Articles in This Slice

839

KITE-FLYING, the art of sending up into the air, by means of the wind, light frames of varying shapes covered with paper or cloth (called kites, after the bird—in German Drache, dragon), which are attached to long cords or wires held in the hand or wound on a drum. When made in the common diamond form, or triangular with a semicircular head, kites usually have a pendulous tail appended for balancing purposes. The tradition is that kites were invented by Archytas of Tarentum four centuries before the Christian era, but they have been in use among Asiatic peoples and savage tribes like the Maoris of New Zealand from time immemorial. Kite-flying has always been a national pastime of the Koreans, Chinese, Japanese, Tonkinese, Annamese, Malays and East Indians. It is less popular among the peoples of Europe. The origin of the sport, although obscure, is usually ascribed to religion. With the Maoris it still retains a distinctly religious character, and the ascent of the kite is accompanied by a chant called the kite-song. The Koreans attribute its origin to a general, who, hundreds of years ago, inspirited his troops by sending up a kite with a lantern attached, which was mistaken by his army for a new star and a token of divine succour. Another Korean general is said to have been the first to put the kite to mechanical uses by employing one to span a stream with a cord, which was then fastened to a cable and formed the nucleus of a bridge. In Korea, Japan and China, and indeed throughout Eastern Asia, even the tradespeople may be seen indulging in kite-flying while waiting for customers. Chinese and Japanese kites are of many shapes, such as birds, dragons, beasts and fishes. They vary in size, but are often as much as 7 ft. in height or breadth, and are constructed of bamboo strips covered with rice paper or very thin silk. In China the ninth day of the ninth month is “Kites’ Day,” when men and boys of all classes betake themselves to neighbouring eminences and fly their kites. Kite-fighting is a feature of the pastime in Eastern Asia. The cord near the kite is usually stiffened with a mixture of glue and crushed glass or porcelain. The kite-flyer manœuvres to get his kite to windward of that of his adversary, then allows his cord to drift against his enemy’s, and by a sudden jerk to cut it through and bring its kite to grief. The Malays possess a large variety of kites, mostly without tails. The Sultan of Johor sent to the Columbian Exposition at Chicago in 1893 a collection of fifteen different kinds. Asiatic musical kites bear one or more perforated reeds or bamboos which emit a plaintive sound that can be heard for great distances. The ignorant, believing that these kites frighten away evil spirits, often keep them flying all night over their houses.

840

There are various metaphorical uses of the term “kite-flying,” such as in commercial slang, when “flying a kite” means raising money on credit (cf. “raising the wind”), or in political slang for seeing “how the wind blows.” And “flying-kites,” in nautical language, are the topmost sails.

Kite-flying for scientific purposes began in the middle of the 18th century. In 1752 Benjamin Franklin made his memorable kite experiment, by which he attracted electricity from the air and demonstrated the electrical nature of lightning. A more systematic use of kites for scientific purposes may, however, be said to date from the experiments made in the last quarter of the 19th century.

Meteorological Use.—Many European and American meteorological services employ kites regularly, and obtain information not only of the temperature, but also of the humidity and velocity of the air above. The kites used are mostly modifications of the so-called box-kites, invented by L. Hargrave. Roughly these kites may be said to resemble an ordinary box with the two ends removed, and also the middle part of each of the four sides. The original Hargrave kite, the form generally used, has a rectangular section; in Russia a semicircular section with the curved part facing the wind is most in favour; in England the diamond-shaped section is preferred for meteorological purposes owing to its simplicity of construction. Stability depends on a multitude of small details of construction, and long practice and experience are required to make a really good kite. The sizes most in use have from 30 to 80 sq. ft. of sail area. There is no difficulty about raising a kite to a vertical height of one or even two miles on suitable days, but heights exceeding three miles are seldom reached. On the 29th of November 1905 at Lindenberg, the Prussian Aeronautical Observatory, the upper one of a train of six kites attained an altitude of just four miles. The total lifting surface of these six kites was nearly 300 sq. ft., and the length of wire a little over nine miles. The kites are invariably flown on a steel wire line, for the hindrance to obtaining great heights is not due so much to the weight of the line as to the wind pressure upon it, and thus it becomes of great importance to use a material that possesses the greatest possible strength, combined with the smallest possible size. Steel piano wire meets this requirement, for a wire of 1⁄32 in. diameter will weigh about 16 ℔ to the mile, and stand a strain of some 250-280 ℔ before it breaks. Some stations prefer to use one long piece of wire of the same gauge throughout without a join, others prefer to start with a thin wire and join on thicker and thicker wire as more kites are added. The process of kite-flying is as follows. The first kite is started either with the self-recording instruments secured in it, or hanging from the wire a short distance below it. Wire is then paid out, whether quickly or slowly depends on the strength of the wind, but the usual rate is from two to three miles per hour. The quantity that one kite will take depends on the kite and on the wind, but roughly speaking it may be said that each 10 sq. ft. of lifting surface on the kite should carry 1000 ft. of 1⁄32 in. wire without difficulty. When as much wire as can be carried comfortably has run out another kite is attached to the line, and the paying out is continued; after a time a third is added, and so on. Each kite increases the strain upon the wire, and moreover adds to the height and makes it more uncertain what kind of wind the upper kites will encounter; it also adds to the time that is necessary to haul in the kites. In each way the risk of their breaking away is increased, for the wind is very uncertain and is liable to alter in strength. Since to attain an exceptional height the wire must be strained nearly to its breaking point, and under such conditions a small increase in the strength of the wind will break the wire, it follows that great heights can only be attained by those who are willing to risk the trouble and expense of frequently having their wire and train of kites break away. The weather is the essential factor in kite-flying. In the S.E. of England in winter it is possible on about two days out of three, and in summer on about one day out of three. The usual cause of failure is want of wind, but there are a few days when the wind is too strong. (For meteorological results, &c., see Meteorology.)

Military Use.—A kite forms so extremely simple a method of lifting anything to a height in the air that it has naturally been suggested as being suitable for various military purposes, such as signalling to a long distance, carrying up flags, or lamps, or semaphores. Kites have been used both in the army and in the navy for floating torpedoes on hostile positions. As much as two miles of line have been paid out. For purposes of photography a small kite carrying a camera to a considerable height may be caused to float over a fort or other place of which a bird’s-eye view is required, the shutter being operated by electric wire, or slow match, or clockwork. Many successful photographs have been thus obtained in England and America.

The problem of lifting a man by means of kites instead of by a captive balloon is a still more important one. The chief military advantages to be gained are: (1) less transport is required; (2) they can be used in a strong wind; (3) they are not so liable to damage, either from the enemy’s fire or from trees, &c., and are easier to mend; (4) they can be brought into use more quickly; (5) they are very much cheaper, both in construction and in maintenance, not requiring any costly gas.

Captain B. F. S. Baden-Powell, of the Scots Guards, in June 1894 constructed, at Pirbright Camp, a huge kite 36 ft. high, with which he successfully lifted a man on different occasions. He afterwards improved the contrivance, using five or six smaller kites attached together in preference to one large one. With this arrangement he frequently ascended as high as 100 ft. The kites were hexagonal, being 12 ft. high and 12 ft. across. The apparatus, which could be packed in a few minutes into a simple roll, weighed in all about 1 cwt. This appliance was proved to be capable of raising a man even during a dead calm, the retaining line being fixed to a wagon and towed along. Lieut. H. D. Wise made some trials in America in 1897 with some large kites of the Hargrave pattern (Hargrave having previously himself ascended in Australia), and succeeded in lifting a man 40 ft. above the ground. In the Russian army a military kite apparatus has also been tried, and was in evidence at the manœuvres in 1898. Experiments have also been carried out by most of the European powers.

KIT-FOX (Canis [Vulpes] velox), a small fox, from north-western America, measuring less than a yard in length, with a tail of nearly a third this length. There is a good deal of variation in the colour of the fur, the prevailing tint being grey. A specimen in the Zoological Gardens of London had the back and tail dark grey, the tail tipped with black, and a rufous wash on the cheeks, shoulders, flanks and outer surface of the limbs, with the under surface white. The specific name was given on account of the extraordinary swiftness of the animal. (See Carnivora.)

KITTO, JOHN (1804-1854), English biblical scholar, was the son of a mason at Plymouth, where he was born on the 4th of December 1804. An accident brought on deafness, and in November 1819 he was sent to the workhouse, where he was employed in making list shoes. In 1823 a fund was raised on his behalf, and he was sent to board with the clerk of the guardians, having his time at his own disposal, and the privilege of making use of a public library. After preparing a small volume of miscellanies, which was published by subscription, he studied dentistry with Anthony Norris Groves in Exeter. In 1825 he obtained congenial employment in the printing office of the Church Missionary Society at Islington, and in 1827 was transferred to the same society’s establishment at Malta. There he remained for eighteen months, but shortly after his return to England he accompanied Groves and other friends on a private missionary enterprise to Bagdad, where he obtained personal knowledge of Oriental life and habits which he afterwards applied with tact and skill in the illustration of biblical scenes and incidents. Plague broke out, the missionary establishment was broken up, and in 1832 Kitto returned to England. On arriving in London he was engaged in the preparation of various serial publications of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, the most important of which were the Pictorial History of Palestine and the Pictorial Bible. The Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature, 841 edited under his superintendence, appeared in two volumes in 1843-1845 and passed through three editions. His Daily Bible Illustrations (8 vols. 1849-1853) received an appreciation which is not yet extinct. In 1850 he received an annuity of £100 from the civil list. In August 1854 he went to Germany for the waters of Cannstatt on the Neckar, where on the 25th of November he died.

KITTUR, a village of British India, in the Belgaum district of Bombay; pop. (1901), 4922. It contains a ruined fort, formerly the residence of a Mahratta chief. In connexion with a disputed succession to this chiefship in 1824, St John Thackeray, an uncle of the novelist, was killed when approaching the fort under a flag of truce; and a nephew of Sir Thomas Munro, governor of Madras, fell subsequently when the fort was stormed.

KITZINGEN, a town of Germany, in the kingdom of Bavaria on the Main, 95 m. S.E. of Frankfort-on-Main by rail, at the junction of the main-lines to Passau, Würzburg and Schweinfurt. Pop. (1900), 8489. A bridge, 300 yards long, connects it with its suburb Etwashausen on the left bank of the river. A railway bridge also spans the Main at this point. Kitzingen is still surrounded by its old walls and towers, and has an Evangelical and two Roman Catholic churches, two municipal museums, a town-hall, a grammar school, a richly endowed hospital and two old convents. Its chief industries are brewing, cask-making and the manufacture of cement and colours. Considerable trade in wine, fruit, grain and timber is carried on by boats on the Main. Kitzingen possessed a Benedictine abbey in the 8th century, and later belonged to the bishopric of Würzburg.

KIU-KIANG FU, a prefecture and prefectural city in the province of Kiang-si, China. The city, which is situated on the south bank of the Yangtsze-kiang, 15 m. above the point where the Kan Kiang flows into that river from the Po-yang lake, stands in 29° 42´ N. and 116° 8´ E. The north face of the city is separated from the river by only the width of a roadway, and two large lakes lie on its west and south fronts. The walls are from 5 to 6 m. in circumference, and are more than usually strong and broad. As is generally the case with old cities in China, Kiu-Kiang has repeatedly changed its name. Under the Tsin dynasty (A.D. 265-420), it was known as Sin-Yang, under the Liang dynasty (502-557) as Kiang Chow, under the Suy dynasty (589-618) as Kiu-Kiang, under the Sung dynasty (960-1127) as Ting-Kiang, and under the Ming dynasty (1368-1644) it assumed the name it at present bears. Kiu-Kiang has played its part in the history of the empire, and has been repeatedly besieged and sometimes taken, the last time being in February 1853, when the T’ai-p’ing rebels gained possession of the city. After their manner they looted and utterly destroyed it, leaving only the remains of a single street to represent the once flourishing town. The position of Kiu-Kiang on the Yangtsze-kiang and its proximity to the channels of internal communication through the Po-yang lake, more especially to those leading to the green-tea-producing districts of the provinces of Kiang-si and Ngan-hui, induced Lord Elgin to choose it as one of the treaty ports to be opened under the terms of his treaty (1861). Unfortunately, however, it stands above instead of below the outlet of the Po-yang lake, and this has proved to be a decided drawback to its success as a commercial port. The immediate effect of opening the town to foreign trade was to raise the population in one year from 10,000 to 40,000. The population in 1908, exclusive of foreigners, was officially estimated at 36,000. The foreign settlement extends westward from the city, along the bank of the Yangtsze-kiang, and is bounded on its extreme west by the P’un river, which there runs into the Yangtsze. The bund, which is 500 yards long, was erected by the foreign community. The climate is good, and though hot in the summer months is invariably cold and bracing in the winter. According to the customs returns the value of the trade of the port amounted in 1902 to £2,854,704, and in 1904 to £3,489,816, of which £1,726,506 were imports and £1,763,310 exports. In 1904 322,266 ℔. of opium were imported.

KIUSTENDIL, the chief town of a department in Bulgaria, situated in a mountainous country, on a small affluent of the Struma, 43 m. S.W. of Sofia by rail. Pop. (1906), 12,353. The streets are narrow and uneven, and the majority of the houses are of clay or wood. The town is chiefly notable for its hot mineral springs, in connexion with which there are nine bathing establishments. Small quantities of gold and silver are obtained from mines near Kiustendil, and vines, tobacco and fruit are largely cultivated. Some remains survive of the Roman period, when the town was known as Pautalia, Ulpia Pautalia, and Pautalia Aurelii. In the 10th century it became the seat of a bishopric, being then and during the later middle ages known by the Slavonic name of Velbuzhd. After the overthrow of the Servian kingdom it came into the possession of Constantine, brother of the despot Yovan Dragash, who ruled over northern Macedonia. Constantine was expelled and killed by the Turks in 1394. In the 15th century Kiustendil was known as Velbushka Banya, and more commonly as Konstantinova Banya (Constantine’s Bath), from which has developed the Turkish name Kiustendil.

KIVU, a considerable lake lying in the Central African (or Albertine) rift-valley, about 60 m. N. of Tanganyika, into which it discharges its waters by the Rusizi River. On the north it is separated from the basin of the Nile by a line of volcanic peaks. The length of the lake is about 55 m., and its greatest breadth over 30, giving an area, including islands, of about 1100 sq. m. It is about 4830 ft. above sea-level and is roughly triangular in outline, the longest side lying to the west. The coast-line is much broken, especially on the south-east, where the indentations present a fjord-like character. The lake is deep, and the shores are everywhere high, rising in places in bold precipitous cliffs of volcanic rock. A large island, Kwijwi or Kwichwi, oblong in shape and traversed by a hilly ridge, runs in the direction of the major axis of the lake, south-west of the centre, and there are many smaller islands. The lake has many fish, but no crocodiles or hippopotami. South of Kivu the rift-valley is blocked by huge ridges, through which the Rusizi now breaks its way in a succession of steep gorges, emerging from the lake in a foaming torrent, and descending 2000 ft. to the lacustrine plain at the head of Tanganyika. The lake fauna is a typically fresh-water one, presenting no affinities with the marine or “halolimnic” fauna of Tanganyika and other Central African lakes, but is similar to that shown by fossils to have once existed in the more northern parts of the rift-valley. The former outlet or extension in this direction seems to have been blocked in recent geological times by the elevation of the volcanic peaks which dammed back the water, causing it finally to overflow to the south. This volcanic region is of great interest and has various names, that most used being Mfumbiro (q.v.), though this name is sometimes restricted to a single peak. Kivu and Mfumbiro were first heard of by J. H. Speke in 1861, but not visited by a European until 1894, when Count von Götzen passed through the country on his journey across the continent. The lake and its vicinity were subsequently explored by Dr R. Kandt, Captain Bethe, E. S. Grogan, J. E. S. Moore, and Major St Hill Gibbons. The ownership of Kivu and its neighbourhood was claimed by the Congo Free State and by Germany, the dispute being settled in 1910, after Belgium had taken over the Congo State. The frontier agreed upon was the west bank of the Rusizi, and the west shore of the lake. The island of Kwijwi also fell to Belgium.

KIWI, or Kiwi-Kiwi, the Maori name—first apparently introduced to zoological literature by Lesson in 1828 (Man. 842 d’Ornithologie, ii. 210, or Voy. de la “Coquille,” zoologie, p. 418), and now very generally adopted in English—of one of the most characteristic forms of New Zealand birds, the Apteryx of scientific writers. This remarkable bird was unknown till George Shaw described and figured it in 1813 (Nat. Miscellany, pls. 1057, 1058) from a specimen brought to him from the southern coast of that country by Captain Barcley of the ship “Providence.” At Shaw’s death, in the same year, it passed into the possession of Lord Stanley, afterwards 13th earl of Derby, and president of the Zoological Society, and it is now with the rest of his collection in the Liverpool Museum. Considering the state of systematic ornithology at the time, Shaw’s assignment of a position to this new and strange bird, of which he had but the skin, does him great credit, for he said it seemed “to approach more nearly to the Struthious and Gallinaceous tribes than to any other.” And his credit is still greater when we find the venerable John Latham, who is said to have examined the specimen with Shaw, placing it some years later among the penguins (Gen. Hist. Birds, x. 394), being apparently led to that conclusion through its functionless wings and the backward situation of its legs. In this false allocation, James Francis Stephens also in 1826 acquiesced (Gen. Zoology, xiii. 70). Meanwhile in 1820 K. J. Temminck, who had never seen a specimen, had assorted it with the dodo in an order to which he applied the name of Inertes (Man. d’Ornithologie, i. cxiv.). In 1831 R. P. Lesson, who had previously (loc. cit.) made some blunders about it, placed it (Traité d’Ornithologie, p. 12), though only, as he says, “par analogie et a priori,” in his first division of birds, “Oiseaux Anomaux,” which is equivalent to what we now call Ratitae, making of it a separate family “Nullipennes.” At that time no second example was known, and some doubt was felt, especially on the Continent, as to the very existence of such a bird 1—though Lesson had himself when in the Bay of Islands in April 1824 (Voy. “Coquille,” ut supra) heard of it; and a few years later J. S. C. Dumont d’Urville had seen its skin, which the naturalists of his expedition procured, worn as a tippet by a Maori chief at Tolaga Bay (Houa-houa),2 and in 1830 gave what proves to be on the whole very accurate information concerning it (Voy. “Astrolabe,” ii. 107). To put all suspicion at rest, Lord Derby sent his unique specimen for exhibition at a meeting of the Zoological Society, on the 12th of February 1833 (Proc. Zool. Society, 1833, p. 24), and a few months later (tom. cit., p. 80) William Yarrell communicated to that body a complete description of it, which was afterwards published in full with an excellent portrait (Trans. Zool. Society, vol. i. p. 71, pl. 10). Herein the systematic place of the species, as akin to the Struthious birds, was placed beyond cavil, and the author called upon all interested in zoology to aid in further research as to this singular form. In consequence of this appeal a legless skin was within two years sent to the society (Proceedings, 1835, p. 61) obtained by W. Yate of Waimate, who said it was the second he had seen, and that he had kept the bird alive for nearly a fortnight, while in less than another couple of years additional information (op. cit., 1837, p. 24) came from T. K. Short to the effect that he had seen two living, and that all Yarrell had said was substantially correct, except underrating its progressive powers. Not long afterwards Lord Derby received and in March 1838 transmitted to the same society the trunk and viscera of an Apteryx, which, being entrusted to Sir R. Owen, furnished that eminent anatomist, in conjunction with other specimens of the same kind received from Drs Lyon and George Bennett, with the materials of the masterly monograph laid before the society in instalments, and ultimately printed in its Transactions (ii. 257; iii. 277). From this time the whole structure of the kiwi has certainly been far better known than that of nearly any other bird, and by degrees other examples found their way to England, some of which were distributed to the various museums of the Continent and of America.3

In 1847 much interest was excited by the reported discovery of another species of the genus (Proceedings, 1847, p. 51); and though the story was not confirmed, a second species was really soon after made known by John Gould (tom. cit., p. 93; Transactions, vol. iii, p. 379, pl. 57) under the name of Apteryx oweni—a just tribute to the great master who had so minutely explained the anatomy of the group. Three years later A. D. Bartlett drew attention to the manifest difference existing among certain examples, all of which had hitherto been regarded as specimens of A. australis, and the examination of a large series led him to conclude that under that name two distinct species were confounded. To the second of these, the third of the genus (according to his views), he gave the name of A. mantelli (Proceedings, 1850, p. 274), and it soon turned out that to this new form the majority of the specimens already obtained belonged. In 1851 the first kiwi known to have reached England alive was presented to the Zoological Society by Eyre, then lieutenant-governor of New Zealand. This was found to belong to the newly described A. mantelli, and some careful observations on its habits in captivity were published by John Wolley and another (Zoologist, pp. 3409, 3605).4 Subsequently the society has received several other live examples of this form, besides one of the real A. australis (Proceedings, 1872, p. 861), some of A. oweni, and one of a supposed fourth species, A. haasti, characterized in 1871 by Potts (Ibis, 1872, p. 35; Trans. N. Zeal. Institute, iv. 204; v. 195).5

The kiwis form a group of the subclass Ratitae to which the rank of an order may fitly be assigned, as they differ in many important particulars from any of the other existing forms of Ratite birds. The most obvious feature the Apteryges afford is the presence of a back toe, while the extremely aborted condition of the wings, the position of the nostrils—almost at the tip of the maxilla—and the absence of an after-shaft in the feathers, are characters nearly as manifest, and others not less determinative, though more recondite, will be found on examination. The kiwis are peculiar to New Zealand, and it 843 is believed that A. mantelli is the representative in the North Island of the southern A. australis, both being of a dark reddish-brown, longitudinally striped with light yellowish-brown, while A. oweni, of a light greyish-brown transversely barred with black, is said to occur in both islands. About the size of a large domestic fowl, they are birds of nocturnal habit, sleeping, or at least inactive, by day, feeding mostly on earth-worms, but occasionally swallowing berries, though in captivity they will eat flesh suitably minced. Sir Walter Buller writes (B. of New Zealand, p. 362):—

The foregoing extract refers to A. mantelli, but there is little doubt of the remarks being equally applicable to A. australis, and probably also to A. oweni, though the different proportion of the bill in the last points to some diversity in the mode of feeding.

