a rule strengthened (and often several times) with reinforcing walls of concrete faced with opus reticulatum or brickwork. Below Tivoli, where the Anio leaves its narrow valley, the aqueducts sweep round towards the Alban hills, and pass through some very difficult country between Tivoli and Gallicano, alternately crossing ravines, some of which are as much as 300 ft. deep, and tunnelling through hills.3

The engineering skill displayed is remarkable, and one wonders what instruments were employed—probably the so-called chorobates, an improvement upon the ordinary water-level (Vitruvius viii. 6), though this would be slow and complicated. The optical properties of glass lenses were, however, unknown to the ancients, and the dioptra, or angle measure, was considered by Vitruvius less trustworthy than the chorobates for the planning of aqueducts (cf. E. Hultsch, s.v. in Pauly-Wissowa, Real-encyclopädie). The aqueducts as a rule were carried on separate bridges, though all four united at the Ponte Lupo, a huge structure, which after the addition of all the four, and with the inclusion of all the later strengthening walls that were found necessary in course of time, measures 105 ft. in height, 508 in length, and 46 in thickness at the bottom, without including the buttresses. From Gallicano onwards the course of these four aqueducts follows the lower slopes of the Alban Hills. Previous writers on the subject have been unable to determine their course, which is largely subterranean; but it can be followed step by step with the indications given by the presence of the calcareous deposit which was thrown out at the putei or shafts (which were, as a rule, placed at intervals of 240 ft., as were the cippi) when the specus was cleaned; and remains of bridges, though less important, owing to the less difficult character of the country, are not entirely absent (cf. the works by T. Ashby cited in bibliography).4 Near the 7th milestone of the Via Latina at Le Capanelle, the Aqua Claudia and Anio Novus emerge from their underground course, and run into Rome upon the long series of arches already mentioned, passing over the Porta Maggiore. The Claudia sent off an important branch from the Porta Maggiore over the Caclian to the Palatine, but the main aqueduct soon reached its termination. A mile farther on the Aqua Marcia also, owing to the gradual slope of the ground towards Rome, begins to be supported on arches, which were also used to carry the Aqua Tepula and the Aqua Julia (of the two latter, before their junction with the Marcia, no remains exist above ground, but inscribed cippi of the last named and its underground channel have been found at Le Capanelle, and cippi also close to its springs, which are a little way above Grottaferrata at Gli Squarciarelli). The Anio Vetus followed the same line, but kept underground (as was natural at the early period at which it was constructed) until the immediate neighbourhood of Rome, near the locality known as “ad Spem veterem” (from a temple of Spes, of which no remains are known) close to the Porta Maggiore. At this point, besides the aqueducts named, the Aqua Appia, as we are told by Frontinus, entered the city, and received an important branch, the Appia Augusta. No remains of either have been discovered outside the city.

The Aqua Alexandrina must also have entered the city here, though its channel, which lay at some depth below ground, has not been discovered. Considerable remains of its brick aqueducts exist in the district between the Via Praenestina and the Via Labicana.

Of the two aqueducts on the right bank of the Tiber, the Alsietina, as we have said, has no remains at all, while those of the Traiana are not of great importance. The line of the aqueducts was marked by cippi, inscribed (in the case of the Anio Vetus, Marcia, Tepula, Julia and Virgo—those of the Claudia and Anio Novus are uninscribed, and those of the Traiana are differently worded) with the name of the aqueduct, the distance from the next cippus (generally 240 ft.) and the number, counting from Rome (not from the springs). These boundary stones were erected in pairs, to mark off the strip of land 30 ft. in width reserved for the aqueduct, and for the road or path which generally followed it. The shafts (putei) often stood, but not necessarily, at the same points as the cippi.

To these nine must be added the two following, constructed after Frontinus’s time: (10) Aqua Traiana, from springs to the north-west of the Lacus Sabatinus (Lago di Bracciano), constructed by Trajan in A.D. 109, about 36½ English miles in length. It was restored by Paul V. in 1611, who made use of and largely transformed the remains of the ancient aqueduct; he allowed some of the inferior water of the lake to flow into the channel, and it is thus no longer used for drinking. (11) Aqua Alexandrina, 243 rising about 14 English miles from Rome, between the Via Praenestina and the Via Labicana, the work of Alexander Severus (A.D. 226). The springs now supply the modern Acqua Felice, constructed by Sixtus V. in 1585, but the course of the latter is mainly subterranean and not identical with that of the former.

Plate I.

Plate II.

It is agreed that these eleven are all that were constructed. Procopius speaks of fourteen (and the Regionary catalogues mention others), but this number includes branch conduits. All the aqueducts ended in the city in huge castella or reservoirs for the purpose of distribution. Vitruvius recommends the division of these into three parts—one for the supply of fountains, &c., one for the public baths and one for private consumers. In the Piazza Vittorio Emmanuele at Rome there are still to be seen the remains of a large ornamental fountain built probably for the Aqua Julia by Domitian or Alexander Severus (Jordan-Hülsen, Topographie, i. 3350). Besides these main castella there were also many minor castella in various parts of the city for sub-distribution. To allow the water to purify itself before being distributed in the city, filtering and settling tanks (piscinae limariae) were built outside the walls. These piscinae were covered in with a vaulted roof, and were sometimes on a very large scale, as in the example still preserved at Fermo, which consists of two stories, each having three oblong basins communicating with each other; or the Piscina Mirabilis at Baiae, which is covered in by a vaulted roof, supported on forty-eight pillars and perforated to permit the escape of foul air. Two stairs lead by forty steps to the bottom of the reservoir. In the middle of the basin is a sinking to collect the deposit of the water. The walls and pillars are coated with a stucco so hard as to resist a tool.

The oversight of aqueducts was placed, in the times of the republic, under the aediles, who were not, however, the constructors of them; of the four aqueducts built during this period, three are the work of censors, one (the Marcia) of a praetor. Under the empire this task devolved on special officials styled Curatores Aquarum, instituted by Augustus, who, as he himself says, “rivos aquarum omnium refecit” (inscription on the arch by which the Aqua Marcia crossed the Via Tiburtina).

Among the aqueducts outside Italy, constructed in Roman times and existing still, the most remarkable are: (1) the aqueduct at Nîmes (Nemausus), erected probably by Vipsanius Agrippa in the time of Augustus, which rose to 160 ft. The Pont du Card, as this aqueduct is now called, consists of three tiers of arches across the valley of the river Gardon. In the lowest tier are six arches, of which one has a span of 75 ft., the others each 60 ft. In the second tier are eleven arches, each with a span of 75 ft. In the third tier are thirty-five smaller arches which carried the specus. As a bridge, the Pont du Gard has no rival for lightness and boldness of design among the existing remains of works of this class carried out in Roman times. (2) The aqueduct bridges at Segovia (Merckel, Ingenieurtechnik, pp. 566-568), Tarragona (ibid. 565-566), and Merida in Spain, the former being 2400 ft. long, with 109 arches of fine masonry, in two tiers, and reaching the height of 102 ft. The bridge at Tarragona is 876 ft. long and 83 ft. high. (3) At Mainz are the ruins of an aqueduct 7000 yds. long, about half of which is carried on from 500 to 600 pillars (Archaeological Journal, xlvii., 1890, pp. 211-214). This aqueduct was built by the XIVth legion and was for the use of the camp, not for the townspeople. For the similar aqueduct at Luynes see Arch. Journ. xlv. (1888), pp. 235-237. Similar witnesses of Roman occupation are to be seen in Dacia, Africa (see especially under Carthage), Greece and Asia Minor. (4) The aqueduct at Jouy-aux-Arches, near Metz, which originally extended across the Moselle, here very broad, conveyed to the city an abundance of excellent water from Gorze. From a large reservoir at the source of the aqueduct the water passed along subterranean channels built of hewn stone, and sufficiently spacious for a man to walk in them upright. Similar channels received the water after it had crossed the Moselle by this bridge, at the distance of about 6 m. from Metz, and conveyed it to the city. The bridge consisted of only one row of arches nearly 60 ft. high. The middle arches have given way under the force of the water, but the others are still perfectly solid. This aqueduct is probably to be attributed to the latter half of the 4th century A.D. It is for the use of the town; hence its size. (5) One of the principal bridges of the aqueduct of Antioch in Syria is 700 ft. long, and at the deepest point 200 ft. high. The lower part consists almost entirely of solid wall, and the upper part of a series of arches with very massive pillars. The masonry and design are rude. The water supply was drawn from several springs at a place called Beit el-Ma (anc. Daphne) about 4 or 5 m. from Antioch. From these separate springs the water was conducted by channels of hewn stone into a main channel, similarly constructed, which traversed the rest of the distance, being carried across streams and valleys by means of arches or bridges. (6) At the village of Moris, about an hour’s distance north-west from the town of Mytilene, is the bridge of an aqueduct, carried by massive pillars built of large hewn blocks of grey marble, and connected by means of three rows of arches, of which the uppermost is of brick. The bridge extended about 500 ft. in length, and at the deepest point was from 70 to 80 ft. high. Judged by the masonry and the graceful design, it has been thought to be a work of the age of Augustus. Remains of this aqueduct are to be seen at Larisson Lamarousia, an hour’s distance from Moris, and at St Demetri, two hours and a half from Ayasos, on the road to Vasilika.