KIZILBASHES (Turkish, “Red-Heads”), the nickname given by the Orthodox Turks to the Shiitic Turkish immigrants from Persia, who are found chiefly in the plains from Kara-Hissar along Tokat and Amasia to Angora. During the wars with Persia the Turkish sultans settled them in these districts. They are strictly speaking persianized Turks, and speak pure Persian. There are many Kizilbashes in Afghanistan. Their immigration dates only from the time of Nadir Shah (1737). They are an industrious honest folk, chiefly engaged in trade and as physicians, scribes, and so on. They form the bulk of the amir’s cavalry. Their name seems to have been first used in Persia of the Shiites in allusion to their red caps.

KIZIL IRMAK, i.e. “Red River” (anc. Halys), the largest river in Asia Minor, rising in the Kizil Dagh at an altitude of 6500 ft., and running south-west past Zara to Sivas. Below Sivas it flows south to the latitude of Kaisarieh, and then curves gradually round to the north. Finally, after a course of about 600 m., it discharges its waters into the Black Sea between Sinope and Samsun, where it forms a large delta. The only important tributaries are the Delije Irmak on the right and the Geuk Irmak on the left bank.

KIZLYAR (Kizliar, or Kizlar), a town of Russia, in Caucasia, in the province of Terek, 120 m. N.E. of Vladikavkaz, in the low-lying delta of the river Terek, about 35 m. from the Caspian. The population decreased from 8309 in 1861 to 7353 in 1897. The town lies to the left of the main stream between two of the larger secondary branches, and is subject to flooding. The town proper, which spreads out round the citadel, has Tatar, Georgian and Armenian quarters. The public buildings include the Greek cathedral, dating from 1786; a Greek nunnery, founded by the Georgian chief Daniel in 1736; the Armenian church of SS Peter and Paul, remarkable for its size and wealth. The population is mainly supported by the gardens and vineyards irrigated by canals from the river. A government vineyard and school of viticulture are situated 3½ m. from the town. About 1,200,000 gallons of Kizlyar wine are sold annually at the fair of Nizhniy-Novgorod. Silk and cotton are woven. Kizlyar is mentioned as early as 1616, but the most notable accession of inhabitants (Armenians, Georgians and Persians) took place in 1715. Its importance as a fortress dates from 1736, but the fortress is no longer kept in repair.

KIZYL-KUM, a desert of Western Asia, stretching S.E. of the Aral Lake between the river Syr-darya on the N.E. and the river Amu-darya on the S.W. It measures some 370 by 220 m., and is in part covered with drift-sand or dunes, many of which are advancing slowly but steadily towards the S.W. In character they resemble those of the neighbouring Kara-kum desert (see Kara-kum). On the whole the Kizyl-kum slopes S.W. towards the Aral Lake, where its altitude is only about 160 ft. as compared with 2000 in the S.E. In the vicinity of that lake the surface is covered with Aralo-Caspian deposits; but in the S.E., as it ascends towards the foothills of the Tian-shan system, it is braided with deep accumulations of fertile loess.

KJERULF, HALFDAN (1815-1868), Norwegian musical composer, the son of a high government official, was born at Christiania on the 15th of September 1815. His early education was at Christiania University, for a legal career, and not till he was nearly 26—on the death of his father—was he able to devote himself entirely to music. As a fact, he actually started on his career as a music teacher and composer of songs before ever having seriously studied music at all, and not for ten years did he attract any particular notice. Then, however, his Government paid for a year’s instruction for him at Leipzig. For many years after his return to Norway Kjerulf tried in vain to establish serial classical concerts, while he himself was working with Björnson and other writers at the composition of lyrical songs. His fame rests almost entirely on his beautiful and manly national part-songs and solos; but his pianoforte music is equally charming and simple. Kjerulf died at Grefsen, on the 11th of August 1868.

KJERULF, THEODOR (1825-1888), Norwegian geologist, was born at Christiania on the 30th of March 1825. He was educated in the university at Christiania, and subsequently studied at Heidelberg, working in Bunsen’s laboratory. In 1858 he became professor of geology in the university of his native city, and he was afterwards placed in charge of the geological survey of the country, then established mainly through his influence. His contributions to the geology of Norway were numerous and important, especially in reference to the southern portion of the country, and to the structure and relations of the Archaean and Palaeozoic rocks, and the glacial phenomena. His principal results were embodied in his work Udsigt over det sydlige Norges Geologi (1879). He was author also of some poetical works. He died at Christiania on the 25th of October 1888.

KLADNO, a mining town of Bohemia, Austria, 18 m. W.N.W. of Prague by rail. Pop. (1900), 18,600, mostly Czech. It is situated in a region very rich in iron-mines and coal-fields and possesses some of the largest iron and steel works in Bohemia. Near it is the mining town of Buschtĕhrad (pop. 3510), situated in the centre of very extensive coal-fields. Buschtĕhrad was originally the name of the castle only. This was from the 15th century to 1630 the property of the lords of Kolovrat, and came by devious inheritance through the grand-dukes of Tuscany, to the emperor Francis Joseph. The name Buschtĕhrad was first given to the railway, and then to the town, which had been called Buckow since its foundation in 1700. There is another castle of Buschtĕhrad near Hořic. Kladno, which for centuries had been a village of no importance, was sold in 1705 by the grand-duchess Anna Maria of Tuscany to the cloister in 844 Břewnow, to which it still belongs. The mining industry began in 1842.

KLAFSKY, KATHARINA (1855-1896), Hungarian operatic singer, was born at Szt János, Wieselburg, of humble parents. Being employed at Vienna as a nurserymaid, her fine soprano voice led to her being engaged as a chorus singer, and she was given good lessons in music. By 1882 she became well-known in Wagnerian rôles at the Leipzig theatre, and she increased her reputation at other German musical centres. In 1892 she appeared in London, and had a great success in Wagner’s operas, notably as Brünnhilde and as Isolde, her dramatic as well as vocal gifts being of an exceptional order. She sang in America in 1895, but died of brain disease in 1896.

KLAGENFURT (Slovene, Celovec), the capital of the Austrian duchy of Carinthia, 212 m. S.W. of Vienna by rail. Pop. (1900), 24,314. It is picturesquely situated on the river Glan, which is in communication with the Wörther-see by the 3 m. long Lend canal. Among the more noteworthy buildings are the parish church of St Ægidius (1709), with a tower 298 ft. in height; the cathedral of SS Peter and Paul (1582-1593, burnt 1723, restored 1725); the churches of the Benedictines (1613), of the Capuchins (1646), and of the order of St Elizabeth (1710). To these must be added the palace of the prince-bishop of Gurk, the burg or castle, existing in its present form since 1777; and the Landhaus or house of assembly, dating from the end of the 14th century, and containing a museum of natural history, and collection of minerals, antiquities, seals, paintings and sculptures. The most interesting public monument is the great Lindwurm or Dragon, standing in the principal square (1590). The industrial establishments comprise white lead factories, machine and iron foundries, and commerce is active, especially in the mineral products of the region.

Upon the Zollfeld to the north of the city once stood the ancient Roman town of Virunum. During the Middle Ages Klagenfurt became the property of the crown, but by a patent of Maximilian I. of the 24th of April 1518, it was conceded to the Carinthian estates, and has since then taken the place of St Veit as capital of Carinthia. In 1535, 1636, 1723 and 1796 Klagenfurt suffered from destructive fires, and in 1690 from the effects of an earthquake. On the 29th of March 1797 the French took the city, and upon the following day it was occupied by Napoleon as his headquarters.

KLAJ (latinized Clajus), JOHANN (1616-1656), German poet, was born at Meissen in Saxony. After studying theology at Wittenberg he went to Nuremberg as a “candidate for holy orders,” and there, in conjunction with Georg Philipp Harsdörffer, founded in 1644 the literary society known as the Pegnitz order. In 1647 he received an appointment as master in the Sebaldus school in Nuremberg, and in 1650 became preacher at Kitzingen, where he died in 1656. Klaj’s poems consist of dramas, written in stilted language and redundant with adventures, among which are Höllen- und Himmelfahrt Christi (Nuremberg, 1644), and Herodes, der Kindermörder (Nuremberg, 1645), and a poem, written jointly with Harsdörffer, Pegnesische Schäfergedicht (1644), which gives in allegorical form the story of his settlement in Nuremberg.

KLAMATH, a small tribe of North American Indians of Lutuamian stock. They ranged around the Klamath river and lakes, and are now on the Klamath reservation, southern Oregon.

KLAPKA, GEORG (1820-1892), Hungarian soldier, was born at Temesvár on the 7th of April 1820, and entered the Austrian army in 1838. He was still a subaltern when the Hungarian revolution of 1848 broke out, and he offered his services to the patriot party. He served in important staff appointments during the earlier part of the war which followed; then, early in 1849, he was ordered to replace General Mészáros, who had been defeated at Kaschau, and as general commanding an army corps he had a conspicuous share in the victories of Kapólna, Isaszeg, Waitzen, Nagy Sarlo and Komárom. Then, as the fortune of war turned against the Hungarians, Klapka, after serving for a short time as minister of war, took command at Komárom, from which fortress he conducted a number of successful expeditions until the capitulation of Világos in August put an end to the war in the open field. He then brilliantly defended Komárom for two months, and finally surrendered on honourable terms. Klapka left the country at once, and lived thenceforward for many years in exile, at first in England and afterwards chiefly in Switzerland. He continued by every means in his power to work for the independence of Hungary, especially at moments of European war, such as 1854, 1859 and 1866, at which an appeal to arms seemed to him to promise success. After the war of 1866 (in which as a Prussian major-general he organized a Hungarian corps in Silesia) Klapka was permitted by the Austrian government to return to his native country, and in 1867 was elected a member of the Hungarian Chamber of Deputies, in which he belonged to the Deák party. In 1877 he made an attempt to reorganize the Turkish army in view of the war with Russia. General Klapka died at Budapest on the 17th of May 1892. A memorial was erected to his memory at Komárom in 1896.

KLAPROTH, HEINRICH JULIUS (1783-1835), German Orientalist and traveller, was born in Berlin on the 11th of October 1783, the son of the chemist Martin Heinrich Klaproth (q.v.). He devoted his energies in quite early life to the study of Asiatic languages, and published in 1802 his Asiatisches Magazin (Weimar, 1802-1803). He was in consequence called to St Petersburg and given an appointment in the academy there. In 1805 he was a member of Count Golovkin’s embassy to China. On his return he was despatched by the academy to the Caucasus on an ethnographical and linguistic exploration (1807-1808), and was afterwards employed for several years in connexion with the academy’s Oriental publications. In 1812 he moved to Berlin; but in 1815 he settled in Paris, and in 1816 Humboldt procured him from the king of Prussia the title and salary of professor of Asiatic languages and literature, with permission to remain in Paris as long as was requisite for the publication of his works. He died in that city on the 28th of August 1835.

KLAPROTH, MARTIN HEINRICH (1743-1817), German chemist, was born at Wernigerode on the 1st of December 1743. During a large portion of his life he followed the profession of an apothecary. After acting as assistant in pharmacies at Quedlinburg, Hanover, Berlin and Danzig successively he came to Berlin on the death of Valentin Rose the elder in 1771 as manager of his business, and in 1780 he started an establishment on his own account in the same city, where from 1782 he was pharmaceutical assessor of the Ober-Collegium Medicum. In 1787 he was appointed lecturer in chemistry to the Royal Artillery, and when the university was founded in 1810 he was selected to be the professor of chemistry. He died in Berlin on the 1st of January 1817. Klaproth was the leading chemist of his time in Germany. 845 An exact and conscientious worker, he did much to improve and systematize the processes of analytical chemistry and mineralogy, and his appreciation of the value of quantitative methods led him to become one of the earliest adherents of the Lavoisierian doctrines outside France. He was the first to discover uranium, zirconium and titanium, and to characterize them as distinct elements, though he did not obtain any of them in the pure metallic state; and he elucidated the composition of numerous substances till then imperfectly known, including compounds of the then newly recognized elements: tellurium, strontium, cerium and chromium.

KLÉBER, JEAN BAPTISTE (1753-1800), French general, was born on the 9th of March 1753, at Strassburg, where his father was a builder. He was trained, partly at Paris, for the profession of architect, but his opportune assistance to two German nobles in a tavern brawl obtained for him a nomination to the military school of Munich. Thence he obtained a commission in the Austrian army, but resigned it in 1783 on finding his humble birth in the way of his promotion. On returning to France he was appointed inspector of public buildings at Belfort, where he studied fortification and military science. In 1792 he enlisted in the Haut-Rhin volunteers, and was from his military knowledge at once elected adjutant and soon afterwards lieutenant-colonel. At the defence of Mainz he so distinguished himself that though disgraced along with the rest of the garrison and imprisoned, he was promptly reinstated, and in August 1793 promoted general of brigade. He won considerable distinction in the Vendéan war, and two months later was made a general of division. In these operations began his intimacy with Marceau, with whom he defeated the Royalists at Le Mans and Savenay. For openly expressing his opinion that lenient measures ought to be pursued towards the Vendéans he was recalled; but in April 1794 he was once more reinstated and sent to the Army of the Sambre-and-Meuse. He displayed his skill and bravery in the numerous actions around Charleroi, and especially in the crowning victory of Fleurus, after which in the winter of 1794-95 he besieged Mainz. In 1795 and again in 1796 he held the chief command of an army temporarily, but declined a permanent appointment as commander-in-chief. On the 13th of October 1795 he fought a brilliant rearguard action at the bridge of Neuwied, and in the offensive campaign of 1796 he was Jourdan’s most active and successful lieutenant. Having, after the retreat to the Rhine (see French Revolutionary Wars), declined the chief command, he withdrew into private life early in 1798. He accepted a division in the expedition to Egypt under Bonaparte, but was wounded in the head at Alexandria in the first engagement, which prevented his taking any further part in the campaign of the Pyramids, and caused him to be appointed governor of Alexandria. In the Syrian campaign of 1799, however, he commanded the vanguard, took El-Arish, Gaza and Jaffa, and won the great victory of Mount Tabor on the 15th of April 1799. When Napoleon returned to France towards the end of 1799 he left Kléber in command of the French forces. In this capacity, seeing no hope of bringing his army back to France or of consolidating his conquests, he made the convention of El-Arish. But when Lord Keith, the British admiral, refused to ratify the terms, he attacked the Turks at Heliopolis, though with but 10,000 men against 60,000, and utterly defeated them on the 20th of March 1800. He then retook Cairo, which had revolted from the French. Shortly after these victories he was assassinated at Cairo by a fanatic on the 14th of June 1800, the same day on which his friend and comrade Desaix fell at Marengo. Kléber was undoubtedly one of the greatest generals of the French revolutionary epoch. Though he distrusted his powers and declined the responsibility of supreme command, there is nothing in his career to show that he would have been unequal to it. As a second in command he was not excelled by any general of his time. His conduct of affairs in Egypt at a time when the treasury was empty and the troops were discontented for want of pay, shows that his powers as an administrator were little—if at all—inferior to those he possessed as a general.

KLEIN, JULIUS LEOPOLD (1810-1876), German writer of Jewish origin, was born at Miskolcz, in Hungary. He was educated at the gymnasium in Pest, and studied medicine in Vienna and Berlin. After travelling in Italy and Greece, he settled as a man of letters in Berlin, where he remained until his death on the 2nd of August 1876. He was the author of many dramatic works, among others the historical tragedies Maria von Medici (1841); Luines (1842); Zenobia (1847); Moreto (1859); Maria (1860); Strafford (1862) and Heliodora (1867); and the comedies Die Herzogin (1848); Ein Schützling (1850); and Voltaire (1862). The tendency of Klein as a dramatist was to become bombastic and obscure, but many of his characters are vigorously conceived, and in nearly all his tragedies there are passages of brilliant rhetoric. He is chiefly known as the author of the elaborate though uncompleted Geschichte des Dramas (1865-1876), in which he undertook to record the history of the drama from the earliest times. He died when about to enter upon the Elizabethan period, to the treatment of which he had looked forward as the chief part of his task. The work, which is in thirteen bulky volumes, gives proof of immense learning, but is marred by eccentricities of style and judgment.

KLEIST, BERND HEINRICH WILHELM VON (1777-1811), German poet, dramatist and novelist, was born at Frankfort-on-Oder on the 18th of October 1777. After a scanty education, he entered the Prussian army in 1792, served in the Rhine campaign of 1796 and retired from the service in 1799 with the rank of lieutenant. He next studied law and philosophy at the university of Frankfort-on-Oder, and in 1800 received a subordinate post in the ministry of finance at Berlin. In the following year his roving, restless spirit got the better of him, and procuring a lengthened leave of absence he visited Paris and then settled in Switzerland. Here he found congenial friends in Heinrich Zschokke (q.v.) and Ludwig Friedrich August Wieland (1777-1819), son of the poet; and to them he read his first drama, a gloomy tragedy, Die Familie Schroffenstein (1803), originally entitled Die Familie Ghonorez. In the autumn of 1802 Kleist returned to Germany; he visited Goethe, Schiller and Wieland in Weimar, stayed for a while in Leipzig and Dresden, again proceeded to Paris, and returning in 1804 to his post in Berlin was transferred to the Domänenkammer (department for the administration of crown lands) at Königsberg. On a journey to Dresden in 1807 Kleist was arrested by the French as a spy, and being sent to France was kept for six months a close prisoner at Châlons-sur-Marne. On regaining his liberty he proceeded to Dresden, where in conjunction with Adam Heinrich Müller (1779-1829) he published in 1808 the journal Phöbus. In 1809 he went to Prague, and ultimately settled in Berlin, where he edited (1810-1811) the Berliner Abendblätter. Captivated by the intellectual and musical accomplishments of a certain Frau Henriette Vogel, Kleist, who was himself more disheartened and embittered than ever, agreed to do her bidding and die with her, carrying out this resolution by first shooting the lady and then himself on the shore of the Wannsee near Potsdam, on the 21st of November 1811. Kleist’s whole life was filled by a restless striving after ideal and illusory happiness, and this is largely reflected in his work. He was by far the most important North German dramatist of the Romantic movement, and no other of the Romanticists approaches him in the energy with which he expresses patriotic indignation.

846

KLEIST, EWALD CHRISTIAN VON (1715-1759), German poet, was born at Zeblin, near Köslin in Pomerania, on the 7th of March 1715. After attending the Jesuit school in Deutschkrona and the gymnasium in Danzig, he proceeded in 1731 to the university of Königsberg, where he studied law and mathematics. On the completion of his studies, he entered the Danish army, in which he became an officer in 1736. Recalled to Prussia by Frederick II. in 1740, he was appointed lieutenant in a regiment stationed at Potsdam, where he became acquainted with J. W. L. Gleim (q.v.), who interested him in poetry. After distinguishing himself at the battle of Mollwitz (April 10, 1741) and the siege of Neisse (1741), he was promoted captain in 1749 and major in 1756. Quartered during the winter of 1757-1758 in Leipzig, he found relief from his irksome military duties in the society of Gotthold Ephraim Lessing (q.v.). Shortly afterwards in the battle of Kunersdorf, on the 12th of August 1759, he was mortally wounded while leading the attack, and died at Frankfort-on-Oder on the 24th of August following.