The whole subject of the ancient and medieval aqueducts of Asia Minor has been considered in great detail by G. Weber (“Wasserleitungen in kleinasiatischen Städten,” in the Jahrbuch des kaiserl. deutsch. archäolog. Instit. xix., 1904; see also earlier articles in Jahrbuch, 1892, Asia Minor. 1899). The aqueducts examined are those at Pergamum, Laodicea and Smyrna (in the earlier articles), and those at Metropolis (Ionia), Tralles (Aidin), Antioch-on-Maeander, Aphrodisias, Trapezopolis, Hierapolis, Apamea Cibotus and Antioch in Pisidia. In most of these cases it is difficult or even impossible to decide whether the work is Hellenistic or Roman; to the Romans Weber inclines to attribute, e.g. those at Metropolis, Tralles (perhaps), Aphrodisias; to the Greeks, e.g. those at Antioch-on-Maeander and Antioch in Pisidia. Since, therefore, a detailed description of these remains does not provide material for any satisfactory generalizations as to the distinctive features of Hellenistic and Roman work, it will be sufficient here to mention a few of the more interesting discoveries.

In the case of Metropolis, the aqueduct in the valley of the Astraeus consisted of an arcade about 13 to 16 ft. high. Nearer to the town in the hills there are distinct traces of a canal with brick walls. It is clear that the water could not have served more than the lower parts of the town, the acropolis of which is nearly 200 ft. above the level of the conduit. In the case of Tralles the water was supplied by a high pressure conduit and distributed from the acropolis, where there are the remains of a basin (13 ft. by 10) arched over with brick. The ancient aqueduct is to be distinguished from a later, probably Byzantine, canal conduit, the course of which avoids the deeper depressions, crossed by the old aqueduct. Of the Antioch-on-Maeander aqueduct only a few clay-pipes remain, and the same is true of the aqueduct which was built by Carminius in the 2nd century A.D. to supply the community when reinforced by the amalgamation of Plarasa and Tauropolis; two of its basins are still distinguishable, but the two water-towers which are still standing belong to a later Byzantine structure. Trapezopolis was supplied from Mt. Salbacus (Baba Dagh): some twenty stone-pipes have been found built into a low wall which varies from 3¼ to about 5 ft. wide. Of the pillars which carried the conduit-pipe to Antioch in Pisidia, nineteen are still standing. Each arch consists of eleven keystones; no cement was used. The conduit, which was high-pressure, ends in a distributing tower and reservoir.

II. Medieval.—The aqueduct near Spoleto, which now serves also as a bridge, is deserving of notice as an early instance of the use of the pointed arch, belonging as it does to the 7th or 8th 244 century. It has ten arches, remarkable for the elegance of their design and the airy lightness of their proportions, each over 66 ft. in span, and about 300 ft. in height.

The aqueduct of Pyrgos, near Constantinople, is a remarkable example of works of this class carried out in the later times of the Roman empire, and consisted of two branches. From this circumstance it was called Egri Kemer Constantinople. (“the Crooked Aqueduct”), to distinguish it from the Long Aqueduct, situated near the source of the waters. One of the branches extends 670 ft. in length, and is 106 ft. in height at the deepest part. It is composed of three tiers of arches, those in each row increasing in width from the bottom to the top—an arrangement very properly introduced with the view of saving materials without diminishing the strength of the work. The two upper rows consisted of arches of semicircles, the lower of Gothic arches; and this circumstance leads to the belief that the date of the structure is about the 10th century. The breadth of the building at the base was 21 ft., and it diminished with a regular batter on each side to the top, where it was only 11 ft. The base also was protected by strong buttresses or counterforts, erected against each of the pillars. The other branch of the aqueduct was 300 ft. long, and consisted of twelve semicircular arches. This aqueduct serves to convey to Constantinople the waters of the valley of Belgrad, one of the principal sources from which the city is supplied. These are situated on the heights of Mount Haemus, the extremity of the Balkan Mountains, which overhangs the Black Sea. The water rises about 15 m. from the city, and between 3 and 4 m. west of the village of Belgrad, in three sources, which run in three deep and very confined valleys. These unite a little below the village, and then are collected into a large reservoir. After flowing a mile or two from this reservoir, the waters are augmented by two other streams, and conveyed by a channel of stone to the Crooked Aqueduct. From this they are conveyed to another which is the Long Aqueduct; and then, with various accessions, into a third, termed the Aqueduct of Justinian. From this they enter a vaulted conduit, which skirts the hills on the left side of the valley, and crosses a broad valley 2 m. below the Aqueduct of Justinian, by means of an aqueduct, with two tiers of arches of a very beautiful construction. The conduit then proceeds onward in a circuitous route, till it reaches the reservoir of Egri Kapu, situated just without and on the walls of the city. From this the water is conducted to the various quarters of the city, and also to the reservoir of St Sophia, which supplies the seraglio of the grand signior. The Long Aqueduct (Usun Kemer) is more imposing by its extent than the Crooked one, but is far inferior in the regularity of design and disposition of the materials. It is evidently a work of the Turks. It consists of two tiers of arches, the lower being forty-eight in number, and the upper fifty. The whole length was about 2200 ft., and the height 80 ft. The aqueduct of Justinian (Muallak Kemer or “Hanging Aqueduct”) is without doubt one of the finest monuments which remain to us of the middle ages. It consists of two tiers of large pointed arches, pierced transversely. Those of the lower story have 55 ft. of span, the upper ones 40 ft. The piers are supported by strong buttresses, and at different heights they have little arches passing through them laterally, which relieve the deadness of the solid pillar. The length of this aqueduct is 720 ft. and the height 108 ft. This aqueduct has been attributed both to Constantine I. and to Justinian, the latter being perhaps the more probable.