Kleist’s chief work is a poem in hexameters, Der Frühling (1749), for which Thomson’s Seasons largely supplied ideas. In his description of the beauties of nature Kleist shows real poetical genius, an almost modern sentiment and fine taste. He also wrote some charming odes, idylls and elegies, and a small epic poem Cissides und Paches (1759), the subject being two Thessalian friends who die an heroic death for their country in a battle against the Athenians.

KLERKSDORP, a town of the Transvaal, 118 m. S.W. of Johannesburg and 192 m. N.E. of Kimberley by rail. Pop. (1904), 4276 of whom 2203 were whites. The town, built on the banks of the Schoonspruit 10 m. above its junction with the Vaal, possesses several fine public buildings. In the neighbourhood are gold-mines, the reef appearing to form the western boundary of the Witwatersrand basin. Diamonds (green in colour) and coal are also found in the district. Klerksdorp was one of the villages founded by the first Boers who crossed the Vaal, dating from 1838. The modern town, which is on the side of the spruit opposite the old village, was founded in 1888.

KLESL (or Khlesl), MELCHIOR (1552-1630), Austrian statesman and ecclesiastic, was the son of a Protestant baker, and was born in Vienna. Under the influence of the Jesuits he was converted to Roman Catholicism, and having finished his education at the universities of Vienna and Ingolstadt, he was made chancellor of the university of Vienna; and as official and vicar-general of the bishop of Passau he exhibited the zeal of a convert in forwarding the progress of the counter-reformation in Austria. He became bishop of Vienna in 1598; but more important was his association with the archduke Matthias which began about the same time. Both before and after 1612, when Matthias succeeded his brother Rudolph II. as emperor, Klesl was the originator and director of his policy, although he stoutly opposed the concessions to the Hungarian Protestants in 1606. He assisted to secure the election of Matthias to the imperial throne, and sought, but without success, to strengthen the new emperor’s position by making peace between the Catholics and the Protestants. When during the short reign of Matthias the question of the imperial succession demanded prompt attention, the bishop, although quite as anxious as his opponents to retain the empire in the house of Habsburg and to preserve the dominance of the Roman Catholic Church, advised that this question should be shelved until some arrangement with the Protestant princes had been reached. This counsel was displeasing to the archduke Maximilian and to Ferdinand, afterwards the emperor Ferdinand II. who believed that Klesl was hostile to the candidature of the latter prince. It was, however, impossible to shake his influence with the emperor; and in June 1618, a few months before the death of Matthias, he was seized by order of the archdukes and imprisoned at Ambras in Tirol. In 1622 Klesl, who had been a cardinal since 1615, was transferred to Rome by order of Pope Gregory XV., and was released from imprisonment. In 1627 Ferdinand II. allowed him to return to his episcopal duties in Vienna, where he died on the 18th of September 1630.

KLINGER, FRIEDRICH MAXIMILIAN VON (1752-1831), German dramatist and novelist, was born of humble parentage at Frankfort-on-Main, on the 17th of February 1752. His father died when he was a child, and his early years were a hard struggle. He was enabled, however, in 1774 to enter the university of Giessen, where he studied law; and Goethe, with whom he had been acquainted since childhood, helped him in many ways. In 1775 Klinger gained with his tragedy Die Zwillinge a prize offered by the Hamburg theatre, under the auspices of the actress Sophie Charlotte Ackermann (1714-1792) and her son the famous actor and playwright, Friedrich Ludwig Schröder (1744-1816). In 1776 Klinger was appointed Theaterdichter to the “Seylersche Schauspiel-Gesellschaft” and held this post for two years. In 1778 he entered the Austrian military service and took part in the Bavarian war of succession. In 1780 he went to St Petersburg, became an officer in the Russian army, was ennobled and attached to the Grand Duke Paul, whom he accompanied on a journey to Italy and France. In 1785 he was appointed director of the corps of cadets, and having married a natural daughter of the empress Catharine, was made praeses of the Academy of Knights in 1799. In 1803 Klinger was nominated by the emperor Alexander curator of the university of Dorpat, an office he held until 1817; in 1811 he became lieutenant-general. He then gradually gave up his official posts, and after living for many years in honourable retirement, died at Dorpat on the 25th of February 1831.

Klinger was a man of vigorous moral character and full of fine feeling, though the bitter experiences and deprivations of his youth are largely reflected in his dramas. It was one of his earliest works, Sturm und Drang (1776), which gave its name to this literary epoch. In addition to this tragedy and Die Zwillinge (1776), the chief plays of his early period of passionate fervour and restless “storm and stress” are Die neue Arria (1776), Simsone Grisaldo (1776) and Stilpo und seine Kinder (1780). To 847 a later period belongs the fine double tragedy of Medea in Korinth and Medea auf dem Kaukasos (1791). In Russia he devoted himself mainly to the writing of philosophical romances, of which the best known are Fausts Leben, Taten und Höllenfahrt (1791), Geschichte Giafars des Barmeciden (1792) and Geschichte Raphaels de Aquillas (1793). This series was closed in 1803 with Betrachtungen und Gedanken über verschiedene Gegenstände der Welt und der Literatur. In these works Klinger gives calm and dignified expression to the leading ideas which the period of Sturm und Drang had bequeathed to German classical literature.

KLINGER, MAX (1857-  ), German painter, etcher and sculptor, was born at Plagwitz near Leipzig. He attended the classes at the Carlsruhe art school in 1874, and went in the following year to Berlin, where in 1878 he created a sensation at the Academy exhibition with two series of pen-and-ink drawings—the “Series upon the Theme of Christ” and “Fantasies upon the Finding of a Glove.” The daring originality of these imaginative and eccentric works caused an outburst of indignation, and the artist was voted insane; nevertheless the “Glove” series was bought by the Berlin National Gallery. His painting of “The Judgment of Paris” caused a similar storm of indignant protest in 1887, owing to its rejection of all conventional attributes and the naïve directness of the conception. His vivid and somewhat morbid imagination, with its leaning towards the gruesome and disagreeable, and the Goyaesque turn of his mind, found their best expression in his “cycles” of etchings: “Deliverances of Sacrificial Victims told in Ovid,” “A Brahms Phantasy,” “Eve and the Future,” “A Life,” and “Of Death”; but in his use of the needle he does not aim at the technical excellence of the great masters; it supplies him merely with means of expressing his ideas. After 1886 Klinger devoted himself more exclusively to painting and sculpture. In his painting he aims neither at classic beauty nor modern truth, but at grim impressiveness not without a touch of mysticism. His “Pietà” at the Dresden Gallery, the frescoes at the Leipzig University, and the “Christ in Olympus,” at the Modern Gallery in Vienna, are characteristic examples of his art. The Leipzig Museum contains his sculptured “Salome” and “Cassandra.” In sculpture he favours the use of varicoloured materials in the manner of the Greek chryselephantine sculpture. His “Beethoven” is a notable instance of his work in this direction.

KLIPSPRINGER, the Boer name of a small African mountain-antelope (Oreotragus saltator), ranging from the Cape through East Africa to Somaliland and Abyssinia, and characterized by its blunt rounded hoofs, thick pithy hair and gold-spangled colouring. The klipspringer represents a genus by itself, the various local forms not being worthy of more than racial distinction. The activity of these antelopes is marvellous.

KLONDIKE, a district in Yukon Territory, north-western Canada, approximately in 64° N. and 140° W. The limits are rather indefinite, but the district includes the country to the south of the Klondike River, which comes into the Yukon from the east and has several tributaries, as well as Indian River, a second branch of the Yukon, flowing into it some distance above the Klondike. The richer gold-bearing gravels are found along the creeks tributary to these two rivers within an area of about 800 sq. m. The Klondike district is a dissected peneplain with low ridges of rounded forms rising to 4250 ft. above the sea at the Dome which forms its centre. All of the gold-bearing creeks rise not far from the Dome and radiate in various directions toward the Klondike and Indian rivers, the most productive being Bonanza with its tributary Eldorado, Hunker, Dominion and Gold Run. Of these, Eldorado, for the two or three miles in which it was gold-bearing, was much the richest, and for its length probably surpassed any other known placer deposit. Rich gravel was discovered on Bonanza Creek in 1896, and a wild rush to this almost inaccessible region followed, a population of 30,000 coming in within the next three or four years with a rapidly increasing output of gold, reaching in 1900 the climax of $22,000,000. Since then the production has steadily declined, until in 1906 it fell to $5,600,000. The richest gravels were worked out before 1910, and most of the population had left the Klondike for Alaska and other regions; so that Dawson, which for a time was a bustling city of more than 10,000, dwindled to about 3000 inhabitants. As the ground was almost all frozen, the mines were worked by a thawing process, first by setting fires, afterwards by using steam, new methods being introduced to meet the unusual conditions. Later dredges and hydraulic mining were resorted to with success.

The Klondike, in spite of its isolated position, brought together miners and adventurers from all parts of the world, and it is greatly to the credit of the Canadian government and of the mounted police, who were entrusted with the keeping of order, that life and property were as safe as elsewhere and that no lawless methods were adopted by the miners as in placer mining camps in the western United States. The region was at first difficult of access, but can now be reached with perfect comfort in summer, travelling by well-appointed steamers on the Pacific and the Yukon River. Owing to its perpetually frozen soil, summer roads were excessively bad in earlier days, but good wagon roads have since been constructed to all the important mining centres. Dawson itself has all the resources of a civilized city in spite of being founded on a frozen peat-bog; and is supplied with ordinary market vegetables from farms just across the river. During the winter, when for some time the sun does not appear above the hills, the cold is intense, though usually without wind, but the well-chinked log houses can be kept comfortably warm. When winter travel is necessary dog teams and sledges are generally made use of, except on the stage route south to White Horse, where horses are used. A telegraph line connects Dawson with British Columbia, but the difficulties in keeping it in order are so great over the long intervening wilderness that communication is often broken. Gold is practically the only economic product of the Klondike, though small amounts of tin ore occur, and lignite coal has been mined lower down on the Yukon. The source of the gold seems to have been small stringers of quartz in the siliceous and sericitic schists which form the bed rock of much of the region, and no important quartz veins have been discovered; so that unlike most other placer regions the Klondike has not developed lode mines to continue the production of gold when the gravels are exhausted.

KLOPP, ONNO (1822-1903), German historian, was born at Leer on the 9th of October 1822, and was educated at the universities of Bonn, Berlin and Göttingen. For a few years he was a teacher at Leer and at Osnabrück; but in 1858 he settled at Hanover, where he became intimate with King George V., who made him his Archivrat. Thoroughly disliking Prussia, he was in hearty accord with George in resisting her aggressive policy; and after the annexation of Hanover in 1866 he accompanied the exiled king to Hietzing. He became a Roman Catholic in 1874. He died at Penzing, near Vienna, on the 9th of August 1903. Klopp is best known as the author of Der Fall des Hauses Stuart (Vienna, 1875-1888), the fullest existing account of the later Stuarts.

KLOPSTOCK, GOTTLIEB FRIEDRICH (1724-1803), German poet, was born at Quedlinburg, on the 2nd of July 1724, the eldest 848 son of a lawyer, a man of sterling character and of a deeply religious mind. Both in his birthplace and on the estate of Friedeburg on the Saale, which his father later rented, young Klopstock passed a happy childhood; and more attention having been given to his physical than to his mental development he grew up a strong healthy boy and was an excellent horseman and skater. In his thirteenth year Klopstock returned to Quedlinburg where he attended the gymnasium, and in 1739 proceeded to the famous classical school of Schulpforta. Here he soon became an adept in Greek and Latin versification, and wrote some meritorious idylls and odes in German. His original intention of making the emperor Henry I. (“The Fowler”) the hero of an epic, was, under the influence of Milton’s Paradise Lost, with which he became acquainted through Bodmer’s translation, abandoned in favour of the religious epic. While yet at school, he had already drafted the plan of Der Messias, upon which his fame mainly rests. On the 21st of September 1745 he delivered on quitting school a remarkable “leaving oration” on epic poetry—Abschiedsrede über die epische Poesie, kultur- und literargeschichtlich erläutert—and next proceeded to Jena as a student of theology, where he elaborated the first three cantos of the Messias in prose. The life at this university being uncongenial to him, he removed in the spring of 1746 to Leipzig, and here joined the circle of young men of letters who contributed to the Bremer Beiträge. In this periodical the first three cantos of the Messias in hexameters were anonymously published in 1748. A new era in German literature had commenced, and the name of the author soon became known. In Leipzig he also wrote a number of odes, the best known of which is An meine Freunde (1747), afterwards recast as Wingolf (1767). He left the university in 1748 and became a private tutor in the family of a relative at Langensalza. Here unrequited love for a cousin (the “Fanny” of his odes) disturbed his peace of mind. Gladly therefore he accepted in 1750 an invitation from Jakob Bodmer (q.v.), the translator of Paradise Lost, to visit him in Zürich. Here Klopstock was at first treated with every kindness and respect and rapidly recovered his spirits. Bodmer, however, was disappointed to find in the young poet of the Messias a man of strong worldly interests, and a coolness sprang up between the two friends.

At this juncture Klopstock received from Frederick V. of Denmark, on the recommendation of his minister Count von Bernstorff (1712-1772), an invitation to settle at Copenhagen, with an annuity of 400 talers, with a view to the completion of the Messias. The offer was accepted; on his way to the Danish capital Klopstock met at Hamburg the lady who in 1754 became his wife, Margareta (Meta) Moller, (the “Cidli” of his odes), an enthusiastic admirer of his poetry. His happiness was short; she died in 1758, leaving him almost broken-hearted. His grief at her loss finds pathetic expression in the 15th canto of the Messias. The poet subsequently published his wife’s writings, Hinterlassene Werke von Margareta Klopstock (1759), which give evidence of a tender, sensitive and deeply religious spirit. Klopstock now relapsed into melancholy; new ideas failed him, and his poetry became more and more vague and unintelligible. He still continued to live and work at Copenhagen, and next, following Heinrich Wilhelm von Gerstenberg (q.v.), turned his attention to northern mythology, which he conceived should replace classical subjects in a new school of German poetry. In 1770, on the dismissal by King Christian VII. of Count Bernstorff from office, he retired with the latter to Hamburg, but retained his pension together with the rank of councillor of legation. Here, in 1773, he issued the last five cantos of the Messias. In the following year he published his strange scheme for the regeneration of German letters, Die Gelehrtenrepublik (1774). In 1775 he travelled south, and making the acquaintance of Goethe on the way, spent a year at the court of the margrave of Baden at Karlsruhe. Thence, in 1776, with the title of Hofrat and a pension from the margrave, which he retained together with that from the king of Denmark, he returned to Hamburg where he spent the remainder of his life. His latter years he passed, as had always been his inclination, in retirement, only occasionally relieved by association with his most intimate friends, busied with philological studies, and hardly interesting himself in the new developments of German literature. The American War of Independence and the Revolution in France aroused him, however, to enthusiasm. The French Republic sent him the diploma of honorary citizenship; but, horrified at the terrible scenes the Revolution had enacted in the place of liberty, he returned it. When 67 years of age he contracted a second marriage with Johanna Elisabeth von Winthem, a widow and a niece of his late wife, who for many years had been one of his most intimate friends. He died at Hamburg on the 14th of March 1803, mourned by all Germany, and was buried with great pomp and ceremony by the side of his first wife in the churchyard of the village of Ottensen.

KLOSTERNEUBURG, a town of Austria, in Lower Austria, 5½ m. N.W. of Vienna by rail. Pop. (1900), 11,595. It is situated on the right bank of the Danube, at the foot of the Kahlenberg, and is divided by a small stream into an upper and a lower town. As an important pioneer station Klosterneuburg has various military buildings and stores, and among the schools it possesses an academy of wine and fruit cultivation.

On a hill rising directly from the banks of the Danube stand the magnificent buildings (erected 1730-1834) of the Augustine canonry, founded in 1106 by Margrave Leopold the Holy. This foundation is the oldest and richest of the kind in Austria; it 849 owns much of the land upon which the north-western suburbs of Vienna stand. Among the points of interest within it are the old chapel of 1318, with Leopold’s tomb and the altar of Verdun, dating from the 12th century, the treasury and relic-chamber, the library with 30,000 volumes and many MSS., the picture gallery, the collection of coins, the theological hall, and the wine-cellar, containing an immense tun like that at Heidelberg. The inhabitants of Klosterneuburg are mainly occupied in making wine, of excellent quality. There is a large cement factory outside the town. In Roman times the castle of Citium stood in the region of Klosterneuburg. The town was founded by Charlemagne, and received its charter as a town in 1298.

KLOTZ, REINHOLD (1807-1870), German classical scholar, was born near Chemnitz in Saxony on the 13th of March 1807. In 1849 he was appointed professor in the university of Leipzig in succession to Gottfried Hermann, and held this post till his death on the 10th of August 1870. Klotz was a man of unwearied industry, and devoted special attention to Latin literature.

KNARESBOROUGH, a market town in the Ripon parliamentary division of the West Riding of Yorkshire, England, 16½ m. W. by N. from York by a branch of the North Eastern railway. Pop. of urban district (1901), 4979. Its situation is most picturesque, on the steep left bank of the river Nidd, which here follows a well-wooded valley, hemmed in by limestone cliffs. The church of St John the Baptist is Early English, but has numerous Decorated and Perpendicular additions; it is a cruciform building containing several interesting monuments. Knaresborough Castle was probably founded in 1070 by Serlo de Burgh. Its remains, however, are of the 14th century, and include a massive keep rising finely from a cliff above the Nidd. After the battle of Marston Moor it was taken by Fairfax, and in 1648 it was ordered to be dismantled. To the south of the castle is St Robert’s chapel, an excavation in the rock constructed into an ecclesiastical edifice in the reign of Richard I. Several of the excavations in the limestone, which is extensively quarried, are incorporated in dwelling-houses. A little farther down the river is St Robert’s cave, which is supposed to have been the residence of the hermit, and in 1744 was the scene of the murder of Daniel Clarke by Eugene Aram, whose story is told in Lytton’s well-known novel. Opposite the castle is the Dropping Well, the waters of which are impregnated with lime and have petrifying power, this action causing the curious and beautiful incrustations formed where the water falls over a slight cliff. The Knaresborough free grammar school was founded in 1616. There is a large agricultural trade, and linen and leather manufactures and the quarries also employ a considerable number of persons.

Knaresborough (Canardesburg, Cnarreburc, Cknareburg), which belonged to the Crown before the Conquest, formed part of William the Conqueror’s grant to his follower Serlo de Burgh. Being forfeited by his grandson Eustace FitzJohn in the reign of Stephen, Knaresborough was granted to Robert de Stuteville, from whose descendants it passed through marriage to Hugh de Morville, one of the murderers of Thomas Becket, who with his three accomplices remained in hiding in the castle for a whole year. During the 13th and 14th centuries the castle and lordship changed hands very frequently; they were granted successively to Hubert de Burgh, whose son forfeited them after the battle of Evesham, to Richard, earl of Cornwall, whose son Edmund died without issue; to Piers Gaveston, and lastly to John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, and so to the Crown as parcel of the duchy of Lancaster. In 1317 John de Lilleburn, who was holding the castle of Knaresborough for Thomas duke of Lancaster against the king, surrendered under conditions to William de Ros of Hamelak, but before leaving the castle managed to destroy all the records of the liberties and privileges of the town which were kept in the castle. In 1368 an inquisition was taken to ascertain these privileges, and the jurors found that the burgesses held “all the soil of their borough yielding 7s. 4d. yearly and doing suit at the king’s court.” In the reign of Henry VIII. Knaresborough is said by Leland to be “no great thing and meanely builded but the market there is quik.” During the civil wars Knaresborough was held for some time by the Royalists, but they were obliged to surrender, and the castle was among those ordered to be destroyed by parliament in 1646. A market on Wednesday and a fortnightly fair on the same day from the Feast of St Mark to that of St Andrew are claimed under a charter of Charles II. confirming earlier charters. Lead ore was found and worked on Knaresborough Common in the 16th century. From 1555 to 1867 the town returned two members to parliament, but in the latter year the number was reduced to one, and in 1885 the representation was merged in that of the West Riding.