Besides the waters of Belgrad, Constantinople was supplied from several other principal sources, one of which took its rise on the heights of the same mountains, 3 or 4 m. east of Belgrad. This was conveyed in a similar manner by an arched channel elevated, when it was necessary, on aqueduct bridges, till it reached the northern parts of the city. It was in the course of this aqueduct that the contrivance of the souterasi or hydraulic obelisks, described by Andréossy (on his voyage to the Black Sea, the account of the Thracian Bosporus), was constructed, which excited some attention, as being an improvement on the method of conducting water by aqueduct bridges. “The souterasi,” says Andréossy, “are masses of masonry, having generally the form of a truncated pyramid or an Egyptian obelisk. To form a conduit with souterasi, we choose sources of water, the level of which is several feet higher than the reservoir by which it is to be distributed over the city. We bring the water from its sources in subterranean canals, slightly declining until we come to the borders of a valley or broken ground. We there raise on each side a souterasi, to which we adapt vertically leaden pipes of determinate diameters, placed parallel to the two opposite sides of the building. These pipes are disjoined at the upper part of the obelisk, which forms a sort of basin, with which the pipes are connected. The one permits the water to rise to the level from whence it had descended; by the other, the water descends from this level to the foot of the souterasi, where it enters another canal underground, which conducts it to a second and to a third souterasi, where it rises and again descends, as at the last station. Here a reservoir receives it and distributes it in different directions by orifices of which the discharge is known.” Again he says, “it requires but little attention to perceive that this system of conducting tubes is nothing but a series of siphons open at their upper part, and communicating with each other. The expense of a conduit by souterasi is estimated at only one-fifth of that of an aqueduct with arcades.” There seems to be really no advantage in these pyramids, further than as they serve the purpose of discharging the air which collects in the pipes. They are in themselves an evident obstruction, and the water would flow more freely without any interruption of the kind. In regard to the leaden pipes, again, they would have required, with so little head pressure as is stated, to be used of very extraordinary dimensions to pass the same quantity of water as was discharged along the arched conduits (see also works quoted under Constantinople). The other principal source from which Constantinople is supplied, is from the high grounds 6 or 8 m. west of the town, from which it is conducted by conduits and arches, in the same manner as the others. The supply drawn from all these sources, as detailed by Andréossy, amounted to 400,000 cubic ft. per day.

III. Modern Construction.—Where towns are favourably situated the aqueduct may be very short and its cost bear a relatively small proportion to the total outlay upon a scheme of water supply, but where distant sources have to be relied upon Aqueducts and water supply. the cost of the aqueduct becomes one of the most important features in the scheme, and the quantity of water obtainable must be considerable to justify the outlay. Hence it is that only very large towns can undertake the responsibility for this expenditure. In Great Britain it has in all large schemes become a condition that, when a town is permitted to go outside its own watershed, it shall, subject to a priority of a certain number of gallons per day per head of its own inhabitants, allow local authorities, any part of whose district is within a certain number of miles of the aqueduct, to take a supply on reasonable terms. The first case in which this principle was adopted on a large scale was the Thirlmere scheme sanctioned by parliament in 1879, for augmenting the supply of Manchester. The previous supply was derived from a source only about 15 m. distant, and the cost of the aqueduct, chiefly cast-iron pipes, was insignificant compared with the cost of the impounding reservoirs. But Thirlmere is 96 m. distant from the service reservoir near Manchester, and the cost of the aqueduct was more than 90% of the total cost. As a supply of about 50,000,000 gallons a day is available the outlay was justifiable, and the water is in fact very cheaply obtained. Liverpool derives a supply of about 40,000,000 gallons a day from the river Vyrnwy in North Wales, 68 m. distant, and Birmingham has constructed works for impounding water in Radnorshire, and conveying it a distance of 74 m., the supply being about 75,000,000 gallons a day. In the year 1899 an act of parliament was passed authorizing the towns of Derby, Leicester, Sheffield and Nottingham, jointly to obtain a supply of water from the head waters of the river Derwent in Derbyshire. Leicester is 60 m. distant from this source, and its share of the supply is about 10,000,000 gallons a day. For more than half the distance, however, the aqueduct 245 is common to Derby and Nottingham, which together are entitled to about 16,000,000 gallons a day, and the expense to Leicester is correspondingly reduced. These are the most important cases of long aqueducts in England, and all are subsequent to 1879. It is obvious, therefore, how greatly the design and construction of the aqueduct have grown in importance, and what care must be Exercised in order that the supply upon which such large populations depend may not be interrupted, and that the country through which such large volumes of water are conveyed may not be flooded in consequence of the failure of any of the works.

Practically only two types of aqueduct are used in England. The one is built of concrete, brickwork, &c., the other of cast-iron (or, in special circumstances, steel) pipes. In the former type the water surface coincides with the Construction. hydraulic gradient, and the conditions are those of an artificial river; the aqueduct must therefore be carefully graded throughout, so that the fall available between source and termination may be economically distributed. This condition requires that the ground in which the work is built shall be at the proper elevation; if at any point this is not the case, the aqueduct must be carried on a substructure built up to the required level. Such large structures are, however, extremely expensive, and require elaborate devices for maintaining water-tightness against the expansion and contraction of the masonry due to changes of temperature. They are now only used where their length is very short, as in cases where mountain streams have to be crossed, and even these short lengths are avoided by some engineers, who arrange that the aqueduct shall pass, wherever practicable, under the streams. Where wide valleys interrupt the course of the built aqueduct, or where the absence of high ground prevents the adoption of that type at any part of the route, the cast-iron pipes hereafter referred to are used.

The built aqueduct may be either in tunnel, or cut-and-cover, the latter term denoting the process of cutting the trench, building the floor, side-walls, and roof, and covering with earth, the surface of the ground being restored Masonry aqueducts. as before. For works conveying water for domestic supply, the aqueduct is in these days, in England, always covered. Where, as is usually the case, the water is derived from a tract of mountainous country, the tunnel work is sometimes very heavy. In the case of the Thirlmere aqueduct, out of the first 13 m. the length of the tunnelled portions is 8 m., the longest tunnel being 3 m. in length. Conditions of time, and the character of the rock, usually require the use of machinery for driving, at any rate in the case of the longer tunnels. For the comparatively small tunnels required for aqueducts, two percussion drilling machines are usually mounted on a carriage, the motive power being derived from compressed air sent up the tunnel in pipes. The holes when driven are charged with explosives and fired. In the Thirlmere tunnels, driven through very hard Lower Silurian strata, the progress was about 13 yds. a week at each face, work being carried on continuously day and night for six days a week. Where the character of the country through which the aqueduct passes is much the same as that from which the supply is derived, the tunnels need not be lined with concrete, &c., more than is absolutely necessary for retaining the water and supporting weak places in the rock; the floor, however, is nearly always so treated. The lining, whether in tunnel or cut-and-cover, may be either of concrete, or brickwork, or of concrete faced with brickwork. To ensure the impermeability of work constructed with these materials is in practice somewhat difficult, and no matter how much care is taken by those supervising the workmen, and even by the workmen themselves, it is impossible to guarantee entire freedom from trouble in this respect. With a wall only about 15 in. thick, any neglect is certain to make the work permeable; frequently the labourers do not distribute the broken stone and fine material of the concrete uniformly, and no matter how excellent the design, the quality of materials, &c., a leak is sure to occur at such places (unless, indeed, the pressure of the outside water is superior and an inflow occurs). A further cause of trouble lies in the water which flows from the strata on to the concrete, and washes away some of the cement upon which the work depends for its watertightness, before it has time to set. For this reason it is advisable to put in the floor before, and not after, the sidewalls and arch have been built, otherwise the only outlet for the water in the strata is through the ground on which the floor has to be laid. Each length of about 20 ft. should be completely constructed before the next is begun, the water then having an easy exit at the leading end. Manholes, by which the aqueduct can be entered, are usually placed in the roof at convenient intervals; thus, in the case of the Thirlmere aqueduct, they occur at every quarter of a mile.

In some parts of America aqueducts are frequently constructed of wood, being then termed flumes. These are probably more extensively used in California than in any other part of the world, for conveying large quantities of water Timber aqueducts. which is required for hydraulic mining, for irrigation, for the supply of towns and for transporting timber. The flumes are frequently carried along precipitous mountain slopes, and across valleys, supported on trestles. In Fresno county, California, there is a flume 52 m. in length for transporting timber from the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the plain below; it has a rectangular V-shaped section, 3 ft. 7 in. wide at the top, and 21 in. deep vertically. The boards which form the sides are 1¼ in. thick, and some of the trestlework is 130 ft. high. The steepest grade occurs where there is a fall of 730 ft. in a length of 3000 ft. About 9,000,000 ft. of timber were used in the construction. At San Diego there is a flume 35 m. long for irrigation and domestic supply, the capacity being 50 ft. per second; it has 315 trestle bridges (the longest of which is that across Los Coches Creek, 1794 ft. in length and 65 ft. in height) and 8 tunnels, and the cost was $900,000. The great bench flume of the Highline canal, Colorado, is 2640 ft. in length, 28 ft. wide, and 7 ft. deep; the gradient is 5.28 ft. per mile, and the discharge 1184 ft. per second.

As previously stated, the type of aqueduct built of concrete, &c., can only be adopted where the ground is sufficiently elevated to carry it, and where the quantity of water to be conveyed makes it more economical than piping. Where the falling contour Aqueduct in iron piping. is interrupted by valleys too wide for a masonry structure above the surface of the ground, the detached portions of the built aqueduct must be connected by rows of pipes laid beneath, and following the main undulations of, the surface. In such cases the built aqueduct terminates in a chamber of sufficient size to enclose the mouths of the several pipes, which, thus charged, carry the water under the valley up to a corresponding chamber on the farther hillside from which the built aqueduct again carries on the supply. These connecting pipes are sometimes called siphons, although they have nothing whatever to do with the principle of a siphon, the water simply flowing into the pipe at one end and out at the other under the influence of gravity, and the pressure of the atmosphere being no element in the case. The pipes are almost always made of cast-iron, except in such cases as the lower part of some siphons, where the pressure is very great, or where they are for use abroad, when considerations of weight are of importance, and when they are made of rolled steel with riveted or welded seams. It is frequently necessary to lay them in deep cuttings, in which case cast-iron is much better adapted for sustaining a heavy weight of earth than the thinner steel, though the latter is more adapted to resist internal pressure. Mr D. Clarke (Trans. Am. Soc. C.E. vol. xxxviii. p. 93) gives some particulars of a riveted steel pipe 24 m. long, 33 to 42 in. diameter, varying in thickness from 0.22 in. to 0.375 in. After a length of 9 m. had been laid, and the trench refilled, it was found that the crown of the pipe had been flattened by an amount varying from ½ in. to 4 in. Steel pipes suffer more from corrosion than those made of cast-iron, and as the metal attacked is much thinner the strength is more seriously reduced. These considerations have prevented any general change from cast-iron to steel.

Pipes in England are usually laid with not less than 2 ft. 6 in. of cover, in order that the water may not be frozen in a severe winter. Where they are laid in deep cutting they should be partly surrounded with concrete, so that they Methods of laying. may not be fractured by the weight of earth above them. Angles are turned by means of special bend pipes, the curves being made of as large a radius as convenient. In the case of the Thirlmere aqueduct, double socketed castings about 12 in. long (exclusive of the sockets) were used, the sockets being inclined to each other at the required angle. They were made to various angles, and for any particular curve several would be used connected by straight pipes 3 ft. long. As special castings are nearly double the price of the regular pipes, the cost was much diminished by making them as short as possible, while a curve, made up of the slight angles used, offered practically no more impediment to the flow of water in consequence of its polygonal form, than would be the case had special bend pipes been used. In all cases of curves on a line of pipes under internal fluid pressure, there exists a resultant force tending to displace the pipes. When the curve is in a horizontal plane and the pipes are buried in the ground, the side of the pipe trench offers sufficient resistance to this force. Where, however, the pipes are above ground, or when the curve is in a vertical plane, it is necessary to anchor them in position. In the case of the Tansa aqueduct to Bombay, there is a curve of 500 ft. radius near Bassein Creek. At this point the hydrostatic head is about 250 ft., and the engineer, Mr Clerke, mentions that a tendency to an outward movement of the line of pipes was observed. At the siphon under Kurla Creek the curves on the approaches as originally laid down were sharp, the hydrostatic head being there about 210 ft.; here the outward movement was so marked that it was considered advisable to realign the approaches with easier curves (Proc. Inst. C.E. vol. cxv. p. 34). In the case of the Thirlmere aqueduct the greatest hydrostatic pressure, 410 ft., occurs at the bridge over the river Lune, where the pipes are 40 in. in diameter, and in descending from the bridge make reverse angles of 31½°. The displacing force at each of these angles amounts to 54 tons, and as the design includes five lines of pipes, it is obvious that the anchoring arrangements must be very efficient. The steel straps used for anchoring these and all other bends were curved to fit as closely as possible the castings to be anchored. Naturally the metal was not in perfect contact, but when the pipes were charged the disappearance of all the slight inequalities showed that the straps were fulfilling their intended purpose. At every summit on a line of pipes one or more valves must be placed in order to allow the escape of air, and they must also be provided on long level stretches, and at changes of gradient where the depth of the point of change below the hydraulic gradient is less than that at both 247 sides, causing what may be called a virtual summit. It is better to have too many than too few, as accumulations of air may cause an enormous diminution in the quantity of water delivered. In all depressions discharge valves should be placed for emptying the pipes when desired, and for letting off the sediment which accumulates at such points. Automatic valves are frequently placed at suitable distances for cutting off the supply in case of a burst. At the inlet mouth of the pipe they may depend for their action on the sudden lowering of the water (due to a burst in the pipe) in the chamber from which they draw their supply, causing a float to sink and set the closing arrangement in motion. Those on the line of main are started by the increased velocity in the water, caused by the burst on the pipe at a lower level. The water, when thus accelerated, is able to move a disk hung in the pipe at the end of a lever and weighted so as to resist the normal velocity; this lever releases a catch, and a door is then gradually revolved by weights until it entirely closes the pipe. Reflux valves on the ascending leg of a siphon prevent water from flowing back in case of a burst below them; they have doors hung on hinges, opening only in the normal direction of flow. Due allowance must be made, in the amount of head allotted to a pipe, for any head which may be absorbed by such mechanical arrangements as those described where they offer opposition to the flow of the water. These large mains require most careful and gradual filling with water, and constant attention must be given to the air-valves to see that the gutta-percha balls do not wedge themselves in the openings. A large mass of water, having a considerable velocity, may cause a great many bursts by water-ramming, due to the admission of the water at too great a speed. In places where iron is absent and timber plentiful, as in some parts of America, pipes, even of large diameter and in the most important cases, are sometimes made of wooden staves hooped with iron. A description of two of these will be found below.

AQUILA Άκύλας, (1) a Jew from Rome, who with his wife Prisca or Priscilla had settled in Corinth, where Paul stayed with them (Acts xviii. 2,3). They became Christians and fellow-workers with Paul, to whom they seem to have shown their devotion in some special way (Rom. xvi. 3, 4). (2) A native of Pontus, celebrated for a very literal and accurate translation of the Old Testament into Greek. Epiphanius (De Pond. et Mens. c. 15) preserves a tradition that he was a kinsman of the emperor Hadrian, who employed him in rebuilding Jerusalem (Aelia Capitolina, q.v.), and that he was converted to Christianity, but, on being reproved for practising pagan astrology, apostatized to Judaism. He is said also to have been a disciple of Rabbi ’Aqiba (d. A.D. 132), and seems to be referred to in Jewish writings as עקילס. Aquila’s version is said to have been used in place of the Septuagint in the synagogues. The Christians generally disliked it, alleging without due grounds that it rendered the Messianic passages incorrectly, but Jerome and Origen speak in its praise. Origen incorporated it in his Hexapla.