KNAVE (O.E. cnafa, cognate with Ger. Knabe, boy), originally a male child, a boy (Chaucer, Canterbury Tales: “Clerk’s Tale,” I. 388). Like Lat. puer, the word was early used as a name for any boy or lad employed as a servant, and so of male servants in general (Chaucer: “Pardoner’s Tale,” 1. 204). The current use of the word for a man who is dishonest and crafty, a rogue, was however an early usage, and is found in Layamon (c. 1205). In playing-cards the lowest court card of each suit, the “jack,” representing a medieval servant, is called the “knave.” (See also Valet.)

KNEBEL, KARL LUDWIG VON (1744-1834), German poet and translator, was born at the castle of Wallerstein in Franconia on the 30th of November 1744. After having studied law for a short while at Halle, he entered the regiment of the crown prince of Prussia in Potsdam and was attached to it as officer for ten years. Disappointed in his military career, owing to the slowness of promotion, he retired in 1774, and accepting the post of tutor to Prince Konstantin of Weimar, accompanied him and his elder brother, the hereditary prince, on a tour to Paris. On this journey he visited Goethe in Frankfort-on-Main, and introduced him to the hereditary prince, Charles Augustus. This meeting is memorable as being the immediate cause of Goethe’s later intimate connexion with the Weimar court. After Knebel’s return and the premature death of his pupil he was pensioned, receiving the rank of major. In 1798 he married the singer Luise von Rudorf, and retired to Ilmenau; but in 1805 he removed to Jena, where he lived until his death on the 23rd of February 1834. Knebel’s Sammlung kleiner Gedichte (1815), issued anonymously, and Distichen (1827) contain many graceful sonnets, but it is as a translator that he is best known. His translation of the elegies of Propertius, Elegien des Properz (1798), and that of Lucretius’ De rerum natura (2 vols., 1831) are deservedly praised. Since their first acquaintance Knebel and Goethe were intimate friends, and not the least interesting of Knebel’s writings is his correspondence with the eminent poet, Briefwechsel mit Goethe (ed. G. E. Guhrauer, 2 vols., 1851).

KNEE (O.E. cnéow, a word common to Indo-European languages, cf. Ger. Knie, Fr. genou, Span, hinojo, Lat. genu, Gr. γόνυ, Sansk. janu), in human anatomy, the articulation of the upper and lower parts of the leg, the joint between the femur and the tibia (see Joints). The word is also used of articulation resembling the knee-joint in shape or position in other animals; it thus is applied to the carpal articulation of the fore leg of a horse, answering to the ankle in man, or to the tarsal articulation or heel of a bird’s foot.

850

KNELLER, SIR GODFREY (1648-1723), a portrait painter whose celebrity belongs chiefly to England, was born in Lübeck in the duchy of Holstein, of an ancient family, on the 8th of August 1648. He was at first intended for the army, and was sent to Leyden to learn mathematics and fortification. Showing, however, a marked preference for the fine arts, he studied in the school of Rembrandt, and under Ferdinand Bol in Amsterdam. In 1672 he removed to Italy, directing his chief attention to Titian and the Caracci; Carlo Maratta gave him some guidance and encouragement. In Rome, and more especially in Venice, Kneller earned considerable reputation by historical paintings as well as portraits. He next went to Hamburg, painting with still increasing success. In 1674 he came to England at the invitation of the duke of Monmouth, was introduced to Charles II., and painted that sovereign, much to his satisfaction, several times. Charles also sent him to Paris, to take the portrait of Louis XIV. When Sir Peter Lely died in 1680, Kneller, who produced in England little or nothing in the historical department, remained without a rival in the ranks of portrait painting; there was no native-born competition worth speaking of. Charles appointed him court painter; and he continued to hold the same post into the days of George I. Under William III. (1692) he was made a knight, under George I. (1715) a baronet, and by order of the emperor Leopold I. a knight of the Roman Empire. Not only his court favour but his general fame likewise was large: he was lauded by Dryden, Addison, Steele, Prior, Tickell and Pope. Kneller’s gains also were very considerable; aided by habits of frugality which approached stinginess, he left property yielding an annual income of £2000. His industry was maintained till the last. His studio had at first been in Covent Garden, but in his closing years he lived in Kneller Hall, Twickenham. He died of fever, the date being generally given as the 7th of November 1723, though some accounts say 1726. He was buried in Twickenham church, and has a monument in Westminster Abbey. An elder brother, John Zachary Kneller, an ornamental painter, had accompanied Godfrey to England, and had died in 1702. The style of Sir Godfrey Kneller as a portrait painter represented the decline of that art as practised by Vandyck; Lely marks the first grade of descent, and Kneller the second. His works have much freedom, and are well drawn and coloured; but they are mostly slight in manner, and to a great extent monotonous, this arising partly from the habit which he had of lengthening the oval of all his heads. The colouring may be called brilliant rather than true. He indulged much in the common-places of allegory; and, though he had a quality of dignified elegance not unallied with simplicity, genuine simple nature is seldom to be traced in his works. His fame has greatly declined, and could not but do so after the advent of Reynolds. Among Kneller’s principal paintings are the “Forty-three Celebrities of the Kit-Cat Club,” and the “Ten Beauties of the Court of William III.,” now at Hampton Court; these were painted by order of the queen; they match, but match unequally, the “Beauties of the Court of Charles II.,” painted by Lely. He executed altogether the likenesses of ten sovereigns, and fourteen of his works appear in the National Portrait Gallery. It is said that Kneller’s own favourite performance was the portrait of the “Converted Chinese” in Windsor Castle. His later works are confined almost entirely to England, not more than two or three specimens having gone abroad after he had settled here.

KNICKERBOCKER, HARMEN JANSEN (c. 1650-c. 1720), Dutch colonist of New Netherland (New York), was a native of Wyhe (Wie), Overyssel, Holland. Before 1683 he settled near what is now Albany, New York, and there in 1704 he bought through Harme Gansevoort one-fourth of the land in Dutchess county near Red Hook, which had been patented in 1688 to Peter Schuyler, who in 1722 deeded seven (of thirteen) lots in the upper fourth of his patent to the seven children of Knickerbocker. The eldest of these children, Johannes Harmensen, received from the common council of the city of Albany a grant of 50 acres of meadow and 10 acres of upland on the south side of Schaghticoke Creek. This Schaghticoke estate was held by Johannes Harmensen’s son Johannes (1723-1802), a colonel in the Continental Army in the War of Independence, and by his son Harmen (1779-1855), a lawyer, a federalist representative in Congress in 1809-1811, a member of the New York Assembly in 1816, and a famous gentleman of the old school, who for his courtly hospitality in his manor was called “the prince of Schaghticoke” and whose name was borrowed by Washington Irving for use in his (Diedrich) Knickerbocker’s History of New York (1809). Largely owing to this book, the name “Knickerbockers” has passed into current use as a designation of the early Dutch settlers in New York and their descendants. The son of Johannes, David Buel Knickerbacker (1833-1894), who returned to the earlier spelling of the family name, graduated at Trinity College in 1853 and at the General Theological Seminary in 1856, was a rector for many years at Minneapolis, Minnesota, and in 1883 was consecrated Protestant Episcopal bishop of Indiana.

KNIFE (O.E. cníf, a word appearing in different forms in many Teutonic languages, cf. Du. knijf, Ger. Kneif, a shoemaker’s knife, Swed. knif; the ultimate origin is unknown; Skeat finds the origin in the root of “nip,” formerly “knip”; Fr. canif is also of Teutonic origin), a small cutting instrument, with the blade either fixed to the handle or fastened with a hinge so as to clasp into the handle (see Cutlery). For the knives chipped from flint by prehistoric man see Archaeology and Flint Implements.

KNIGGE, ADOLF FRANZ FRIEDRICH, Freiherr von (1752-1796), German author, was born on the family estate of Bredenbeck near Hanover on the 16th of October 1752. After studying law at Göttingen he was attached successively to the courts of Hesse-Cassel and Weimar as gentleman-in-waiting. Retiring from court service in 1777, he lived a private life with his family in Frankfort-on-Main, Hanau, Heidelberg and Hanover until 1791, when he was appointed Oberhauptmann (civil administrator) in Bremen, where he died on the 6th of May 1796. Knigge, under the name “Philo,” was one of the most active members of the Illuminati, a mutual moral and intellectual improvement society founded by Adam Weishaupt (1748-1830) at Ingolstadt, and which later became affiliated to the Freemasons. Knigge is known as the author of several novels, among which Der Roman meines Lebens (1781-1787; new ed., 1805) and Die Reise nach Braunschweig (1792), the latter a rather coarsely comic story, are best remembered. His chief literary achievement was, however, Über den Umgang mit Menschen (1788), in which he lays down rules to be observed for a peaceful, happy and useful life; it has been often reprinted.

KNIGHT, CHARLES (1791-1873), English publisher and author, the son of a bookseller and printer at Windsor, was born on the 15th of March 1791. He was apprenticed to his father, but on the completion of his indentures he took up journalism and interested himself in several newspaper speculations. In 1823, in conjunction with friends he had made as publisher (1820-1821) of The Etonian, he started Knight’s Quarterly Magazine, to which W. M. Praed, Derwent Coleridge and Macaulay contributed. The venture was brought to a close with its sixth number, but it initiated for Knight a career as publisher and author which extended over forty years. In 1827 Knight was compelled to give up his publishing business, and became the superintendent of the publications of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, for which he projected and edited The British Almanack and Companion, begun in 1828. In 1829 he resumed business on his own account with the publication of The Library of Entertaining Knowledge, writing several volumes of the series himself. In 1832 and 1833 he started The Penny Magazine and 851 The Penny Cyclopaedia, both of which had a large circulation. The Penny Cyclopaedia, however, on account of the heavy excise duty, was only completed in 1844 at a great pecuniary sacrifice. Besides many illustrated editions of standard works, including in 1842 The Pictorial Shakespeare, which had appeared in parts (1838-1841), Knight published a variety of illustrated works, such as Old England and The Land we Live in. He also undertook the series known as Weekly Volumes. He himself contributed the first volume, a biography of William Caxton. Many famous books, Miss Martineau’s Tales, Mrs Jameson’s Early Italian Painters and G. H. Lewes’s Biographical History of Philosophy, appeared for the first time in this series. In 1853 he became editor of The English Cyclopaedia, which was practically only a revision of The Penny Cyclopaedia, and at about the same time he began his Popular History of England (8 vols., 1856-1862). In 1864 he withdrew from the business of publisher, but he continued to write nearly to the close of his long life, publishing The Shadows of the Old Booksellers (1865), an autobiography under the title Passages of a Working Life during Half a Century (2 vols., 1864-1865), and an historical novel, Begg’d at Court (1867). He died at Addlestone, Surrey, on the 9th of March 1873.

KNIGHT, DANIEL RIDGWAY (1845-  ), American artist, was born at Philadelphia, Penn., in 1845. He was a pupil at the École des Beaux-Arts, Paris, under Gleyre, and later worked in the private studio of Meissonier. After 1872 he lived in France, having a house and studio at Poissy on the Seine. He painted peasant women out of doors with great popular success. He was awarded the silver medal and cross of the Legion of Honour, Exposition Universelle, Paris, 1889, and was made a knight of the Royal Order of St Michael of Bavaria, Munich, 1893, receiving the gold medal of honour from the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, Philadelphia, 1893. His son, Ashton Knight, is also known as a landscape painter.

KNIGHT, JOHN BUXTON (1843-1908), English landscape painter, was born at Sevenoaks, Kent; he started as a schoolmaster, but painting was his hobby, and he subsequently devoted himself to it. In 1861 he had his first picture hung at the Academy. He was essentially an open-air painter, constantly going on sketching tours in the most picturesque spots of England, and all his pictures were painted out of doors. He died at Dover on the 2nd of January 1908. The Chantrey trustees bought his “December’s Bareness Everywhere” for the nation in the following month. Most of his best pictures had passed into the collection of Mr Iceton of Putney (including “White Walls of Old England” and “Hereford Cathedral”), Mr Walter Briggs of Burley in Wharfedale (especially “Pinner”), and Mr S. M. Phillips of Wrotham (especially two water-colours of Richmond Bridge).

KNIGHTHOOD and CHIVALRY. These two words, which are nearly but not quite synonymous, designate a single subject of inquiry, which presents itself under three different although connected and in a measure intermingled aspects. It may be regarded in the first place as a mode or variety of feudal tenure, in the second place as a personal attribute or dignity, and in the third place as a scheme of manners or social arrangements. The first of these aspects is discussed under the headings Feudalism and Knight Service: we are concerned here only with the second and third. For the more important religious as distinguished from the military orders of knighthood or chivalry the reader is referred to the headings St John of Jerusalem, Knights of; Teutonic Knights; and Templars.

“The growth of knighthood” (writes Stubbs) “is a subject on which the greatest obscurity prevails”: and, though J. H. Round has done much to explain the introduction of the system into England,1 its actual origin on the continent of Europe is still obscure in many of its most important details.

The words knight and knighthood are merely the modern forms of the Anglo-Saxon or Old English cniht and cnihthád. Of these the primary signification of the first was a boy or youth, and of the second that period of life which intervenes between childhood and manhood. But some time before the middle of the 12th century they had acquired the meaning they still retain of the French chevalier and chevalerie. In a secondary sense cniht meant a servant or attendant answering to the German Knecht, and in the Anglo-Saxon Gospels a disciple is described as a leorning cniht. In a tertiary sense the word appears to have been occasionally employed as equivalent to the Latin miles—usually translated by thegn—which in the earlier middle ages was used as the designation of the domestic as well as of the martial officers or retainers of sovereigns and princes or great personages.2 Sharon Turner suggests that cniht from meaning an attendant simply may have come to mean more especially a military attendant, and that in this sense it may have gradually superseded the word thegn.3 But the word thegn itself, that is, when it was used as the description of an attendant of the king, appears to have meant more especially a military attendant. As Stubbs says “the thegn seems to be primarily the warrior gesith”—the gesithas forming the chosen band of companions (comites) of the German chiefs (principes) noticed by Tacitus—“he is probably the gesith who had a particular military duty in his master’s service”; and he adds that from the reign of Athelstan “the gesith is lost sight of except very occasionally, the more important class having become thegns, and the lesser sort sinking into the rank of mere servants of the king.”4 It is pretty clear, therefore, that the word cniht could never have superseded the word thegn in the sense of a military attendant, at all events of the king. But besides the king, the ealdormen, bishops and king’s thegns themselves had their thegns, and to these it is more than probable that the name of cniht was applied.

Around the Anglo-Saxon magnates were collected a crowd of retainers and dependants of all ranks and conditions; and there is evidence enough to show that among them were some called cnihtas who were not always the humblest or least considerable of their number.5 The testimony of Domesday also establishes the existence in the reign of Edward the Confessor of what Stubbs describes as a “large class” of landholders who had commended themselves to some lord, and he regards it as doubtful whether their tenure had not already assumed a really feudal character. But in any event it is manifest that their condition was in many respects similar to that of a vast number of unquestionably feudal and military tenants who made their appearance after the Norman Conquest. If consequently the former were called cnihtas under the Anglo-Saxon régime, it seems sufficiently probable that the appellation should have been continued to the latter—practically their successors—under the Anglo-Norman régime. And if the designation of knights was first applied to the military tenants of the earls, bishops and barons—who although they held their lands of mesne lords owed their services to the king—the extension of that designation to the whole body of military tenants need not have been a very violent or prolonged process. Assuming, however, that knight was originally used to describe the military tenant of a noble person, as cniht had sometimes been used to describe the thegn of a noble person, it would, to begin with, have defined rather his social status than the nature of his services. But those whom the English called knights the Normans called chevaliers, by which term the nature of their services was defined, while their social status was left out of consideration. And at first chevalier in its general and honorary signification seems to have been rendered not by knight but by rider, as may be inferred from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, wherein it is recorded under the year 1085 that William the Conqueror “dubbade his sunu Henric to ridere.”6 But, as E. A. Freeman says, “no such title is heard of in the earlier days of England. The thegn, the ealdorman, the king himself, fought on foot; the horse might bear him to the field, but when the fighting 852 itself came he stood on his native earth to receive the onslaught of her enemies.”7 In this perhaps we may behold one of the most ancient of British insular prejudices, for on the Continent the importance of cavalry in warfare was already abundantly understood. It was by means of their horsemen that the Austrasian Franks established their superiority over their neighbours, and in time created the Western Empire anew, while from the word caballarius, which occurs in the Capitularies in the reign of Charlemagne, came the words for knight in all the Romance languages.8 In Germany the chevalier was called Ritter, but neither rider nor chevalier prevailed against knight in England. And it was long after knighthood had acquired its present meaning with us that chivalry was incorporated into our language. It may be remarked too in passing that in official Latin, not only in England but all over Europe, the word miles held its own against both eques and caballarius.

Concerning the origin of knighthood or chivalry as it existed in the middle ages—implying as it did a formal assumption of and initiation into the profession of arms—nothing beyond more or less probable conjecture is possible. Origin of Medieval Knighthood. The medieval knights had nothing to do in the way of derivation with the “equites” of Rome, the knights of King Arthur’s Round Table, or the Paladins of Charlemagne. But there are grounds for believing that some of the rudiments of chivalry are to be detected in early Teutonic customs, and that they may have made some advance among the Franks of Gaul. We know from Tacitus that the German tribes in his day were wont to celebrate the admission of their young men into the ranks of their warriors with much circumstance and ceremony. The people of the district to which the candidate belonged were called together; his qualifications for the privileges about to be conferred upon him were inquired into; and, if he were deemed fitted and worthy to receive them, his chief, his father, or one of his near kinsmen presented him with a shield and a lance. Again, among the Franks we find Charlemagne girding his son Louis the Pious, and Louis the Pious girding his son Charles the Bald with the sword, when they arrived at manhood.9 It seems certain here that some ceremony was observed which was deemed worthy of record not for its novelty, but as a thing of recognized importance. It does not follow that a similar ceremony extended to personages less exalted than the sons of kings and emperors. But if it did we must naturally suppose that it applied in the first instance to the mounted warriors who formed the most formidable portion of the warlike array of the Franks. It was among the Franks indeed, and possibly through their experiences in war with the Saracens, that cavalry first acquired the pre-eminent place which it long maintained in every European country. In early society, where the army is not a paid force but the armed nation, the cavalry must necessarily consist of the noble and wealthy, and cavalry and chivalry, as Freeman observes,10 will be the same. Since then we discover in the Capitularies of Charlemagne actual mention of “caballarii” as a class of warriors, it may reasonably be concluded that formal investiture with arms applied to the “caballarii” if it was a usage extending beyond the sovereign and his heir-apparent. “But,” as Hallam says, “he who fought on horseback and had been invested with peculiar arms in a solemn manner wanted nothing more to render him a knight;” and so he concludes, in view of the verbal identity of “chevalier” and “caballarius,” that “we may refer chivalry in a general sense to the age of Charlemagne.”11 Yet, if the “caballarii” of the Capitularies are really the precursors of the later knights, it remains a difficulty that the Latin name for a knight is “miles,” although “caballarius” became in various forms the vernacular designation.

Before it was known that the chronicle ascribed to Ingulf of Croyland is really a fiction of the 13th or 14th century, the knighting of Heward or Hereward by Brand, abbot of Burgh (now Peterborough), was accepted from Selden to Hallam as Knighthood in England. an historical fact, and knighthood was supposed, not only to have been known among the Anglo-Saxons, but to have had a distinctively religious character which was contemned by the Norman invaders. The genuine evidence at our command altogether fails to support this view. When William of Malmesbury describes the knighting of Athelstan by his grandfather Alfred the Great, that is, his investiture “with a purple garment set with gems and a Saxon sword with a golden sheath,” there is no hint of any religious observance. In spite of the silence of our records, Dr Stubbs thinks that kings so well acquainted with foreign usages as Ethelred, Canute and Edward the Confessor could hardly have failed to introduce into England the institution of chivalry then springing up in every country of Europe; and he is supported in this opinion by the circumstance that it is nowhere mentioned as a Norman innovation. Yet the fact that Harold received knighthood from William of Normandy makes it clear either that Harold was not yet a knight, which in the case of so tried a warrior would imply that “dubbing to knighthood” was not yet known in England even under Edward the Confessor, or, as Freeman thinks, that in the middle of the 11th century the custom had grown in Normandy into “something of a more special meaning” than it bore in England.