AQUILA, CASPAR [Kaspar Adler] (1488-1560), German reformer, was born at Augsburg on the 7th of August 1488, educated there and at Ulm (1502), in Italy (he met Erasmus in Rome), at Bern (1508), Leipzig (1510) and Wittenberg (1513). According to his son, he entered the ministry in August 1514, at Bern. He was for some time a military chaplain. In 1516 he became pastor of Jenga, near Augsburg. Openly proclaiming his adhesion to Luther’s doctrine, he was imprisoned for 249 half a year (1520 or 1522) at Dillingen, by order of the bishop of Augsburg; a death sentence was commuted to banishment through the influence of Isabella, wife of Christian II. of Denmark and sister of Charles V. Returning to Wittenberg he met Luther, acted as tutor to the sons of Franz von Sickingen at Ebernburg, taught Hebrew at Wittenberg, and aided Luther in his version of the Old Testament. The dates and particulars of his career are uncertain till 1527, when he became pastor at Saalfeld, and in 1528, superintendent. His vehement opposition to the Augsburg Interim (1548) led him to take temporary shelter at Rudolstadt with Catherine, countess of Schwarzburg. In 1550 he was appointed dean of the Collegiatstift in Schmalkalden. Here he had a controversy with Andreas Osiander. Restored to Saalfeld, not without opposition, in 1552, he remained there, still engaged in controversy, till his death on the 12th of November 1560. He was twice married, and left four sons. He published numerous sermons, a few Old Testament expositions and some controversial tracts.

AQUILA, SERAFINO DELL’ (1466-1500), Italian poet and improvisatore, was born in 1466 at the town of Aquila, from which he took his name, and died in the year 1500. He spent several years at the courts of Cardinal Sforza and Ferdinand, duke of Calabria; but his principal patrons were the Borgias at Rome, from whom he received many favours. Aquila seems to have aimed at an imitation of Dante and Petrarch; and his poems, which were extravagantly praised during the author’s lifetime, are occasionally of considerable merit. His reputation was in great measure due to his remarkable skill as an improvisatore and musician. His works were printed at Venice in 1502, and there have been several subsequent editions.

AQUILA, a city of the Abruzzi, Italy, the capital of the province of Aquila, and the seat of an archbishop, 2360 ft. above sea-level, 50 m. directly N.E. of Rome, and 145 m. by rail. Pop. (1901) town, 18,494; commune, 21,261. It lies on a hill in the wide valley of the Aterno, surrounded by mountains on all sides, the Gran Sasso d’Italia being conspicuous on the north-east. It is a favourite summer resort of the Italians, but is cold and windy in winter. In the highest part of the town is the massive citadel, erected by the Spanish viceroy Don Pedro de Toledo in 1534. The church of S. Bernardino di Siena (1472) has a fine Renaissance façade by Nicolò Filotesio (commonly called Cola dell’ Amatrice), and contains the monumental tomb of the saint, decorated with beautiful sculptures, and executed by Silvestro Ariscola in 1480. The church of S. Maria di Collemaggio, just outside the town, has a very fine Romanesque façade of simple design (1270-1280) in red and white marble, with three finely decorated portals and a rose-window above each. The two side doors are also fine. The interior contains the mausoleum of Pope Celestine V. (d. 1296) erected in 1517. Many smaller churches in the town have similar façades (S. Giusta, S. Silvestro, &c.). The town also contains some fine palaces: the municipality has a museum, with a collection of Roman inscriptions and some illuminated service books. The Palazzi Dragonetti and Persichetti contain private collections of pictures. Outside the town is the Fontana delle novantanove cannelle, a fountain with ninety-nine jets distributed along three walls, constructed in 1272. Aquila has some trade in lace and saffron, and possesses other smaller industries. It was a university town in the middle ages, but most of its chairs have now been suppressed.

Aquila was founded by Conrad, son of the emperor Frederick II., about 1250, as a bulwark against the power of the papacy. It was destroyed by Manfred in 1259, but soon rebuilt by Charles I. of Anjou. Its walls were completed in 1316; and it maintained itself as an almost independent republic until it was subdued in 1521 by the Spaniards, who had become masters of the kingdom of Naples in 1503. It was twice sacked by the French in 1799.

AQUILA, in astronomy, the “Eagle,” sometimes named the “Vulture,” a constellation of the northern hemisphere, mentioned by Eudoxus (4th cent. B.C.) and Aratus (3rd cent. B.C.). Ptolemy catalogued nineteen stars jointly in this constellation and in the constellation Antinous, which was named in the reign of the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138), but sometimes, and wrongly, attributed to Tycho Brahe, who catalogued twelve stars in Aquila and seven in Antinous; Hevelius determined twenty-three stars in the first, and nineteen in the second. The most brilliant star of this constellation, α-Aquilae or Altair, has a parallax of 0.23″, and consequently is about eight times as bright as the sun; η-Aquilae is a short-period variable, while Nova Aquilae is a “temporary” or “new” star, discovered by Mrs Fleming of Harvard in 1899.

AQUILA ROMANUS, a Latin grammarian who flourished in the second half of the 3rd century A.D. He was the author of an extant treatise De Figuris Sententiarum et Elocutionis, written as an instalment of a complete rhetorical handbook for the use of a young and eager correspondent. While recommending Demosthenes and Cicero as models, he takes his own examples almost exclusively from Cicero. His treatise is really adapted from that by Alexander, son of Numenius, as is expressly stated by Julius Rufinianus, who brought out a supplementary treatise, augmented by material from other sources. Aquila’s style is harsh and careless, and the Latin is inferior.

AQUILEIA, an ancient town of Italy, at the head of the Adriatic at the edge of the lagoons, about 6 m. from the sea, on the river Natiso (mod. Natisone), the course of which has changed somewhat since Roman times. It was founded by the Romans in 181 B.C. as a frontier fortress on the north-east, not far from the site where, two years before, Gaulish invaders had attempted to settle. The colony was led by two men of consular and one of praetorian rank, and 3000 pedites formed the bulk of the settlers. It was probably connected by road with Bononia in 175 B.C.; and subsequently with Genua in 148 B.C. by the Via Postumia, which ran through Cremona, Bedriacum and Altinum, joining the first-mentioned road at Concordia, while the construction of the Via Popilia from Ariminum to Ad Portum near Altinum in 132 B.C. improved the communications still further. In 169 B.C., 1500 more families were settled there as a reinforcement to the garrison. The discovery of the goldfields near the modern Klagenfurt in 150 B.C. (Strabo iv. 208) brought it into notice, and it soon became a place of importance, not only owing to its strategic position, but as a centre of trade, especially in agricultural products. It also had, in later times at least, considerable brickfields. It was originally a Latin colony, but became a municipium probably in 90 B.C. The customs boundary of Italy was close by in Cicero’s day. It was plundered by the Iapydes under Augustus, but, in the period of peace which followed, was able to develop its resources. Augustus visited it during the Pannonian wars in 12-10 B.C. and it was the birthplace of Tiberius’s son by Julia, in the latter year. It was the starting-point of several important roads leading to the north-eastern portion of the empire—the road (Via Iulia Augusta) by Iulium Carnicum to Veldidena (mod. Wilten, near Innsbruck), from which branched off the road into Noricum, leading by Virunum (Klagenfurt) to Lauricum (Lorch) on the Danube, the road into Pannonia, leading to Emona (Laibach)1 and Sirmium (Mitrowitz), the road to Tarsatica (near Fiume) and Siscia (Sissek), and that to Tergeste (Trieste) and the Istrian coast.

In the war against the Marcomanni in A.D. 167, the town was hard pressed; the fortifications had fallen into disrepair during the long peace. In A.D. 238, when the town took the side of the senate against the emperor Maximinus, they were hastily restored, and proved of sufficient strength to resist for several months, until Maximinus himself was assassinated. The 4th century marks, however, the greatest importance of 250 Aquileia; it became a naval station and, probably, the seat of the corrector Venetiarum et Histriae; a mint was established here, the coins of which are very numerous, and the bishop obtained the rank of patriarch. An imperial palace was constructed here, in which the emperors after the time of Diocletian frequently resided; and the city often played a part in the struggles between the rulers of the 4th century. At the end of the century, Ausonius enumerated it as the ninth among the great cities of the world, placing Rome, Mediolanum and Capua before it, and called it “moenibus et portu celeberrima.” In A.D. 452, however, it was destroyed by Attila, though it continued to exist until the Lombard invasion of A.D. 568. After this the patriarchate was transferred to Grado. In 606 the diocese was divided into two parts, and the patriarchate of Aquileia, protected by the Lombards, was revived, that of Grado being protected by the exarch of Ravenna and later by the doges of Venice. In 1027 and 1044 Patriarch Poppo of Aquileia entered and sacked Grado, and, though the pope reconfirmed the patriarch of the latter in his dignities, the town never recovered, though it continued to be the seat of the patriarchate until its formal transference to Venice in 1450. The seat of the patriarchate of Aquileia had been transferred to Udine in 1238, but returned in 1420 when Venice annexed the territory of Udine. It was finally suppressed in 1751, and the sees of Udine and Gorizia (Görz) established in its stead. Its buildings served as stone quarries for centuries, and no edifices of the Roman period remain above ground. Excavations have revealed one street and the north-west angle of the town walls, while the local museum contains over 2000 inscriptions, besides statues and other antiquities. The cathedral, a flat-roofed basilica, was erected by Patriarch Poppo in 1031 on the site of an earlier church, and rebuilt about 1379 in the Gothic style by Patriarch Marquad. The narthex and baptistery belong to an earlier period. Of the palace of the patriarchs only two isolated columns remain standing. The modern village (pop. 2300) is rendered unhealthy by rice-fields.

AQUILLIUS, MANIUS, Roman general, consul in 101 B.C. He successfully put down a revolt of the slaves under Athenion in Sicily. After his return, being accused of extortion, he was acquitted on account of his military services, although there was little doubt of his guilt. In 88 he acted as legate against Mithradates the Great, by whom he was defeated and taken prisoner. Mithradates treated him with great cruelty, and is said to have put him to death by pouring molten gold down his throat.

AQUINAS, THOMAS [Thomas of Aquin or Aquino], (c. 1227-1274), scholastic philosopher, known as Doctor Angelicus, Doctor Universalis, was of noble descent, and nearly allied to several of the royal houses of Europe. He was born in 1225 or 1227, at Roccasecca, the castle of his father Landulf, count of Aquino, in the territories of Naples. Having received his elementary education at the monastery of Monte Cassino, he studied for six years at the university of Naples, leaving it in his sixteenth year. While there he probably came under the influence of the Dominicans, who were doing their utmost to enlist within their ranks the ablest young scholars of the age, for in spite of the opposition of his family, which was overcome only by the intervention of Pope Innocent IV., he assumed the habit of St Dominic in his seventeenth year.

His superiors, seeing his great aptitude for theological study, sent him to the Dominican school in Cologne, where Albertus Magnus was lecturing on philosophy and theology. In 1245 Albertus was called to Paris, and there Aquinas followed him, and remained with him for three years, at the end of which he graduated as bachelor of theology. In 1248 he returned to Cologne with Albertus, and was appointed second lecturer and magister studentium. This year may be taken as the beginning of his literary activity and public life. Before he left Paris he had thrown himself with ardour into the controversy raging between the university and the Friar-Preachers respecting the liberty of teaching, resisting both by speeches and pamphlets the authorities of the university; and when the dispute was referred to the pope, the youthful Aquinas was chosen to defend his order, which he did with such success as to overcome the arguments of Guillaume de St Amour, the champion of the university, and one of the most celebrated men of the day. In 1257, along with his friend Bonaventura, he was created doctor of theology, and began to give courses of lectures upon this subject in Paris, and also in Rome and other towns in Italy. From this time onwards his life was one of incessant toil; he was continually engaged in the active service of his order, was frequently travelling upon long and tedious journeys, and was constantly consulted on affairs of state by the reigning pontiff.

In 1263 we find him at the chapter of the Dominican order held in London. In 1268 he was lecturing now in Rome and now in Bologna, all the while engaged in the public business of the church. In 1271 he was again in Paris, lecturing to the students, managing the affairs of the church and consulted by the king, Louis VIII., his kinsman, on affairs of state. In 1272 the commands of the chief of his order and the request of King Charles brought him back to the professor’s chair at Naples. All this time he was preaching every day, writing homilies, disputations, lectures, and finding time to work hard at his great work the Summa Theologiae. Such rewards as the church could bestow had been offered to him. He refused the archbishopric of Naples and the abbacy of Monte Cassino. In January 1274 he was summoned by Pope Gregory X. to attend the council convened at Lyons, to investigate and if possible settle the differences between the Greek and Latin churches. Though suffering from illness, he at once set out on the journey; finding his strength failing on the way, he was carried to the Cistercian monastery of Fossa Nuova, in the diocese of Terracina, where, after a lingering illness of seven weeks, he died on the 7th of March 1274, Dante (Purg. xx. 69) asserts that he was poisoned by order of Charles of Anjou. Villani (ix. 218) quotes the belief, and the Anonimo Fiorentino describes the crime and its motive. But Muratori, reproducing the account given by one of Thomas’s friends, gives no hint of foul play. Aquinas was canonized in 1323 by Pope John XXII., and in 1567 Pius V. ranked the festival of St Thomas with those of the four great Latin fathers, Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome and Gregory. No theologian save Augustine has had an equal influence on the theological thought and language of the Western Church, a fact which was strongly emphasized by Leo XIII. (q.v.) in his Encyclical of August 4, 1879, which directed the clergy to take the teachings of Aquinas as the basis of their theological position. In 1880 he was declared patron of all Roman Catholic educational establishments. In a monastery at Naples, near the cathedral of St Januarius, is still shown a cell in which he is said to have lived.

The writings of Thomas are of great importance for philosophy as well as for theology, for by nature and education he is the spirit of scholasticism incarnate. The principles on which his system rested were these. He held that there were two sources of knowledge—the mysteries of Christian faith and the truths of human reason. The distinction between these two was made emphatic by Aquinas, who is at pains, especially in his treatise Contra Gentiles, to make it plain that each is a distinct fountain of knowledge, but that revelation is the more important of the two. Revelation is a source of knowledge, rather than the manifestation in the world of a divine life, and its chief characteristic is that it presents men with mysteries, which are to be believed even when they cannot be understood. Revelation is not Scripture alone, for Scripture taken by itself does not correspond exactly with his description; nor is it church tradition alone, for church tradition must so far rest on Scripture. Revelation is a divine source of knowledge, of which Scripture and church tradition are the channels; and he who would rightly 251 understand theology must familiarize himself with Scripture, the teachings of the fathers, and the decisions of councils, in such a way as to be able to make part of himself, as it were, those channels along which this divine knowledge flowed. Aquinas’s conception of reason is in some way parallel with his conception of revelation. Reason is in his idea not the individual reason, but the fountain of natural truth, whose chief channels are the various systems of heathen philosophy, and more especially the thoughts of Plato and the methods of Aristotle. Reason and revelation are separate sources of knowledge; and man can put himself in possession of each, because he can bring himself into relation to the church on the one hand, and the system of philosophy, or more strictly Aristotle, on the other. The conception will be made clearer when it is remembered that Aquinas, taught by the mysterious author of the writings of the pseudo-Dionysius, who so marvellously influenced medieval writers, sometimes spoke of a natural revelation, or of reason as a source of truths in themselves mysterious, and was always accustomed to say that reason as well as revelation contained two kinds of knowledge. The first kind lay quite beyond the power of man to receive it, the second was within man’s reach. In reason, as in revelation, man can only attain to the lower kind of knowledge; there is a higher kind which we may not hope to reach.