Regarded as a method of military organization, the feudal system of tenures was always far better adapted to the purposes of defensive than of offensive warfare. Against invasion it furnished a permanent provision both in men-at-arms and strongholds; nor was it unsuited for the campaigns of neighbouring counts and barons which lasted for only a few weeks, and extended over only a few leagues. But when kings and kingdoms were in conflict, and distant and prolonged expeditions became necessary, it was speedily discovered that the unassisted resources of feudalism were altogether inadequate. It became therefore the manifest interest of both parties that personal services should be commuted into pecuniary payments. Then there grew up all over Europe a system of fining the knights who failed to respond to the sovereign’s call or to stay their full time in the field; and in England this fine developed, from the reign of Henry II. to that of Edward II., into a regular war-tax called escuage or scutage (q.v.). In this way funds for war were placed at the free disposal of sovereigns, and, although the feudatories and their retainers still formed the most considerable portion of their armies, the conditions under which they served were altogether changed. Their military service was now far more the result of special agreement. In the reign of Edward I., whose warlike enterprises after he was king were confined within the four seas, this alteration does not seem to have proceeded very far, and Scotland and Wales were subjugated by what was in the main, if not exclusively, a feudal militia raised as of old by writ to the earls and barons and the sheriffs.12 But the armies of Edward III., Henry V. and Henry VI. during the century of intermittent warfare between England and France were recruited and sustained to a very great extent on the principle of contract.13 On the Continent the systematic employment of mercenaries was both an early and a common practice.

Besides consideration for the mutual convenience of sovereigns and their feudatories, there were other causes which materially contributed towards bringing about those changes in the military system of Europe which were finally The Crusades. accomplished in the 13th and 14th centuries. During the Crusades vast armies were set on foot in which feudal rights 853 and obligations had no place, and it was seen that the volunteers who flocked to the standards of the various commanders were not less but even more efficient in the field than the vassals they had hitherto been accustomed to lead. It was thus established that pay, the love of enterprise and the prospect of plunder—if we leave zeal for the sacred cause which they had espoused for the moment out of sight—were quite as useful for the purpose of enlisting troops and keeping them together as the tenure of land and the solemnities of homage and fealty. Moreover, the crusaders who survived the difficulties and dangers of an expedition to Palestine were seasoned and experienced although frequently impoverished and landless soldiers, ready to hire themselves to the highest bidder, and well worth the wages they received. Again, it was owing to the crusades that the church took the profession of arms under her peculiar protection, and thenceforward the ceremonies of initiation into it assumed a religious as well as a martial character.

To distinguished soldiers of the cross the honours and benefits of knighthood could hardly be refused on the ground that they did not possess a sufficient property qualification—of which perhaps they had denuded themselves in Knighthood independent of Feudalism. order to their equipment for the Holy War. And thus the conception of knighthood as of something distinct from feudalism both as a social condition and a personal dignity arose and rapidly gained ground. It was then that the analogy was first detected between the order of knighthood and the order of priesthood, and that an actual union of monachism and chivalry was effected by the establishment of the religious orders of which the Knights Templars and the Knights Hospitallers were the most eminent examples. As comprehensive in their polity as the Benedictines or Franciscans, they gathered their members from, and soon scattered their possessions over, every country in Europe. And in their indifference to the distinctions of race and nationality they merely accommodated themselves to the spirit which had become characteristic of chivalry itself, already recognized, like the church, as a universal institution which knit together the whole warrior caste of Christendom into one great fraternity irrespective alike of feudal subordination and territorial boundaries. Somewhat later the adoption of hereditary surnames and armorial bearings marked the existence of a large and noble class who either from the subdivision of fiefs or from the effects of the custom of primogeniture were very insufficiently provided for. To them only two callings were generally open, that of the churchman and that of the soldier, and the latter as a rule offered greater attractions than the former in an era of much licence and little learning. Hence the favourite expedient for men of birth, although not of fortune, was to attach themselves to some prince or magnate in whose military service they were sure of an adequate maintenance and might hope for even a rich reward in the shape of booty or of ransom.14 It is probably to this period and these circumstances that we must look for at all events the rudimentary beginnings of the military as well as the religious orders of chivalry. Of the existence of any regularly constituted companionships of the first kind there is no trustworthy evidence until between two and three centuries after fraternities of the second kind had been organized. Soon after the greater crusading societies had been formed similar orders, such as those of St James of Compostella, Calatrava and Alcantara, were established to fight the Moors in Spain instead of the Saracens in the Holy Land. But the members of these orders were not less monks than knights, their statutes embodied the rules of the cloister, and they were bound by the ecclesiastical vows of celibacy, poverty and obedience. From a very early stage in the development of chivalry, however, we meet with the singular institution of brotherhood in arms; and from it the ultimate origin if not of the religious fraternities at any rate of the military companionships is usually derived.15 By this institution a relation was created between two or more monks by voluntary agreement, which was regarded as of far more intimacy and stringency than any which the mere accident of consanguinity implied. Brothers in arms were supposed to be partners in all things save the affections of their “lady-loves.” They shared in every danger and in every success, and each was expected to vindicate the honour of another as promptly and zealously as his own. The plot of the medieval romance of Amis and Amiles is built entirely on such a brotherhood. Their engagements usually lasted through life, but sometimes only for a specified period or during the continuance of specified circumstances, and they were always ratified by oath, occasionally reduced to writing in the shape of a solemn bond and often sanctified by their reception of the Eucharist together. Romance and tradition speak of strange rites—the mingling and even the drinking of blood—as having in remote and rude ages marked the inception of these martial and fraternal associations.16 But in later and less barbarous times they were generally evidenced and celebrated by a formal and reciprocal exchange of weapons and armour. In warfare it was customary for knights who were thus allied to appear similarly accoutred and bearing the same badges or cognisances, to the end that their enemies might not know with which of them they were in conflict, and that their friends might be unable to accord more applause to one than to the other for his prowess in the field. It seems likely enough therefore that there should grow up bodies of knights banded together by engagements of fidelity, although free from monastic obligations; wearing a uniform or livery, and naming themselves after some special symbol or some patron saint of their adoption. And such bodies placed under the command of a sovereign or grand master, regulated by statutes, and enriched by ecclesiastical endowments would have been precisely what in after times such orders as the Garter in England, the Golden Fleece in Burgundy, the Annunziata in Savoy and the St Michael and Holy Ghost in France actually were.17

During the 14th and 15th centuries, as well as somewhat earlier and later, the general arrangements of a European army were always and everywhere pretty much the same.18 Under the sovereign the constable and the marshal Grades of Knighthood. or marshals held the chief commands, their authority being partly joint and partly several. Attendant on them were the heralds, who were the officers of their military court, wherein offences committed in the camp and field were tried and adjudged, and among whose duties it was to carry orders and messages, to deliver challenges and call truces, and to identify and number the wounded and the slain. The main divisions of the army were distributed under the royal and other principal standards, smaller divisions under the banners of some of the greater nobility or of knights banneret, and smaller divisions still under the pennons of knights or, as in distinction from knights banneret they came to be called, knights bachelors. All knights whether bachelors or bannerets were escorted by their squires. But the banner of the banneret always implied a more or less extensive command, while every knight was entitled to bear a pennon and every squire a pencel. All three flags were of such a size as to be conveniently attached to and carried on a lance, and were emblazoned with the arms or some portion of the bearings of their owners. But while the banner was square the pennon, which resembled it in other respects, was either pointed or forked at its extremity, and the pencel, which was considerably less than the others, always terminated in a single tail or streamer.19

If indeed we look at the scale of chivalric subordination from another point of view, it seems to be more properly divisible into four than into three stages, of which two may be called provisional and two final. The bachelor and the banneret were both equally knights, only the one was of greater distinction and authority 854 than the other. In like manner the squire and the page were both in training for knighthood, but the first had advanced further in the process than the second. It is true that the squire was a combatant while the page was not, and that many squires voluntarily served as squires all their lives owing to the insufficiency of their fortunes to support the costs and charges of knighthood. But in the ordinary course of a chivalrous education the successive conditions of page and squire were passed through in boyhood and youth, and the condition of knighthood was reached in early manhood. Every feudal court and castle was in fact a school of chivalry, and although princes and great personages were rarely actually pages or squires, the moral and physical discipline through which they passed was not in any important particular different from that to which less exalted candidates for knighthood were subjected.20 The page, or, as he was more anciently and more correctly called, the “valet” or “damoiseau,” commenced his service and instruction when he was between seven and eight years old, and the initial phase continued for seven or eight years longer. He acted as the constant personal attendant of both his master and mistress. He waited on them in their hall and accompanied them in the chase, served the lady in her bower and followed the lord to the camp.21 From the chaplain and his mistress and her damsels he learnt the rudiments of religion, of rectitude and of love,22 from his master and his squires the elements of military exercise, to cast a spear or dart, to sustain a shield, and to march with the measured tread of a soldier; and from his master and his huntsmen and falconers the “mysteries of the woods and rivers,” or in other words the rules and practices of hunting and hawking. When he was between fifteen and sixteen he became a squire. But no sudden or great alteration was made in his mode of life. He continued to wait at dinner with the pages, although in a manner more dignified according to the notions of the age. He not only served but carved and helped the dishes, proffered the first or principal cup of wine to his master and his guests, and carried to them the basin, ewer or napkin when they washed their hands before and after meat. He assisted in clearing the hall for dancing or minstrelsy, and laid the tables for chess or draughts, and he also shared in the pastimes for which he had made preparation. He brought his master the “vin de coucher” at night, and made his early refection ready for him in the morning. But his military exercises and athletic sports occupied an always increasing portion of the day. He accustomed himself to ride the “great horse,” to tilt at the quintain, to wield the sword and battle-axe, to swim and climb, to run and leap, and to bear the weight and overcome the embarrassments of armour. He inured himself to the vicissitudes of heat and cold, and voluntarily suffered the pains or inconveniences of hunger and thirst, fatigue and sleeplessness. It was then too that he chose his “lady-love,” whom he was expected to regard with an adoration at once earnest, respectful, and the more meritorious if concealed. And when it was considered that he had made sufficient advancement in his military accomplishments, he took his sword to the priest, who laid it on the altar, blessed it, and returned it to him.23 Afterwards he either remained with his early master, relegating most of his domestic duties to his younger companions, or he entered the service of some valiant and adventurous lord or knight of his own selection. He now became a “squire of the body,” and truly an “armiger” or “scutifer,” for he bore the shield and armour of his leader to the field, and, what was a task of no small difficulty and hazard, cased and secured him in his panoply of war before assisting him to mount his courser or charger. It was his function also to display and guard in battle the banner of the baron or banneret or the pennon of the knight he served, to raise him from the ground if he were unhorsed, to supply him with another or his own horse if his was disabled or killed, to receive and keep any prisoners he might take, to fight by his side if he was unequally matched, to rescue him if captured, to bear him to a place of safety if wounded, and to bury him honourably when dead. And after he had worthily and bravely, borne himself for six or seven years as a squire, the time came when it was fitting that he should be made a knight. This, at least, was the current theory; but it is specially dangerous in medieval history to assume too much correspondence between theory and fact. In many castles, and perhaps in most, the discipline followed simply a natural and unwritten code of “fagging” and seniority, as in public schools or on board men-of-war some hundred years or so ago.

Two modes of conferring knighthood appear to have prevailed from a very early period in all countries where chivalry was known. In both of them the essential portion seems to have been the accolade or stroke of the sword. Modes of conferring Knighthood. But while in the one the accolade constituted the whole or nearly the whole of the ceremony, in the other it was surrounded with many additional observances. The former and simpler of these modes was naturally that used in war: the candidate knelt before “the chief of the army or some valiant knight,” who struck him thrice with the flat of a sword, pronouncing a brief formula of creation and of exhortation which varied at the creator’s will.24

In this form a number of knights were made before and after almost every battle between the 11th and the 16th centuries, and its advantages on the score of both convenience and economy gradually led to its general adoption both in time of peace and time of war. On extraordinary occasions indeed the more elaborate ritual continued to be observed. But recourse was had to it so rarely that in England about the beginning of the 15th century it came to be exclusively appropriated to a special king of knighthood. When Segar, garter king of arms, wrote in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, this had been accomplished with such completeness that he does not even mention that there were two ways of creating knights bachelors. “He that is to be made a knight,” he says, “is striken by the prince with a sword drawn upon his back or shoulder, the prince saying, ‘Soys Chevalier,’ and in times past was added ‘Saint George.’ And when the knight rises the prince sayeth ‘Avencez.’ This is the manner of dubbing knights at this present, and that term ‘dubbing’ was the old term in this point, not ‘creating.’ This sort of knights are by the heralds called knights bachelors.” In our days when a knight is personally made he kneels before the sovereign, who lays a sword drawn, ordinarily the sword of state, on either of his shoulders and says, “Rise,” calling him by his Christian name with the addition of “Sir” before it.

855

Very different were the solemnities which attended the creation of a knight when the complete procedure was observed. “The ceremonies and circumstances at the giving this dignity,” says Selden, “in the elder time were of two kinds especially, which we may call courtly and sacred. The courtly were the feasts held at the creation, giving of robes, arms, spurs and the like. The sacred were the holy devotions and what else was used in the church at or before the receiving of the dignity.”25 But the leading authority on the subject is an ancient tract written in French, which will be found at length either in the original or translated by Segar, Dugdale, Byshe and Nicolas, among other English writers.26 Daniel explains his reasons for transcribing it, “tant à cause du detail que de la naïveté du stile et encore plus de la bisarrerie des ceremonies que se faisoient pourtant alors fort sérieusement,” while he adds that these ceremonies were essentially identical in England, France, Germany, Spain and Italy.

The full solemnities for conferring knighthood seem to have been so largely and so early superseded by the practice of dubbing or giving the accolade alone that in England it became at last restricted to such knights as were made at coronations and some other occasions of state. And to them the particular name of Knights of the Bath was assigned, while knights made in the ordinary way were called in distinction from them knights of the sword, as they were also called knights bachelors in distinction from knights banneret.28 It is usually supposed that the first creation of knights of the Bath under that designation was at the coronation of Henry IV.; and before the order of the Bath as a companionship or capitular body was instituted the last creation of them was at the coronation of Charles II. But all knights were also knights of the spur or “equites aurati,” because their spurs were golden or gilt,—the spurs of squires being of silver or white metal,—and these became their peculiar badge in popular estimation and proverbial speech. In the form of their solemn inauguration too, as we have noticed, the spurs together with the sword were always employed as the leading and most characteristic ensigns of knighthood.29

With regard to knights banneret, various opinions have been entertained as to both the nature of their dignity and the qualifications they were required to possess for receiving it at different periods and in different countries. On the Continent the distinction which is commonly but incorrectly made between the nobility and the gentry has never arisen, and it was unknown here while chivalry existed and heraldry was understood. Here, as elsewhere in the old time, a nobleman and a gentleman meant the same thing, namely, a man who under certain conditions of descent was entitled to armorial bearings. Hence Du Cange divides the medieval nobility of France and Spain into three classes: first, barons or ricos hombres; secondly, chevaliers or caballeros; and thirdly, écuyers or infanzons; and to the first, who with their several special titles constituted the greater nobility of either country, he limits the designation of banneret and the right of leading their followers to war under a banner, otherwise a “drapeau quarré” or square flag.30 Selden shows especially from the parliament rolls that the term banneret has been occasionally employed in England as equivalent to baron.31 In Scotland, even as late as the reign of James VI., lords of parliament were always created bannerets as well as barons at their investiture, “part of the ceremony consisting in the display of a banner, and such ‘barones majores’ were thereby entitled to the privilege of having one borne by a retainer before them to the field of a quadrilateral form.”32 In Scotland, too, lords of parliament and bannerets were also called bannerents, banrents or baronets, and in England banneret was often corrupted to baronet. “Even in a patent passed to Sir Ralph Fane, knight under Edward VI., he is called ‘baronettus’ for ‘bannerettus.’”33 In this manner it is not improbable that the title of baronet may have been suggested to the advisers of James I. when the order of Baronets 856 was originally created by him, for it was a question whether the recipients of the new dignity should be designated by that or some other name.34 But there is no doubt that as previously used it was merely a corrupt synonym for banneret, and not the name of any separate dignity. On the Continent, however, there are several recorded examples of bannerets who had an hereditary claim to that honour and its attendant privileges on the ground of the nature of their feudal tenure.35 And generally, at any rate to commence with, it seems probable that bannerets were in every country merely the more important class of feudatories, the “ricos hombres” in contrast to the knights bachelors, who in France in the time of St Louis were known as “pauvres hommes.” In England all the barons or greater nobility were entitled to bear banners, and therefore Du Cange’s observations would apply to them as well as to the barons or greater nobility of France and Spain. But it is clear that from a comparatively early period bannerets whose claims were founded on personal distinction rather than on feudal tenure gradually came to the front, and much the same process of substitution appears to have gone on in their case as that which we have marked in the case of simple knights. According to the Sallade and the Division du Monde, as cited by Selden, bannerets were clearly in the beginning feudal tenants of a certain magnitude and importance and nothing more, and different forms for their creation are given in time of peace and in time of war.36 But in the French Gesta Romanorum the warlike form alone is given, and it is quoted by both Selden and Du Cange. From the latter a more modern version of it is given by Daniel as the only one generally in force.

Plate I.

The knight bachelor whose services and landed possessions entitled him to promotion would apply formally to the commander in the field for the title of banneret. If this were granted, the heralds were called to cut publicly the tails from his pennon: or the commander, as a special honour, might cut them off with his own hands.37 The earliest contemporary mention of knights banneret is in France, Daniel says, in the reign of Philip Augustus, and in England, Selden says in the reign of Edward I. But in neither case is reference made to them in such a manner as to suggest that the dignity was then regarded as new or even uncommon, and it seems pretty certain that its existence on one side could not have long preceded its existence on the other side of the Channel. Sir Alan Plokenet, Sir Ralph Daubeney and Sir Philip Daubeney are entered as bannerets on the roll of the garrison of Caermarthen Castle in 1282, and the roll of Carlaverock records the names and arms of eighty-five bannerets who accompanied Edward I. in his expedition into Scotland in 1300.

What the exact contingent was which bannerets were expected to supply to the royal host is doubtful.38 But, however this may be, in the reign of Edward III. and afterwards bannerets appear as the commanders of a military force raised by themselves and marshalled under their banners: their status and their relations both to the crown and to their followers were mainly the consequences of voluntary contract not of feudal tenure. It is from the reigns of Edward III. and Richard II. also that the two best descriptions we possess of the actual creation of a banneret have been transmitted to us.39 Sir Thomas Smith, writing towards the end of the 16th century, says, after noticing the conditions to be observed in the creation of bannerets, “but this order is almost grown out of use in England”;40 and, during the controversy which arose between the new order of baronets and the crown early in the 17th century respecting their precedence, it was alleged without contradiction in an argument on behalf of the baronets before the privy council that “there are not bannerets now in being, peradventure never shall be.”41 Sir Ralph Fane, Sir Francis Bryan and Sir Ralph Sadler were created bannerets by the Lord Protector Somerset after the battle of Pinkie in 1547, and the better opinion is that this was the last occasion on which the dignity was conferred. It has been stated indeed that Charles I. created Sir John Smith a banneret after the battle of Edgehill in 1642 for having rescued the royal standard from the enemy. But of this there is no sufficient proof. It was also supposed that George III. had created several naval officers bannerets towards the end of the last century, because he knighted them on board ship under the royal standard displayed. This, however, is unquestionably an error.42

On the continent of Europe the degree of knight bachelor disappeared with the military system which had given rise to it. It is now therefore peculiar to the British Empire, where, although very frequently conferred by letters Existing Orders of Knighthood. patent, it is yet the only dignity which is still even occasionally created—as every dignity was formerly created—by means of a ceremony in which the sovereign and the subject personally take part. Everywhere else dubbing or the accolade seems to have become obsolete, and no other species of knighthood, if knighthood it can be called, is known except that which is dependent on admission to some particular order. It is a common error to suppose that baronets are hereditary knights. Baronets are not knights unless they are knighted like anybody else; and, so far from being knights because they are baronets, one of the privileges granted to them shortly after the institution of their dignity was that they, not being knights, and their successors and their eldest sons and heirs-apparent should, when they attained their majority, be entitled if they desired to receive knighthood.43 It is a maxim of the law indeed that, as Coke says, “the knight is by creation and not by descent,” and, although we hear of such designations as the “knight of Kerry” or the “knight of Glin,” they are no more than traditional nicknames, and do not by any means imply that the persons to whom they are applied are knights in a legitimate sense. Notwithstanding, however, that simple knighthood has gone out of use abroad, there are innumerable grand crosses, commanders and companions of a formidable assortment of orders in almost every part of the world.44 (See the section on “Orders of Knighthood” below.)

The United Kingdom has eight orders of knighthood—the Garter, the Thistle, St Patrick, the Bath, the Star of India, St Michael and St George, the Indian Empire and the Royal Victorian Order; and, while the first is undoubtedly the oldest as well as the most illustrious anywhere existing, a fictitious antiquity has been claimed and is even still frequently conceded 857 to the second and fourth, although the third, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth appear to be as contentedly as they are unquestionably recent.