But while reason and revelation are two distinct sources of truths, the truths are not contradictory; for in the last resort they rest on one absolute truth—they come from the one source of knowledge, God, the Absolute One. Hence arises the compatibility of philosophy and theology which was the fundamental axiom of scholasticism, and the possibility of a Summa Theologiae, which is a Summa Philosophiae as well. All the many writings of Thomas are preparatory to his great work the Summa Theologiae, and show us the progress of his mind training for this his life work. In the Summa Catholicae Fidei contra Gentiles he shows how a Christian theology is the sum and crown of all science. This work is in its design apologetic, and is meant to bring within the range of Christian thought all that is of value in Mahommedan science. He carefully establishes the necessity of revelation as a source of knowledge, not merely because it aids us in comprehending in a somewhat better way the truths already furnished by reason, as some of the Arabian philosophers and Maimonides had acknowledged, but because it is the absolute source of our knowledge of the mysteries of the Christian faith; and then he lays down the relations to be observed between reason and revelation, between philosophy and theology. This work, Contra Gentiles, may be taken as an elaborate exposition of the method of Aquinas. That method, however, implied a careful study and comprehension of the results which accrued to man from reason and revelation, and a thorough grasp of all that had been done by man in relation to those two sources of human knowledge; and so, in his preliminary writings, Thomas proceeds to master the two provinces. The results of revelation he found in the Holy Scriptures and in the writings of the fathers and the great theologians of the church; and his method was to proceed backwards. He began with Peter of Lombardy (who had reduced to theological order, in his famous book on the Sentences, the various authoritative statements of the church upon doctrine) in his In Quatuor Sententiarum P. Lombardi libros. Then came his deliverances upon undecided points in theology, in his XII. Quodlibeta Disputata, and his Quaestiones Disputatae. His Catena Aurea next appeared, which, under the form of a commentary on the Gospels, was really an exhaustive summary of the theological teaching of the greatest of the church fathers. This side of his preparation was finished by a close study of Scripture, the results of which are contained in his commentaries, In omnes Epistolas Dim Apostoli Expositio, his Super Isaiam et Jeremiam, and his In Psalmos. Turning now to the other side, we have evidence, not only from tradition but from his writings, that he was acquainted with Plato and the mystical Platonists; but he had the sagacity to perceive that Aristotle was the great representative of philosophy, and that his writings contained the best results and method which the natural reason had as yet attained to. Accordingly Aquinas prepared himself on this side by commentaries on Aristotle’s De Interpretatione, on his Posterior Analytics, on the Metaphysics, the Physics, the De Anima, and on Aristotle’s other psychological and physical writings, each commentary having for its aim to lay hold of the material and grasp the method contained and employed in each treatise. Fortified by this exhaustive preparation, Aquinas began his Summa Theologiae, which he intended to be the sum of all known learning, arranged according to the best method, and subordinate to the dictates of the church. Practically it came to be the theological dicta of the church, explained according to the philosophy of Aristotle and his Arabian commentators. The Summa is divided into three great parts, which shortly may be said to treat of God, Man and the God-Man. The first and the second parts are wholly the work of Aquinas, but of the third part only the first ninety quaestiones are his; the rest of it was finished in accordance with his designs. The first book, after a short introduction upon the nature of theology as understood by Aquinas, proceeds in 119 questions to discuss the nature, attributes and relations of God; and this is not done as in a modern work on theology, but the questions raised in the physics of Aristotle find a place alongside of the statements of Scripture, while all subjects in any way related to the central theme are brought into the discourse. The second part is divided into two, which are quoted as Prima Secundae and Secunda Secundae. This second part has often been described as ethic, but this is scarcely true. The subject is man, treated as Aristotle does, according to his τέλος, and so Aquinas discusses all the ethical, psychological and theological questions which arise; but any theological discussion upon man must be mainly ethical, and so a great proportion of the first part, and almost the whole of the second, has to do with ethical questions. In his ethical discussions (a full account of which is given under Ethics) Aquinas distinguishes theological from natural virtues and vices; the theological virtues are faith, hope and charity; the natural, justice, prudence and the like. The theological virtues are founded on faith, in opposition to the natural, which are founded on reason; and as faith with Aquinas is always belief in a proposition, not trust in a personal Saviour, conformably with his idea that revelation is a new knowledge rather than a new life, the relation of unbelief to virtue is very strictly and narrowly laid down and enforced. The third part of the Summa is also divided into two parts, but by accident rather than by design. Aquinas died ere he had finished his great work, and what has been added to complete the scheme is appended as a Supplementum Tertiae Partis. In this third part Aquinas discusses the person, office and work of Christ, and had begun to discuss the sacraments, when death put an end to his labours.

The purely philosophical theories of Aquinas are explained in the article Scholasticism. In connexion with the problem of universals, he held that the diversity of individuals depends on the quantitative division of matter (materia signata), and in this way he attracted the criticism of the Scotists, who pointed out that this very matter is individual and determinate, and, therefore, itself requires explanation. In general, Aquinas maintained in different senses the real existence of universals ante rem, in re and post rem.

AQUINO, a town and episcopal see of Campania, Italy, in the province of Caserta; it is 56 m. N.W. by rail from the town of Caserta, and 7½ m. N.W. of Cassino. Pop. (1901) 2672. The modern town, close to the ancient, is unimportant, though the canons of the cathedral have the privilege of wearing the mitre and cappa magna at great festivals. It is close to the site of the ancient Aquinum, a municipium in the time of Cicero, and made a colony by the Triumviri, the birthplace of Juvenal and of the emperor Pescennius Niger. The Via Latina traversed it; one of the gates through which it passed, now called Porta S. Lorenzo, is still well preserved, and there are remains within the walls (portions of which, built of large blocks of limestone, still remain) of two (so called) temples, a basilica and an amphitheatre (see R. Delbrück in Röm. Mitteilungen, 1903, p. 143). Outside, on the south is a well-preserved triumphal arch with composite capitals, and close to it the 11th-century basilica of S. Maria Libera, a handsome building in the Romanesque style, but now roofless. Several Roman inscriptions are built into it, and many others that have been found indicate the ancient importance of the place, which, though it does not appear in early history, is vouched for by Cicero and Strabo.1 A colony was planted here by the Triumviri. St Thomas Aquinas was born in the castle of Roccasecca, 5 m. N.

AQUITAINE, the name of an ancient province in France, the extent of which has varied considerably from time to time. About the time of Julius Caesar the name Aquitania was given to that part of Gaul lying between the Pyrenees and the Garonne, and its inhabitants were a race, or races, distinct from the Celts. The name Aquitania is probably a form of Auscetani, which in its turn is a lengthened form of Ausces, and is thus cognate with the words Basque and Wasconia, i.e. Gascony. Although many of the tribes of Aquitania submitted to Julius Caesar, it was not until about 28 B.C. that the district was brought under the Roman yoke. In keeping with the Roman policy of denationalization, the term Aquitania was extended, and under Augustus it included the whole of Gaul south and west of the Loire and the Allier, and thus ceased to possess ethnographical importance. In the 3rd century A.D. this larger Aquitania was divided into three parts: Aquitania Prima, the eastern part of the district between the Loire and the Garonne; Aquitania Secunda, the western part of the same district; and Aquitania Tertia, or Novempopulana, the region between the Garonne and the Pyrenees, or the original Aquitania. The seats of government were respectively Bourges, Bordeaux and Eauze; the province contained twenty-six cities, and was in the diocese of Vienne. Like the rest of Gaul, Aquitania absorbed a large measure of Roman civilization, and this continued to distinguish the district down to a late period. In the 5th century the Visigoths established themselves in Aquitania Secunda, and also in parts of Aquitania Prima and Novempopulana, but after the defeat of their king Alaric II. by the Franks under Clovis in 507, they were supplanted by their conquerors. Clovis and his successors extended their authority nominally to the Pyrenees, but, as Guizot has remarked, “the conquest of Aquitania by Clovis left it almost as alien to the people and king of Franks as it had formerly been.” Subsequently during the Merovingian period it was contended for by the feeble rulers of the various Frankish kingdoms, and was frequently partitioned among them; but the Aquitanians had little difficulty in effectually resisting this authority, although they did not establish themselves as a separate kingdom. About 628, indeed, they gathered around Charibert, or Haribert, a brother of the Frankish king, Dagobert I., in the hope of national independence; but after his death in 630 they returned to their former condition. But this effort, although a failure, brought about a certain measure of concord between the two principal races inhabiting the district, and so prepared the way for the stubborn resistance which, subsequently, the Aquitanians were able to offer to the Franks.

The first line of dukes began about 660 with one Felix, who, like his successor, Lupus, probably owned allegiance to the Frankish kings, and whose seat of government was Toulouse. About the end of the 7th century an adventurer named Odo, or Eudes, made himself master of this region. Attacked by the Saracens he inflicted on them a crushing defeat, but when they reappeared, he was obliged to invoke the aid of Charles Martel, who, as the price of his support, claimed and received the homage of his ally. Odo was succeeded by his son Hunald, who after carrying on a war against the Franks under Pippin the Short, retired to a convent, leaving both the kingdom and the conflict to Waifer, or Guaifer. For some years Waifer strenuously carried on an unequal struggle with the Franks, but he was assassinated in 768, and with him perished the national independence, although not the national individuality, of the Aquitanians. In 781 Charlemagne bestowed Aquitaine upon his young son, Louis, and as Louis was generally described as a king, Aquitaine is referred to during the Carolingian period as a kingdom, and not as a duchy. When Louis succeeded Charlemagne as emperor in 814, he granted Aquitaine to his son Pippin, on whose death in 838 the Aquitanians chose his son Pippin II. (d. 865) as their king. The emperor Louis I., however, opposed this arrangement and gave the kingdom to his youngest son Charles, afterwards the emperor Charles the Bald. Now followed a time of confusion and conflict which resulted eventually in the success of Charles, although from 845 to 852 Pippin was in possession of the kingdom. In 852 Pippin was imprisoned by Charles the Bald, who soon afterwards gave to the Aquitanians his own son Charles as their king. On the death of the younger Charles in 866, his brother Louis the Stammerer succeeded to the kingdom, and when, in 877, Louis became king of the Franks, Aquitaine was united to the Frankish crown.

A new period now begins in the history of Aquitaine. By a treaty made in 845 between Charles the Bald and Pippin II. the kingdom had been diminished by the loss of Poitou, Saintonge and Angoumois, which had been given to Rainulf I., count of Poitiers. Somewhat earlier than this date the title of duke of the Aquitanians had been revived, and this was now borne by Rainulf, although it was also claimed by the counts of Toulouse. The new duchy of Aquitaine, comprising the three districts already mentioned, remained in the hands of Rainulf’s successors, in spite of some trouble with their Frankish overlords, until 893 when Count Rainulf II. was poisoned by order of King Charles III. the Simple. Charles then bestowed the duchy upon William the Pious, count of Auvergne, the founder of the abbey of Cluny, who was succeeded in 918 by his nephew, Count William II., who died in 926. A succession of dukes followed, one of whom, William IV., fought against Hugh Capet, king of France, and another of whom, William V., called the Great, was able considerably to strengthen and extend his authority, although he failed in his attempt to secure the Lombard crown. William’s duchy almost reached the limits of the Roman Aquitania Prima and Secunda, but did not stretch south of the Garonne, a district which was in the possession of the Gascons. William died in 1030, and the names of William VI. (d. 1038), Odo or Eudes (d. 1039), who joined Gascony to his duchy, William VII. and William VIII. bring us down to William IX. (d. 1127), who succeeded in 1087, and made himself famous as a crusader and a troubadour. William X. (d. 1137) married his daughter Eleanor to Louis VII., king of France, and Aquitaine went as her dowry. When Eleanor was divorced from Louis and was married in 1152 to Henry II. of England the duchy passed to her new husband, who, having suppressed a revolt there, gave it to his son Richard. When Richard died in 1199, it reverted to Eleanor, and on her death five years later, was united to the English crown and henceforward followed the fortunes of the English possessions in France. Aquitaine as it came to the English kings stretched as of old from the Loire to the Pyrenees, but its extent was curtailed on the 253 south-east by the wide lands of the counts of Toulouse. The name Guienne, a corruption of Aquitaine, seems to have come into use about the 10th century, and the subsequent history of Aquitaine is merged in that of Gascony (q.v.) and Guienne (q.v.).

ARABESQUE, a word meaning simply “Arabian,” but technically used for a certain form of decorative design in flowing lines intertwined; hence comes the more metaphorical use of this word, whether in nature or in morals, indicating a fantastic or complicated interweaving of lines against a background. In decorative design the term is historically a misnomer. It is applied to the grotesque decoration derived from Roman remains of the early time of the empire, not to any style derived from Arabian or Moorish work. Arabesque and Moresque are really distinct; the latter is from the Arabian style of ornament, developed by the Byzantine Greeks for their new masters, after the conquests of the followers of Mahomet; and the former is a term pretty well restricted to varieties of cinquecento decoration, which have nothing in common with any Arabian examples in their details, but are a development derived from Greek and Roman grotesque designs, such as we find them in the remains of ancient palaces at Rome, and in ancient houses at Pompeii. These were reproduced by Raphael and his pupils in the decoration of some of the corridors of the Loggie of the Vatican at Rome: grotesque is thus a better name for these decorations than Arabesque. This technical Arabesque, therefore, is much more ancient than any Arabian or Moorish decoration, and has really nothing in common with it except the mere symmetrical principles of its arrangement. Pliny and Vitruvius give us no name for the extravagant decorative wall-painting in vogue in their time, to which the early Italian revivers of it seem to have given the designation of grotesque, because it, was first discovered in the arched or underground chambers (grotte) of Roman ruins—as in the golden house of Nero, or the baths of Titus. What really took place in the Italian revival was in some measure a supplanting of the Arabesque for the classical grotesque, still retaining the original Arabian designation, while the genuine Arabian art, the Saracenic, was distinguished as Moresque or Moorish. So it is now the original Arabesque that is called by its specific names of Saracenic, Moorish and Alhambresque, while the term Arabesque is applied exclusively to the style developed from the debased classical grotesque of the Roman empire.

There is still much of the genuine Saracenic element in Renaissance Arabesques, especially in that selected for book-borders and for silver-work, the details of which consist largely of the conventional Saracenic foliations. But the Arabesque developed in the Italian cinquecento work repudiated all the original Arabian elements and devices, and limited itself to the manipulating of the classical elements, of which the most prominent feature is ever the floriated or foliated scroll; and it is in this cinquecento decoration, whether in sculpture or in painting, that Arabesque has been perfected.

In the Saracenic, as the elder sister of the two styles, which was ingeniously developed by the Byzantine Greek artists for their Arabian masters in the early times of Mahommedan conquest, every natural object was proscribed; the artists were, therefore, reduced to making symmetrical designs from forms which should have no positive meaning; yet the Byzantine Greeks, who were Christians, managed to work even their own ecclesiastical symbols, in a disguised manner, into their tracery and diapers; as the lily, for instance. The cross was not so introduced; this, of course, was inadmissible; but neither was the crescent ever introduced into any of this early work in Damascus or Cairo. The crescent was itself not a Mahommedan device till after the conquest of Constantinople in 1453 A.D. The crescent, as the new moon, was the symbol of Byzantium; and it was only after that capital of the Eastern empire fell into the hands of the Turks that this symbol was adopted by them. The crescent and the cross became antagonist standards, therefore, first in the 15th century. And the crescent is not an element of original Moorish decoration.