It is, however, certain that the “most noble” Order of the Garter at least was instituted in the middle of the 14th century, when English chivalry was outwardly brightest and the court most magnificent. But in what particular Order of the Garter. year this event occurred is and has been the subject of much difference of opinion. All the original records of the order until after 1416 have perished, and consequently the question depends for its settlement not on direct testimony but on inference from circumstances. The dates which have been selected vary from 1344 (given by Froissart, but almost certainly mistaken) to 1351. The evidence may be examined at length in Nicolas and Beltz; it is indisputable that in the wardrobe account from September 1347 to January 1349, the 21st and 23rd Edward III., the issue of certain habits with garters and the motto embroidered on them is marked for St George’s Day; that the letters patent relating to the preparation of the royal chapel of Windsor are dated in August 1348; and that in the treasury accounts of the prince of Wales there is an entry in November 1348 of the gift by him of “twenty-four garters to the knights of the Society of the Garter.”45 But that the order, although from this manifestly already fully constituted in the autumn of 1348, was not in existence before the summer of 1346 Sir Harris Nicolas proves pretty conclusively by pointing out that nobody who was not a knight could under its statutes have been admitted to it, and that neither the prince of Wales nor several others of the original companions were knighted until the middle of that year.

Regarding the occasion there has been almost as much controversy as regarding the date of its foundation. The “vulgar and more general story,” as Ashmole calls it, is that of the countess of Salisbury’s garter. But commentators are not at one as to which countess of Salisbury was the heroine of the adventure, whether she was Katherine Montacute or Joan the Fair Maid of Kent, while Heylyn rejects the legend as “a vain and idle romance derogatory both to the founder and the order, first published by Polydor Vergil, a stranger to the affairs of England, and by him taken upon no better ground than fama vulgi, the tradition of the common people, too trifling a foundation for so great a building.”46

Another legend is that contained in the preface to the Register or Black Book of the order, compiled in the reign of Henry VIII., by what authority supported is unknown, that Richard I., while his forces were employed against Cyprus and Acre, had been inspired through the instrumentality of St George with renewed courage and the means of animating his fatigued soldiers by the device of tying about the legs of a chosen number of knights a leathern thong or garter, to the end that being thereby reminded of the honour of their enterprise they might be encouraged to redoubled efforts for victory. This was supposed to have been in the mind of Edward III. when he fixed on the garter as the emblem of the order, and it was stated so to have been by Taylor, master of the rolls, in his address to Francis I. of France on his investiture in 1527.47 According to Ashmole the true account of the matter is that “King Edward having given forth his own garter as the signal for a battle which sped fortunately (which with Du Chesne we conceive to be that of Crécy), the victory, we say, being happily gained, he thence took occasion to institute this order, and gave the garter (assumed by him for the symbol of unity and society) preeminence among the ensigns of it.” But, as Sir Harris Nicolas points out—although Ashmole is not open to the correction—this hypothesis rests for its plausibility on the assumption that the order was established before the invasion of France in 1346. And he further observes that “a great variety of devices and mottoes were used by Edward III.; they were chosen from the most trivial causes and were of an amorous rather than of a military character. Nothing,” he adds, “is more likely than that in a crowded assembly a lady should accidentally have dropped her garter; that the circumstance should have caused a smile in the bystanders; and that on its being taken up by Edward he should have reproved the levity of his courtiers by so happy and chivalrous an exclamation, placing the garter at the same time on his own knee, as ‘Dishonoured be he who thinks ill of it.’ Such a circumstance occurring at a time of general festivity, when devices, mottoes and conceits of all kinds were adopted as ornaments or badges of the habits worn at jousts and tournaments, would naturally have been commemorated as other royal expressions seem to have been by its conversion into a device and motto for the dresses at an approaching hastilude.”48 Moreover, Sir Harris Nicolas contends that the order had no loftier immediate origin than a joust or tournament. It consisted of the king and the Black Prince, and 24 knights divided into two bands of 12 like the tilters in a hastilude——at the head of the one being the first, and of the other the second; and to the companions belonging to each, when the order had superseded the Round Table and had become a permanent institution, were assigned stalls either on the sovereign’s or the prince’s side of St George’s Chapel. That Sir Harris Nicolas is accurate in this conjecture seems probable from the selection which was made of the “founder knights.” As Beltz observes, the fame of Sir Reginald Cobham, Sir Walter Manny and the earls of Northampton, Hereford and Suffolk was already established by their warlike exploits, and they would certainly have been among the original companions had the order been then regarded as the reward of military merit only. But, although these eminent warriors were subsequently elected as vacancies occurred, their admission was postponed to that of several very young and in actual warfare comparatively unknown knights, whose claims to the honour may be most rationally explained on the assumption that they had excelled in the particular feats of arms which preceded the institution of the order. The original companionship had consisted of the sovereign and 25 knights, and no change was made in this respect until 1786, when the sons of George III. and his successors were made eligible notwithstanding that the chapter might be complete. In 1805 another alteration was effected by the provision that the lineal descendants of George II. should be eligible in the same manner, except the Prince of Wales for the time being, who was declared to be “a constituent part of the original institution”; and again in 1831 it was further ordained that the privilege accorded to the lineal descendants of George II. should extend to the lineal descendants of George I. Although, as Sir Harris Nicolas observes, nothing is now known of the form of admitting ladies into the order, the description applied to them in the records during the 14th and 15th centuries leaves no doubt that they were regularly received into it. The queen consort, the wives and daughters of knights, and some other women of exalted position, were designated “Dames de la Fraternité de St George,” and entries of the delivery of robes and garters to them are found at intervals in the Wardrobe Accounts from the 50th Edward III. (1376) to the 10th of Henry VII. (1495), the first being Isabel, countess of Bedford, the daughter of the one king, and the last being Margaret and Elizabeth, the daughters of the other king. The effigies of Margaret Byron, wife of Sir Robert Harcourt, K.G., at Stanton Harcourt, and of Alice Chaucer, wife of William de la Pole, duke of Suffolk, K.G., at Ewelme, which date from the reigns of Henry VI. and Edward IV., have garters on their left arms. (See further under “Orders of Knighthood” below.)

It has been the general opinion, as expressed by Sainte Palaye and Mills, that formerly all knights were qualified to confer knighthood.49 But it may be questioned whether the privilege 858 was thus indiscriminately enjoyed even in the earlier days Persons empowered to confer Knighthood. of chivalry. It is true that as much might be inferred from the testimony of the romance writers; historical evidence, however, tends to limit the proposition, and the sounder conclusion appears to be, as Sir Harris Nicolas says, that the right was always restricted in operation to sovereign princes, to those acting under their authority or sanction, and to a few other personages of exalted rank and station.50 In several of the writs for distraint of knighthood from Henry III. to Edward III. a distinction is drawn between those who are to be knighted by the king himself or by the sheriffs of counties respectively, and bishops and abbots could make knights in the 11th and 12th centuries.51 At all periods the commanders of the royal armies had the power of conferring knighthood; as late as the reign of Elizabeth it was exercised among others by Sir Henry Sidney in 1583, and Robert, earl of Essex, in 1595, while under James I. an ordinance of 1622, confirmed by a proclamation of 1623, for the registration of knights in the college of arms, is rendered applicable to all who should receive knighthood from either the king or any of his lieutenants.52 Many sovereigns, too, both of England and of France, have been knighted after their accession to the throne by their own subjects, as, for instance, Edward III. by Henry, earl of Lancaster, Edward VI. by the lord protector Somerset, Louis XI. by Philip, duke of Burgundy, and Francis I. by the Chevalier Bayard. But when in 1543 Henry VIII. appointed Sir John Wallop to be captain of Guisnes, it was considered necessary that he should be authorized in express terms to confer knighthood, which was also done by Edward VI. in his own case when he received knighthood from the duke of Somerset.53 But at present the only subject to whom the right of conferring knighthood belongs is the lord-lieutenant of Ireland, and to him it belongs merely by long usage and established custom. But, by whomsoever conferred, knighthood at one time endowed the recipient with the same status and attributes in every country wherein chivalry was recognized. In the middle ages it was a common practice for sovereigns and princes to dub each other knights much as they were afterwards, and are now, in the habit of exchanging the stars and ribbons of their orders. Henry II. was knighted by his great-uncle David I. of Scotland, Alexander III. of Scotland by Henry III., Edward I. when he was prince by Alphonso X. of Castile, and Ferdinand of Portugal by Edmund of Langley, earl of Cambridge.54 And, long after the military importance of knighthood had practically disappeared, what may be called its cosmopolitan character was maintained: a knight’s title was recognized in all European countries, and not only in that country in which he had received it. In modern times, however, by certain regulations, made in 1823, and repeated and enlarged in 1855, not only is it provided that the sovereign’s permission by royal warrant shall be necessary for the reception by a British subject of any foreign order of knighthood, but further that such permission shall not authorize “the assumption of any style, appellation, rank, precedence, or privilege appertaining to a knight bachelor of the United Kingdom.”55

Since knighthood was accorded either by actual investiture or its equivalent, a counter process of degradation was regarded as necessary for the purpose of depriving anybody who had once received it of the rank and condition Degradation. it implied.56 The cases in which a knight has been formally degraded in England are exceedingly few, so few indeed that two only are mentioned by Segar, writing in 1602, and Dallaway says that only three were on record in the College of Arms when he wrote in 1793. The last case was that of Sir Francis Michell in 1621, whose spurs were hacked from his heels, his sword-belt cut, and his sword broken over his head by the heralds in Westminster Hall.57

Roughly speaking, the age of chivalry properly so called may be said to have extended from the beginning of the crusades to the end of the Wars of the Roses. Even in the way of pageantry and martial exercise it did not long survive the middle ages. In England tilts and tourneys, in which her father had so much excelled, were patronized to the last by Queen Elizabeth, and were even occasionally held until after the death of Henry, prince of Wales. But on the Continent they were discredited by the fatal accident which befell Henry II. of France in 1559. The golden age of chivalry has been variously located. Most writers would place it in the early 13th century, but Gautier would remove it two or three generations further back. It may be true that, in the comparative scarcity of historical evidence, 12th-century romances present a more favourable picture of chivalry at that earlier time; but even such historical evidence as we possess, when carefully scrutinized, is enough to dispel the illusion that there was any period of the middle ages in which the unselfish championship of “God and the ladies” was anything but a rare exception.

It is difficult to describe the true spirit and moral influence of knighthood, if only because the ages in which it flourished differed so widely from our own. At its very best, it was always hampered by the limitations of medieval society. Moreover, many of the noblest precepts of the knightly code were a legacy from earlier ages, and have survived the decay of knighthood just as they will survive all transitory human institutions, forming part of the eternal heritage of the race. Indeed, the most important of these precepts did not even attain to their highest development in the middle ages. As a conscious effort to bring religion into daily life, chivalry was less successful than later puritanism; while the educated classes of our own day far surpass the average medieval knight in discipline, self-control and outward or inward refinement. Freeman’s estimate comes far nearer to the historical facts than Burke’s: “The chivalrous spirit is above all things a class spirit. The good knight is bound to endless fantastic courtesies towards men and still more towards women of a certain rank; he may treat all below that rank with any decree of scorn and cruelty. The spirit of chivalry implies the arbitrary choice of one or two virtues to be practised in such an exaggerated degree as to become vices, while the ordinary laws of right and wrong are forgotten. The false code of honour supplants the laws of the commonwealth, the law of God and the eternal principles of right. Chivalry again in its military aspect not only encourages the love of war for its own sake without regard to the cause for which war is waged, it encourages also an extravagant regard for a fantastic show of personal daring which cannot in any way advance the objects of the siege or campaign which is going on. Chivalry in short is in morals very much what feudalism is in law: each substitutes purely personal obligations devised in the interests of an exclusive class, for the more homely duties of an honest man and a good citizen” (Norman Conquest, v. 482). The chivalry from which Burke drew his ideas was, so far as it existed at all, the product of a far later age. In its own age, chivalry rested practically, like the highest civilization of ancient Greece and Rome, on slave labour;58 and if many of its 859 most brilliant outward attractions have now faded for ever, this is only because modern civilization tends so strongly to remove social barriers. The knightly ages will always enjoy the glory of having formulated a code of honour which aimed at rendering the upper classes worthy of their exceptional privileges; yet we must judge chivalry not only by its formal code but also by its practical fruits. The ideal is well summed up by F. W. Cornish: “Chivalry taught the world the duty of noble service willingly rendered. It upheld courage and enterprise in obedience to rule, it consecrated military prowess to the service of the Church, glorified the virtues of liberality, good faith, unselfishness and courtesy, and above all, courtesy to women. Against these may be set the vices of pride, ostentation, love of bloodshed, contempt of inferiors, and loose manners. Chivalry was an imperfect discipline, but it was a discipline, and one fit for the times. It may have existed in the world too long: it did not come into existence too early; and with all its shortcomings it exercised a great and wholesome influence in raising the medieval world from barbarism to civilization” (p. 27). This was the ideal, but to give the reader a clear view of the actual features of knightly society in their contrast with that of our own day, it is necessary to bring out one or two very significant shadows.

Far too much has been made of the extent to which the knightly code, and the reverence paid to the Virgin Mary, raised the position of women (e.g. Gautier, p. 360). As Gautier himself admits, the feudal system made it difficult to separate the woman’s person from her fief: instead of the freedom of Christian marriage on which the Church in theory insisted, lands and women were handed over together, as a business bargain, by parents or guardians. In theory, the knight was the defender of widows and orphans; but in practice wardships and marriages were bought and sold as a matter of everyday routine like stocks and shares in the modern market. Lord Thomas de Berkeley (1245-1321) counted on this as a regular and considerable source of income (Smyth, Lives, i. 157). Late in the 15th century, in spite of the somewhat greater liberty of that age, we find Stephen Scrope writing nakedly to a familiar correspondent “for very need [of poverty], I was fain to sell a little daughter I have for much less than I should have done by possibility,” i.e. than the fair market price (Gairdner, Paston Letters, Introduction, p. clxxvi; cf. ccclxxi). Startling as such words are, it is perhaps still more startling to find how frequently and naturally, in the highest society, ladies were degraded by personal violence. The proofs of this which Schultz and Gautier adduce from the Chansons de Geste might be multiplied indefinitely. The Knight of La Tour-Landry (1372) relates, by way of warning to his daughters, a tale of a lady who so irritated her husband by scolding him in company, that he struck her to the earth with his fist and kicked her in the face, breaking her nose. Upon this the good knight moralizes: “And this she had for her euelle and gret langage, that she was wont to saie to her husbonde. And therfor the wiff aught to suffre and lete her husbonde haue the wordes, and to be maister, for that is her worshippe; for it is shame to here striff betwene hem, and in especial before folke. But y saie not but whanne thei be allone, but she may tolle hym with goodly wordes, and counsaile hym to amende yef he do amys” (La Tour, chap. xviii.; cf. xvii. and xix.). The right of wife-beating was formally recognized by more than one code of laws, and it was already a forward step when, in the 13th century, the Coutumes du Beauvoisis provided “que le mari ne doit battre sa femme que raisonnablement” (Gautier, p. 349). This was a natural consequence not only of the want of self-control which we see everywhere in the middle ages, but also of the custom of contracting child-marriages for unsentimental considerations. Between 1288 and 1500 five marriages are recorded in the direct line of the Berkeley family in which the ten contracting parties averaged less than eleven years of age: the marriage contract of another Lord Berkeley was drawn up before he was six years old. Moreover, the same business considerations which dictated those early marriages clashed equally with the strict theory of knighthood. In the same Berkeley family, the lord Maurice IV. was knighted in 1338 at the age of seven to avoid the possible evils of wardship, and Thomas V. for the same reason in 1476 at the age of five. Smyth’s record of this great family shows that, from the middle of the 13th century onwards, the lords were not only statesmen and warriors, but still more distinguished as gentlemen-farmers on a great scale, even selling fruit from the castle gardens, while their ladies would go round on tours of inspection from dairy to dairy. The lord Thomas III. (1326-1361), who was noted as a special lover of tournaments, spent in two years only £90, or an average of about £15 per tournament; yet he was then laying money by at the rate of £450 a year, and, a few years later, at the rate of £1150, or nearly half his income! Indeed, economic causes contributed much to the decay of romantic chivalry. The old families had lost heavily from generation to generation, partly by personal extravagances, but also by gradual alienations of land to the Church and by the enormous expenses of the crusades. Already, in the 13th century, they were hard pressed by the growing wealth of the burghers, and even the greatest nobles could scarcely keep up their state without careful business management. It is not surprising therefore, to find that at least as early as the middle of the 13th century the commercial side of knighthood became very prominent. Although by the code of chivalry no candidate could be knighted before the age of twenty-one, we have seen how great nobles like the Berkeleys obtained that honour for their infant heirs in order to avoid possible pecuniary loss; and French writers of the 14th century complained of this knighting of infants as a common and serious abuse.59 Moreover, after the knight’s liability to personal service in war had been modified in the 12th century by the scutage system, it became necessary in the first quarter of the 13th to compel landowners to take up the knighthood which in theory they should have coveted as an honour—a compulsion which was soon systematically enforced (Distraint of Knighthood, 1278), and became a recognized source of royal income. An indirect effect of this system60 was to break down another rule of the chivalrous code—that none could be dubbed who was not of gentle birth.61 This rule, however, had often been broken before; even the romances of chivalry speak not infrequently of the knighting of serfs or jongleurs;62 and other causes besides distraint of knighthood tended to level the old distinctions. While knighthood was avoided by poor nobles, it was coveted by rich citizens. It is recorded in 1298 as “an immemorial custom” in Provence that rich burghers enjoyed the honour of knighthood; and less than a century later we find Sacchetti complaining that the dignity is open to any rich upstart, however disreputable his antecedents.63 Similar causes contributed to the decay of knightly ideas in warfare. Even in the 12th century, when war was still rather the pastime of kings and knights than 860 a national effort, the strict code of chivalry was more honoured in the breach than in the observance.64 But when the Hundred Years’ War brought a real national conflict between England and France, when archery became of supreme importance, and a large proportion even of the cavalry were mercenary soldiers, then the exigencies of serious warfare swept away much of that outward display and those class-conventions on which chivalry had always rested. Siméon Luce (chap. vi.) has shown how much the English successes in this war were due to strict business methods. Several of the best commanders (e.g. Sir Robert Knolles and Sir Thomas Dagworth) were of obscure birth, while on the French side even Du Guesclin had to wait long for his knighthood because he belonged only to the lesser nobility. The tournament again, which for two centuries had been under the ban of the Church, was often almost as definitely discouraged by Edward III. as it was encouraged by John of France; and while John’s father opened the Crécy campaign by sending Edward a challenge in due form of chivalry, Edward took advantage of this formal delay to amuse the French king with negotiations while he withdrew his army by a rapid march from an almost hopeless position. A couple of quotations from Froissart will illustrate the extent to which war had now become a mere business. Much as he admired the French chivalry, he recognized their impotence at Crécy. “The sharp arrows ran into the men of arms and into their horses, and many fell, horse and men.... And also among the Englishmen there were certain rascals that went afoot with great knives, and they went in among the men of arms, and slew and murdered many as they lay on the ground, both earls, barons, knights and squires, whereof the king of England was after displeased, for he had rather they had been taken prisoners.” How far Edward’s solicitude was disinterested may be gauged from Froissart’s parallel remark about the battle of Aljubarrota, where, as at Agincourt, the handful of victors were obliged by a sudden panic to slay their prisoners. “Lo, behold the great evil adventure that fell that Saturday. For they slew as many good prisoners as would well have been worth, one with another, four hundred thousand franks.” In 1402 Lord Thomas de Berkeley bought, as a speculation, 24 Scottish prisoners. Similar practical considerations forced the nobles of other European countries either to conform to less sentimental methods of warfare and to growing conceptions of nationality, or to become mere Ishmaels of the type which outlived the middle ages in Götz von Berlichingen and his compeers.

Orders of Knighthood

When orders ceased to be fraternities and became more and more marks of favour and a means of recognizing meritorious services to the Crown and country, the term “orders” became loosely applied to the insignia and decorations themselves. Thus “orders,” irrespective of the title or other specific designation they confer, fall in Great Britain generally into three main categories, according as the recipients are made “knights grand cross,” “knights commander,” or “companions.” In some orders the classes are more numerous, as in the Royal Victorian, for instance, which has five, numerous foreign orders a like number, some six, while the Chinese “Dragon” boasts no less than eleven degrees. Generally speaking, the insignia of the “knights grand cross” consist of a star worn on the left breast and a badge, usually some form either of the cross patée or of the Maltese cross, worn suspended from a ribbon over the shoulder or, in certain cases, on days of high ceremonial from a collar. The “commanders” wear the badge from a ribbon round the neck, and the star on the breast; the “companions” have no star and wear the badge from a narrow ribbon at the button-hole.

Orders may, again, be grouped according as they are (1) Prime Orders of Christendom, conferred upon an exclusive class only. Here belong, inter alia, the well-known orders of the Garter (England), Golden Fleece (Austria and Spain), Annunziata (Italy), Black Eagle (Prussia), St Andrew (Russia), Elephant (Denmark) and Seraphim (Sweden). Of these the first three only, which are usually held to rank inter se in the order given, are historically identified with chivalry. (2) Family Orders, bestowed upon members of the royal or princely class, or upon humbler individuals according to classes, in respect of “personal” services rendered to the family. To this category belong such orders as the Royal Victorian and the Hohenzollern (Prussia). (3) Orders of Merit, whether military, civil or joint orders. Such have, as a rule, at least three, oftener five classes, and here belong such as the Order of the Bath (British), Red Eagle (Prussia), Legion of Honour (France). There are also certain orders, such as the recently instituted Order of Merit (British), and the Pour le Mérite (Prussia), which have but one class, all members being on an equality of rank within the order.

Of the three great military and religious orders, branches survive of two, the Teutonic Order (Der hohe deutsche Ritter Orden or Marianen Orden) and the Knights of St John of Jerusalem (Johanniter Orden, Malteser Orden), for the history of which and the present state see Teutonic Order and St John of Jerusalem, Knights of the Order of.

Great Britain.—The history and constitution of the “most noble” Order of the Garter has been treated above. The officers of the order are five—the prelate, chancellor, registrar, king of arms and usher—the first, third and fifth having been attached to it from the commencement, while the fourth was added by Henry V. and the second by Edward IV. The prelate has always been the bishop of Winchester; the chancellor was formerly the bishop of Salisbury, but is now the bishop of Oxford; the registrarship and the deanery of Windsor have been united since the reign of Charles I.; the king of arms, whose duties were in the beginning discharged by Windsor herald, is Garter Principal King of Arms; and the usher is the gentleman usher of the Black Rod. The chapel of the order is St George’s Chapel, Windsor. The insignia of the order are illustrated on Plate I.

The “most ancient” Order of the Thistle, was founded by James II. in 1687, and dedicated to St Andrew. It consisted of the sovereign and eight knights companions, and fell into abeyance at the Revolution of 1688. In 1703 it was revived by Queen Anne, when it was ordained to consist of the sovereign and 12 knights companions, the number being increased to 16 by statute in 1827. The officers of the order are the dean, the secretary, Lyon King of Arms and the gentleman usher of the Green Rod. The chapel, in St Giles’s, Edinburgh, was begun in 1909. The star, badge and ribbon of the order are illustrated on Plate II., figs. 5 and 6. The collar is formed of thistles, alternating with sprigs of rue, and the motto is Nemo me impune lacessit.

Plate II.

861

The “most illustrious” Order of St Patrick was instituted by George III. in 1788, to consist of the sovereign, the lord lieutenant of Ireland as grand master and 15 knights companions, enlarged to 22 in 1833. The chancellor of the order is the chief secretary to the lord lieutenant of Ireland, and the king of arms is Ulster King of Arms; Black Rod is the usher. The chapel is in St Patrick’s Cathedral, Dublin. The star, badge and ribbon are illustrated on Plate II., figs. 7 and 8. The collar is formed of alternate roses with red and white leaves, and gold harps linked by gold knots; the badge is suspended from a harp surmounted by an imperial jewelled crown. The motto is Quis separabit?

The “most honourable” Order of the Bath was established by George I. in 1725, to consist of the sovereign, a grand master and 36 knights companions. This was a pretended revival of an order supposed to have been created by Henry IV. at his coronation in 1399. But, as has been shown in the preceding section, no such order existed. Knights of the Bath, although they were allowed precedence before knights bachelors, were merely knights bachelors who were knighted with more elaborate ceremonies than others and on certain great occasions. In 1815 the order was instituted, in three classes, “to commemorate the auspicious termination of the long and arduous contest in which the Empire has been engaged”; and in 1847 the civil knights commanders and companions were added. Exclusive of the sovereign, royal princes and distinguished foreigners, the order is limited to 55 military and 27 civil knights grand cross, 145 military and 108 civil knights commanders, and 705 military and 298 civil companions. The officers of the order are the dean (the dean of Westminster), Bath King of Arms, the registrar, and the usher of the Scarlet Rod. The ribbon and badges of the knights grand cross (civil and military) and the stars are illustrated on Plate II., figs. 1, 2, 3 and 4.

The “most distinguished” Order of St Michael and St George was founded by the prince regent, afterwards George IV., in 1818, in commemoration of the British protectorate of the Ionian Islands, “for natives of the Ionian Islands and of the island of Malta and its dependencies, and for such other subjects of his majesty as may hold high and confidential situations in the Mediterranean.” By statute of 1832 the lord high commissioner of the Ionian Islands was to be the grand master, and the order was directed to consist of 15 knights grand crosses, 20 knights commanders and 25 cavaliers or companions. After the repudiation of the British protectorate of the Ionian Islands, the order was placed on a new basis, and by letters patent of 1868 and 1877 it was extended and provided for such of “the natural born subjects of the Crown of the United Kingdom as may have held or shall hold high and confidential offices within her majesty’s colonial possessions, and in reward for services rendered to the crown in relation to the foreign affairs of the Empire.” It is now (by the enlargement of 1902) limited to 100 knights grand cross, of whom the first or principal is grand master, exclusive of extra and honorary members, of 300 knights commanders and 600 companions. The officers are the prelate, chancellor, registrar, secretary and officer of arms. The chapel of the order, in St Paul’s Cathedral, was dedicated in 1906. The badge of the knights grand cross and the ribbon are illustrated on Plate II., figs. 9 and 10. The star of the knights grand cross is a seven-rayed star of silver with a small ray of gold between each, in the centre is a red St George’s cross bearing a medallion of St Michael encountering Satan, surrounded by a blue fillet with the motto Auspicium melioris aevi.

The Order of St Michael and St George ranks between the “most exalted” Order of the Star of India and the “most eminent” Order of the Indian Empire, of both of which the viceroy of India for the time being is ex officio grand master. Of these the first was instituted in 1861 and enlarged in 1876, 1897 and 1903, in three classes, knights grand commanders, knights commanders and companions, and the second was established (for “companions” only) in 1878 and enlarged in 1887, 1892, 1897 and 1903, also in the same three classes, in commemoration of Queen Victoria’s assumption of the imperial style and title of the Empress of India. The badges, stars and ribbons of the knights grand commanders of the two orders are illustrated on Plate III., figs. 3, 4, 5 and 6. The collar of the Star of India is composed of alternate links of the lotus flower, red and white roses and palm branches enamelled on gold, with an imperial crown in the centre; that of the Indian Empire is composed of elephants, peacocks and Indian roses.

The Royal Victorian Order was instituted by Queen Victoria on the 25th of April 1896, and conferred for personal services rendered to her majesty and her successors on the throne. It consists of the sovereign, chancellor, secretary and five classes—knights grand commanders, knights commanders, commanders and members of the fourth and fifth classes, the distinction between these last divisions lying in the badge and in the precedence enjoyed by the members. The knights of this order rank in their respective classes immediately after those of the Indian Empire, and its numbers are unlimited. The badge, star and ribbon of the knights grand cross are illustrated on Plate III., figs. 1 and 2.

To the class of orders without the titular appellation “knight” belongs the Order of Merit, founded by King Edward VII. on the occasion of his coronation. The order is founded on the lines of the Prussian Ordre pour le mérite (see below), yet more comprehensive, including those who have gained distinction in the military and naval services of the Empire, and such as have made themselves a great name in the fields of science, art and literature. The number of British members has been fixed at twenty-four, with the addition of such foreign persons as the sovereign shall appoint. The names of the first recipients were: Earl Roberts, Viscount Wolseley, Viscount Kitchener, Sir Henry Keppel, Sir Edward Seymour, Lord Lister, Lord Rayleigh, Lord Kelvin, John Morley, W. E. H. Lecky, G. F. Watts and Sir William Huggins. The only foreign recipients up to 1910 were Field Marshals Yamagata and Oyama and Admiral Togo. A lady, Miss Florence Nightingale, received the order in 1907. The badge is a cross of red and blue enamel surmounted by an imperial crown; the central blue medallion bears the inscription “For Merit” in gold, and is surrounded by a wreath of laurel. The badge of the military and naval members bears two crossed swords in the angles of the cross. The ribbon is garter blue and crimson and is worn round the neck.

The Golden Fleece (La Toison d’Or) ranks historically and in distinction as one of the great knightly orders of Europe. It is 862 now divided into two branches, of Austria and Spain. It was founded on the 10th of January, 1429/30 by Philip the Good, duke of Burgundy, on the day of his marriage with Isabella of Portugal at Bruges, in her honour and dedicated to the Virgin and St Andrew. No certain origin can be given for the name. It seems to have been in dispute even in the early history of the order. Four different sources have been suggested; the classical myth of the voyage of Jason and the Argonauts for the golden fleece, the scriptural story of Gideon, the staple trade of Flanders in wool, and the fleece of golden hair of Marie de Rambrugge, the duke’s mistress. Motley (Rise of Dutch Rep., i. 48) says: “What could be more practical and more devout than the conception? Did not the Lamb of God, suspended at each knight’s heart, symbolize at once the woollen fabrics to which so much of Flemish wealth and Burgundian power was owing, and the gentle humility of Christ which was ever to characterize the order?” At its constitution the number of the knights was limited to 24, exclusive of the grand master, the sovereign. The members were to be gentilshommes de nom et d’armes et sans reproche, not knights of any other order, and vowed to join their sovereign in the defence of the Catholic faith, the protection of Holy Church, and the upholding of virtue and good morals. The sovereign undertook to consult the knights before embarking on a war, all disputes between the knights were to be settled by the order, at each chapter the deeds of each knight were held in review, and punishments and admonitions were dealt out to offenders; to this the sovereign was expressly subject. Thus we find that the emperor Charles V. accepted humbly the criticism of the knights of the Fleece on his over-centralization of the government and the wasteful personal attention to details (E. A. Armstrong, Charles V., 1902, ii. 373). The knights could claim as of right to be tried by their fellows on charges of rebellion, heresy and treason, and Charles V. conferred on the order exclusive jurisdiction over all crimes committed by the knights. The arrest of the offender had to be by warrant signed by at least six knights, and during the process of charge and trial he remained not in prison but dans l’aimable compagnie du dit ordre. It was in defiance of this right that Alva refused the claim of Counts Egmont and Horn to be tried by the knights of the Fleece in 1568. During the 16th century the order frequently acted as a consultative body in the state; thus in 1539 and 1540 Charles summons the knights with the council of state and the privy council to decide what steps should be taken in face of the revolt of Ghent (Armstrong, op. cit., i. 302), in 1562 Margaret of Parma, the regent, summons them to Brussels to debate the dangerous condition of the provinces (Motley, i. 48), and they were present at the abdication of Charles in the great hall at Brussels in 1555. The history of the order and its subsequent division into the two branches of Austria and Spain may be briefly summarized. By the marriage of Mary, only daughter of Charles the Bold of Burgundy to Maximilian, archduke of Austria, 1477, the grand mastership of the order came to the house of Habsburg and, with the Netherlands provinces, to Spain in 1504 on the accession of Philip, Maximilian’s son, to Castile. On the extinction of the Habsburg dynasty in Spain by the death of Charles II. in 1700 the grand-mastership, which had been filled by the kings of Spain after the loss of the Netherlands, was claimed by the emperor Charles VI., and he instituted the order in Vienna in 1713. Protests were made at various times by Philip V., but the question has never been finally decided by treaty, and the Austrian and Spanish branches have continued as independent orders ever since as the principal order of knighthood in the respective states. It may be noticed that while the Austrian branch excludes any other than Roman Catholics from the order, the Spanish Fleece may be granted to Protestants. The badges of the two branches vary slightly in detail, more particularly in the attachment of fire-stones (fusils or furisons) and steels by which the fleece is attached to the ribbon of the collar. The Spanish form is given on Plate IV., fig. 2. The collar is composed of alternate links of furisons and double steels interlaced to form the letter B for Burgundy. A magnificent exhibition of relics, portraits of knights and other objects connected with the order of the Golden Fleece was held at Bruges in 1907.

France.—The Legion of Honour, the only order of France, and one which in its higher grades ranks in estimation with the highest European orders, was instituted by Napoleon Bonaparte on the 19th of May 1802 (29 Floreal of the year X.) as a general military and civil order of merit. All soldiers on whom “swords of honour” had been already conferred were declared legionaries ipso facto, and all citizens after 25 years’ service were declared eligible, whatever their birth, rank or religion. On admission all were to swear to co-operate so far as in them lay for the assertion of the principles of liberty and equality. The organization as laid down by Napoleon in 1804 was as follows: Napoleon was grand master; a grand council of 7 grand officers administered the order; the order was divided into 15 “cohorts” of 7 grand officers, 20 commanders, 30 officers and 350 legionaries, and at the headquarters of the cohorts, for which the territory of France was separated into 15 divisions, were maintained hospitals for the support of the sick and infirm legionaries. Salaries (traitements) varying in each rank were attached to the order. In 1805 the rank of “Grand Eagle” (now Grand Cross, or Grand Cordon) was instituted, taking precedence of the grand officers. At the Restoration many changes were made, the old military and religious orders were restored, and the Legion of Honour, now Ordre Royale de la Légion d’Honneur, took the lowest rank. The revolution of July 1830 restored the order to its unique place. The constitution of the order now rests on the decrees of the 16th of March and 24th of November 1852, the law of the 25th of July 1873, the decree of the 29th of December 1892, and the laws of the 16th of April 1895 and the 28th of January 1897, and a decree of the 26th of June 1900. The president of the republic is the grand master of the order; the administration is in the hands of a grand chancellor, who has a council of the order nominated by the grand master. The chancellery is housed in the Palais de la Légion de l’Honneur, which, burnt during the Commune, was rebuilt in 1878. The order consists of the five classes of grand cross (limited to 80), grand officer (200), commander (1000), officers (4000), and chevalier or knight, in which the number is unlimited. These limitations in number do not affect the foreign recipients of the order. Salaries (traitements) are attached to the military and naval recipients of the order when on the active list, viz. 3000 francs for grand cross, 2000 francs for grand officers, 1000 francs for commanders, 250 francs for chevaliers. The numbers of the recipients of the order sans traitement are limited through all classes. In ordinary circumstances twenty years of military, naval or civil service must have been performed before a candidate can be eligible for the rank of chevalier, and promotions can only be made after definite service in the lower rank. Extraordinary service in time of war and extraordinary services in civil life admit to any rank. Women have been decorated, notably Rosa Bonheur, Madame Curie and Madame Bartet. The Napoleonic form of the grand cross and ribbon is illustrated on Plate IV, fig. 6; the cross from which the drawing was made was given to King Edward VII. when prince of Wales in 1863. In the present order of the French Republic the symbolical head of the Republic appears in the centre, and a laurel wreath replaces the imperial crown; the inscription round the medallion is République française. Since 1805 there has existed an institution, Maison d’éducation de la Legion d’Honneur, for the education of the daughters, granddaughters, sisters and nieces of members of the Legion of Honour. There are three houses, at Saint Denis, at Écouen and Les Loges (see Dictionnaire de l’administration française, by M. Block and E. Magnéro, 1905, s.v. “Decorations”).

KNIGHT-SERVICE, the dominant and distinctive tenure of land under the feudal system. It is associated in its origin with that development in warfare which made the mailed horseman, armed with lance and sword, the most important factor in battle. Till within recent years it was believed that knight-service was developed out of the liability, under the English system, of every five hides to provide one soldier in war. It is now held that, on the contrary, it was a novel system which was introduced after the Conquest by the Normans, who relied essentially on their mounted knights, while the English fought on foot. They were already familiar with the principle of knight-service, the knight’s fee, as it came to be termed in England, being represented in Normandy by the fief du haubert, so termed from the hauberk or coat of mail (lorica) which was worn by the knight. Allusion is made to this in the coronation charter of Henry I. (1100), which speaks of those holding by knight-service as milites qui per loricam terras suas deserviunt.

The Conqueror, it is now held, divided the lay lands of England among his followers, to be held by the service of a fixed number of knights in his host, and imposed the same service on most of the great ecclesiastical bodies which retained their landed endowments. No record evidence exists of this action on his part, and the quota of knight-service exacted was not determined by the 868 area or value of the lands granted (or retained), but was based upon the unit of the feudal host, the constabularia of ten knights. Of the tenants-in-chief or barons (i.e. those who held directly of the crown), the principal were called on to find one or more of these units, while of the lesser ones some were called on for five knights, that is, half a constabularia. The same system was adopted in Ireland when that country was conquered under Henry II. The baron who had been enfeoffed by his sovereign on these terms could provide the knights required either by hiring them for pay or, more conveniently when wealth was mainly represented by land, by a process of subenfeoffment, analogous to that by which he himself had been enfeoffed. That is to say, he could assign to an under-tenant a certain portion of his fief to be held by the service of finding one or more knights. The land so held would then be described as consisting of one or more knights’ fees, but the knight’s fee had not, as was formerly supposed, any fixed area. This process could be carried farther till there was a chain of mesne lords between the tenant-in-chief and the actual holder of the land; but the liability for performance of the knight-service was always carefully defined.

The primary obligation incumbent on every knight was service in the field, when called upon, for forty days a year, with specified armour and arms. There was, however, a standing dispute as to whether he could be called upon to perform this service outside the realm, nor was the question of his expenses free from difficulty. In addition to this primary duty he had, in numerous cases at least, to perform that of “castle ward” at his lord’s chief castle for a fixed number of days in the year. On certain baronies also was incumbent the duty of providing knights for the guard of royal castles, such as Windsor, Rockingham and Dover. Under the feudal system the tenant by knight-service had also the same pecuniary obligations to his lord as had his lord to the king. These consisted of (1) “relief,” which he paid on succeeding to his lands; (2) “wardship,” that is, the profits from his lands during a minority; (3) “marriage,” that is, the right of giving in marriage, unless bought off, his heiress, his heir (if a minor) and his widow; and also of the three “aids” (see Aids).

The chief sources of information for the extent and development of knight-service are the returns (cartae) of the barons (i.e. the tenants-in-chief) in 1166, informing the king, at his request, of the names of their tenants by knight-service with the number of fees they held, supplemented by the payments for “scutage” (see Scutage) recorded on the pipe rolls, by the later returns printed in the Testa de Nevill, and by the still later ones collected in Feudal Aids. In the returns made in 1166 some of the barons appear as having enfeoffed more and some less than the number of knights they had to find. In the latter case they described the balance as being chargeable on their “demesne,” that is, on the portion of their fief which remained in their own hands. These returns further prove that lands had already been granted for the service of a fraction of a knight, such service being in practice already commuted for a proportionate money payment; and they show that the total number of knights with which land held by military service was charged was not, as was formerly supposed, sixty thousand, but, probably, somewhere between five and six thousand. Similar returns were made for Normandy, and are valuable for the light they throw on its system of knight-service.

The principle of commuting for money the obligation of military service struck at the root of the whole system, and so complete was the change of conception that “tenure by knight-service of a mesne lord becomes, first in fact and then in law, tenure by escuage (i.e. scutage).” By the time of Henry III., as Bracton states, the test of tenure was scutage; liability, however small, to scutage payment made the tenure military.

The disintegration of the system was carried farther in the latter half of the 13th century as a consequence of changes in warfare, which were increasing the importance of foot soldiers and making the service of a knight for forty days of less value to the king. The barons, instead of paying scutage, compounded for their service by the payment of lump sums, and, by a process which is still obscure, the nominal quotas of knight-service due from each had, by the time of Edward I., been largely reduced. The knight’s fee, however, remained a knight’s fee, and the pecuniary incidents of military tenure, especially wardship, marriage, and fines on alienation, long continued to be a source of revenue to the crown. But at the Restoration (1660) tenure by knight-service was abolished by law (12 Car. II. c. 24), and with it these vexatious exactions were abolished.

KNIGHTS OF THE GOLDEN CIRCLE, a semi-military secret society in the United States in the Middle West, 1861-1864, the purpose of which was to bring the Civil War to a close and restore the “Union as it was.” There is some evidence that before the Civil War there was a Democratic secret organization of the same name, with its principal membership in the Southern States. After the outbreak of the Civil War many of the Democrats of the Middle West, who were opposed to the war policy of the Republicans, organized the Knights of the Golden Circle, pledging themselves to exert their influence to bring about peace. In 1863, owing to the disclosure of some of its secrets, the organization took the name of Order of American Knights, and in 1864 this became the Sons of Liberty. The total membership of this order probably reached 250,000 to 300,000, principally in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin, Kentucky and south-western Pennsylvania. Fernando Wood of New York seems to have been the chief officer and in 1864 Clement L. Vallandigham became the second in command. The great importance of the Knights of the Golden Circle and its successors was due to its opposition to the war policy of the Republican administration. The plan was to overthrow the Lincoln government in the elections and give to the Democrats the control of the state and Federal governments, which would then make peace and invite the Southern States to come back into the Union on the old footing. In order to obstruct and embarrass the Republican administration the members of the order held peace meetings to influence public opinion against the continuance of the war; purchased arms to be used in uprisings, which were to place the peace party in control of the Federal government, or failing in that to establish a north-western confederacy; and took measures to set free the Confederate prisoners in the north and bring the war to a forced close. All these plans failed at the critical moment, and the most effective work done by the order was in encouraging desertion from the Federal armies, preventing enlistments, and resisting the draft. Wholesale arrests of leaders and numerous seizures of arms by the United States authorities resulted in a general collapse of the order late in 1864. Three of the leaders were sentenced to death by military commissions, but sentence was suspended until 1866, when they were released under the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the famous case Ex parte Milligan.

869

KNIPPERDOLLINCK (or Knipperdolling), BERNT (Berend or Bernhardt) (c. 1490-1536), German divine, was a prosperous cloth-merchant at Münster when in 1524 he joined Melchior Rinck and Melchior Hofman in a business journey to Stockholm, which developed into an abortive religious errand. Knipperdollinck, a man of fine presence and glib tongue, noted from his youth for eccentricity, had the ear of the Münster populace when in 1527 he helped to break the prison of Tonies Kruse, in the teeth of the bishop and the civic authorities. For this he made his peace with the latter; but, venturing on another business journey, he was arrested, imprisoned for a year, and released on payment of a high fine—in regard of which treatment he began an action before the Imperial Chamber. Though his aims were political rather than religious, he attached himself to the reforming movement of Bernhardt Rothmann, once (1529) chaplain of St Mauritz, outside Münster, now (1532) pastor of the city church of St Lamberti. A new bishop directed a mandate (April 17, 1532) against Rothmann, which had the effect of alienating the moderates in Münster from the democrats. Knipperdollinck was a leader of the latter in the surprise (December 26, 1532) which made prisoners of the negotiating nobles at Telgte, in the territory of Münster. In the end, Münster was by charter from Philip of Hesse (February 14, 1533) constituted an evangelical city. Knipperdollinck was made a burgomaster in February 1534. Anabaptism had already (September 8, 1533) been proclaimed at Münster by a journeyman smith; and, before this, Heinrich Roll, a refugee, had brought Rothmann (May 1533) to a rejection of infant baptism. From the 1st of January 1534 Roll preached Anabaptist doctrines in a city pulpit; a few days later, two Dutch emissaries of Jan Matthysz, or Matthyssen, the master-baker and Anabaptist prophet of Haarlem, came on a mission to Münster. They were followed (January 13) by Jan Beukelsz (or Bockelszoon, or Buchholdt), better known as John of Leiden. It was his second visit to Münster; he came now as an apostle of Matthysz. He was twenty-five, with a winning personality, great gifts as an organizer, and plenty of ambition. Knipperdollinck, whose daughter Clara was ultimately enrolled among the wives of John of Leiden, came under his influence. Matthysz himself came to Münster (1534) and lived in Knipperdollinck’s house, which became the centre of the new movement to substitute Münster for Strassburg (Melchior Hofmann’s choice) as the New Jerusalem. On the death of Matthysz, in a foolish raid (April 5, 1534), John became supreme. Knipperdollinck, with one attempt at revolt, when he claimed the kingship for himself, was his subservient henchman, wheedling the Münster democracy into subjection to the fantastic rule of the “king of the earth.” He was made second in command, and executioner of the refractory. He fell in with the polygamy innovation, the protest of his wife being visited with a penance. In the military measures for resisting the siege of Münster he took no leading part. On the fall of the city (June 25, 1535) he hid in a dwelling in the city wall, but was betrayed by his landlady. After six months’ incarceration, his trial, along with his comrades, took place on the 19th of January, and his execution, with fearful tortures, on the 22nd of January 1536. Knipperdollinck attempted to strangle himself, but was forced to endure the worst. His body, like those of the others, was hung in a cage on the tower of St Lamberti, where the cages are still to be seen. An alleged portrait, from an engraving of 1607, is reproduced in the appendix to A. Ross’s Pansebeia, 1655.

KNITTING (from O.E. cnyttan, to knit; cf. Ger. Knütten; the root is seen in “knot”), the art of forming a single thread or strand of yarn into a texture or fabric of a loop structure, by employing needles or wires. “Crochet” work is an analogous art in its simplest form. It consists of forming a single thread into a single chain of loops. All warp knit fabrics are built on this structure. Knitting may be said to be divided into two principles, viz. (1) hand knitting and (2) frame-work knitting (see Hosiery). In hand knitting, the wires, pins or needles used are of different lengths or gauges, according to the class of work wanted to be produced. They are made of steel, bone, wood or ivory. Some are headed to prevent the loops from slipping over the ends. Flat or selvedged work can only be produced on them. Others are pointed at both ends, and by employing three or more a circular or circular-shaped fabric can be made. In hand knitting each loop is formed and thrown off individually and in rotation and is left hanging on the new loop formed. The cotton, wool and silk fibres are the principal materials from which knitting yarns are manufactured, wool being the most important and most largely used. “Lamb’s-wool,” “wheeling,” “fingering” and worsted yarns are all produced from the wool fibre, but may differ in size or fineness and quality. Those yarns are largely used in the production of knitted underwear. Hand knitting is to-day principally practised as a domestic art, but in some of the remote parts of Scotland and Ireland it is prosecuted as an industry to some extent. In the Shetland Islands the wool of the native sheep is spun, and used in its natural colour, being manufactured into shawls, scarfs, ladies’ jackets, &c. The principal trade of other districts is hose and half-hose, made from the wool of the sheep native to the district. The formation of the stitches in knitting may be varied in a great many ways, by “purling” (knitting or throwing loops to back and front in rib form), “slipping” loops, taking up and casting off and working in various coloured yarns to form stripes, patterns, &c. The articles may be shaped according to the manner in which the wires and yarns are manipulated.

KNOBKERRIE (from the Taal or South African Dutch, knopkirie, derived from Du. knop, a knob or button, and kerrie, a Bushman or Hottentot word for stick), a strong, short stick with a rounded knob or head used by the natives of South Africa in warfare and the chase. It is employed at close quarters, or as a missile, and in time of peace serves as a walking-stick. The name has been extended to similar weapons used by the natives of Australia, the Pacific islands, and other places.

KNOLLES, RICHARD (c. 1545-1610), English historian, was a native of Northamptonshire, and was educated at Lincoln College, Oxford. He became a fellow of his college, and at some date subsequent to 1571 left Oxford to become master of a school at Sandwich, Kent, where he died in 1610. In 1603 Knolles published his Generall Historie of the Turkes, of which several editions subsequently appeared, among them a good one edited by Sir Paul Rycaut (1700), who brought the history down to 1699. It was dedicated to King James I., and Knolles availed himself largely of Jean Jacques Boissard’s Vitae et Icones Sultanorum Turcicorum (Frankfort, 1596). Although now entirely superseded, it has considerable merits as regards style and arrangement. Knolles published a translation of J. Bodin’s De Republica in 1606, but the Grammatica Latina, Graeca et Hebraica, attributed to him by Anthony Wood and others, is the work of the Rev. Hanserd Knollys (c. 1599-1691), a Baptist minister.

KNOLLES (or Knollys), SIR ROBERT (c. 1325-1407), English soldier, belonged to a Cheshire family. In early life he served in Brittany, and he was one of the English survivors who were taken prisoners by the French after the famous “combat of the thirty” in March 1351. He was, however, quickly released and was among the soldiers of fortune who took advantage of the distracted state of Brittany, at this time the scene of a savage civil war, to win fame and wealth at the expense of the wretched inhabitants. After a time he transferred his operations to Normandy, when he served under the allied standards of England and of Charles II. of Navarre. He led the “great company” in their work of devastation along the valley of the Loire, fighting at this time for his own hand and for booty, and winning a terrible reputation by his ravages. After the conclusion of the treaty of Brétigny in 1360 Knolles returned to Brittany and took part in the struggle for the possession of the duchy between John of Montfort (Duke John IV.) and Charles of Blois, gaining great fame by his conduct in the fight at Auray (September 1364), where 870 Du Guesclin was captured and Charles of Blois was slain. In 1367 he marched with the Black Prince into Spain and fought at the battle of Nájera; in 1369 he was with the prince in Aquitaine. In 1370 he was placed by Edward III. at the head of an expedition which invaded France and marched on Paris, but after exacting large sums of money as ransom a mutiny broke up the army, and its leader was forced to take refuge in his Breton castle of Derval and to appease the disappointed English king with a large monetary gift. Emerging from his retreat Knolles again assisted John of Montfort in Brittany, where he acted as John’s representative; later he led a force into Aquitaine, and he was one of the leaders of the fleet sent against the Spaniards in 1377. In 1380 he served in France under Thomas of Woodstock, afterwards duke of Gloucester, distinguishing himself by his valour at the siege of Nantes; and in 1381 he went with Richard II. to meet Wat Tyler at Smithfield. He died at Sculthorpe in Norfolk on the 15th of August 1407. Sir Robert devoted much of his great wealth to charitable objects. He built a college and an almshouse at Pontefract, his wife’s birthplace, where the almshouse still exists; he restored the churches of Sculthorpe and Harpley; and he helped to found an English hospital in Rome. Knolles won an immense reputation by his skill and valour in the field, and ranks as one of the foremost captains of his age. French writers call him Canolles, or Canole.

KNOLLYS, the name of an English family descended from Sir Thomas Knollys (d. 1435), lord mayor of London. The first distinguished member of the family was Sir Francis Knollys (c. 1514-1596), English statesman, son of Robert Knollys, or Knolles (d. 1521), a courtier in the service and favour of Henry VII. and Henry VIII. Robert had also a younger son, Henry, who took part in public life during the reign of Elizabeth and who died in 1583.

Francis Knollys, who entered the service of Henry VIII. before 1540, became a member of parliament in 1542 and was knighted in 1547 while serving with the English army in Scotland. A strong and somewhat aggressive supporter of the reformed doctrines, he retired to Germany soon after Mary became queen, returning to England to become a privy councillor, vice-chamberlain of the royal household and a member of parliament under Queen Elizabeth, whose cousin Catherine (d. 1569), daughter of William Carey and niece of Anne Boleyn, was his wife. After serving as governor of Plymouth, Knollys was sent in 1566 to Ireland, his mission being to obtain for the queen confidential reports about the conduct of the lord-deputy Sir Henry Sidney. Approving of Sidney’s actions he came back to England, and in 1568 was sent to Carlisle to take charge of Mary Queen of Scots, who had just fled from Scotland; afterwards he was in charge of the queen at Bolton Castle and then at Tutbury Castle. He discussed religious questions with his prisoner, although the extreme Protestant views which he put before her did not meet with Elizabeth’s approval, and he gave up the position of guardian just after his wife’s death in January 1569. In 1584 he introduced into the House of Commons, where since 1572 he had represented Oxfordshire, the bill legalizing the national association for Elizabeth’s defence, and he was treasurer of the royal household from 1572 until his death on the 19th of July 1596. His monument may still be seen in the church of Rotherfield Grays, Oxfordshire. Knollys was repeatedly free and frank in his objections to Elizabeth’s tortuous foreign policy; but, possibly owing to his relationship to the queen, he did not lose her favour, and he was one of her commissioners on such important occasions as the trials of Mary Queen of Scots, of Philip Howard earl of Arundel, and of Anthony Babington. An active and lifelong Puritan, his attacks on the bishops were not lacking in vigour, and he was also very hostile to heretics. He received many grants of land from the queen, and was chief steward of the city of Oxford and a knight of the garter.

Sir Francis’s eldest son Henry (d. 1583), and his sons Edward (d. c. 1580), Robert (d. 1625), Richard (d. 1596), Francis (d. c. 1648), and Thomas, were all courtiers and served the queen in parliament or in the field. His daughter Lettice (1540-1634) married Walter Devereux, earl of Essex, and then Robert Dudley, earl of Leicester; she was the mother of Elizabeth’s favourite, the 2nd earl of Essex.

Sir Francis Knollys’s second son William (c. 1547-1632) served as a member of parliament and a soldier during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, being knighted in 1586. His eldest brother Henry, having died without sons in 1583, William inherited his father’s estates in Oxfordshire, becoming in 1596 a privy councillor and comptroller of the royal household; in 1602 he was made treasurer of the household. Sir William enjoyed the favour of the new king James I., whom he had visited in Scotland in 1585, and was made Baron Knollys in 1603 and Viscount Wallingford in 1616. But in this latter year his fortunes suffered a temporary reverse. Through his second wife Elizabeth (1586-1658), daughter of Thomas Howard, earl of Suffolk, Knollys was related to Frances, countess of Somerset, and when this lady was tried for the murder of Sir Thomas Overbury her relatives were regarded with suspicion; consequently Lord Wallingford resigned the treasurership of the household and two years later the mastership of the court of wards, an office which he had held since 1614. However, he regained the royal favour, and was created earl of Banbury in 1626. He died in London on the 25th of May 1632.

His wife, who was nearly forty years her husband’s junior, was the mother of two sons, Edward (1627-1645) and Nicholas (1631-1674), whose paternity has given rise to much dispute. Neither is mentioned in the earl’s will, but in 1641 the law courts decided that Edward was earl of Banbury, and when he was killed in June 1645 his brother Nicholas took the title. In the Convention Parliament of 1660 some objection was taken to the earl sitting in the House of Lords, and in 1661 he was not summoned to parliament; he had not succeeded in obtaining his writ of summons when he died on the 14th of March 1674.

Nicholas’s son Charles (1662-1740), the 4th earl, had not been summoned to parliament when in 1692 he killed Captain Philip Lawson in a duel. This raised the question of his rank in a new form. Was he, or was he not, entitled to trial by the peers? The House of Lords declared that he was not a peer and therefore not so entitled, but the court of king’s bench released him from his imprisonment on the ground that he was the earl of Banbury and not Charles Knollys a commoner. Nevertheless the House of Lords refused to move from its position, and Knollys had not received a writ of summons when he died in April 1740. His son Charles (1703-1771), vicar of Burford, Oxfordshire, and his grandsons, William (1726-1776) and Thomas Woods (1727-1793), were successively titular earls of Banbury, but they took no steps to prove their title. However, in 1806 Thomas Woods’s son William (1763-1824), who attained the rank of general in the British army, asked for a writ of summons as earl of Banbury, but in 1813 the House of Lords decided against the claim. Several peers, including the great Lord Erskine, protested against this decision, but General Knollys himself accepted it and ceased to call himself earl of Banbury. He died in Paris on the 20th of March 1834. His eldest son, Sir William Thomas Knollys (1797-1883), entered the army and served with the Guards during the Peninsular War. Remaining in the army after the conclusion of the peace of 1815 he won a good reputation and rose high in his profession. From 1855 to 1860 he was in charge of the military camp at Aldershot, then in its infancy, and in 1861 he was made president of the council of military education. From 1862 to 1877 he was comptroller of the household of the prince of Wales, afterwards King Edward VII. From 1877 until his death on the 23rd of June 1883 he was gentleman usher of the black rod; he was also a privy councillor and colonel of the Scots Guards. His son Francis (b. 1837), private secretary to Edward VII. and George V., was created Baron Knollys in 1902; another son, Sir Henry Knollys (b. 1840), became private secretary to King Edward’s daughter Maud, queen of Norway.

871

KNOT, a Limicoline bird very abundant at certain seasons on the shores of Britain and many countries of the northern hemisphere. Camden in the edition of his Britannia published in 1607 (p. 408) inserted a passage not found in the earlier issues of that work, connecting the name with that of King Canute, and this account of its origin has been usually received. But no other evidence in its favour is forthcoming, and Camden’s statement is merely the expression of an opinion,1 so that there is perhaps ground for believing him to have been mistaken, and that the clue afforded by Sir Thomas Browne, who (c. 1672) wrote the name “Gnatts or Knots,” may be the true one.2 Still the statement was so determinedly repeated by successive authors that Linnaeus followed them in calling the species Tringa canutus, and so it remains with nearly all modern ornithologists.3 Rather larger than a snipe, but with a shorter bill and legs, the knot visits the coasts of some parts of Europe, Asia and North America at times in vast flocks; and, though in temperate climates a good many remain throughout the winter, these are nothing in proportion to those that arrive towards the end of spring, in England generally about the 15th of May, and after staying a few days pass northward to their summer quarters, while early in autumn the young of the year throng to the same places in still greater numbers, being followed a little later by their parents. In winter the plumage is ashy-grey above (save the rump, which is white) and white beneath. In summer the feathers of the back are black, broadly margined with light orange-red, mixed with white, those of the rump white, more or less tinged with red, and the lower parts are of a nearly uniform deep bay or chestnut. The birds which winter in temperate climates seldom attain the brilliancy of colour exhibited by those which arrive from the south; the luxuriance generated by the heat of a tropical sun seems needed to develop the full richness of hue. The young when they come from their birthplace are clothed in ashy-grey above, each feather banded with dull black and ochreous, while the breast is more or less deeply tinged with warm buff. Much curiosity has long existed among zoologists as to the egg of the knot, of which not a single identified or authenticated specimen is known to exist in collections. The species was found breeding abundantly on the North Georgian (now commonly called the Parry) Islands by Parry’s Arctic expedition, as well as soon after on Melville Peninsula by Captain Lyons, and again during the voyage of Sir George Nares on the northern coast of Grinnell Land and the shores of Smith Sound, where Major Feilden obtained examples of the newly hatched young (Ibis, 1877, p. 407), and observed that the parents fed largely on the buds of Saxifraga oppositifolia. These are the only localities in which this species is known to breed, for on none of the arctic lands lying to the north of Europe or Asia has it been unquestionably observed.4 In winter its wanderings are very extensive, as it is recorded from Surinam, Brazil, Walfisch Bay in South Africa, China, Queensland and New Zealand. Formerly this species was extensively netted in England, and the birds fattened for the table, where they were esteemed a great delicacy, as witness the entries in the Northumberland and Le Strange Household Books; and the British Museum contains an old treatise on the subject: “The maner of kepyng of knotts, after Sir William Askew and my Lady, given to my Lord Darcy, 25 Hen. VIII.” (MSS. Sloane, 1592, 8 cat. 663).

KNOT (O.E. cnotta, from a Teutonic stem knutt; cf. “knit,” and Ger. knoten), an intertwined loop of rope, cord, string or other flexible material, used to fasten two such ropes, &c., to one another, or to another object. (For the various forms which such “knots” may take see below.) The word is also used for the distance-marks on a log-line, and hence as the equivalent of a nautical mile (see Log), and for any hard mass, resembling a knot drawn tight, especially one formed in the trunk of a tree at the place of insertion of a branch. Knots in wood are the remains of dead branches which have become buried in the wood of the trunk or branch on which they were borne. When a branch dies down or is broken off, the dead stump becomes grown over by a healing tissue, and, as the stem which bears it increases in thickness, gradually buried in the newer wood. When a section is made of the stem the dead stump appears in the section as a knot; thus in a board it forms a circular piece of wood, liable to fall out and leave a “knot-hole.” “Knot” or “knob” is an architectural term for a bunch of flowers, leaves or other ornamentation carved on a corbel or on a boss. The word is also applied figuratively to any intricate problem, hard to disentangle, a use stereotyped in the proverbial “Gordian knot,” which, according to the tradition, was cut by Alexander the Great (see Gordium).

Knots, Bends, Hitches, Splices and Seizings are all ways of fastening cords or ropes, either to some other object such as a spar, or a ring, or to one another. The “knot” is formed to make a knob on a rope, generally at the extremity, and by untwisting the strands at the end and weaving them together. But it may be made by turning the rope on itself through a loop, as for instance, the “overhand knot” (fig. 1). A “bend” (from the same root as “bind”), and a “hitch” (an O.E. word), are ways of fastening or tying ropes together, as in the “Carrick bend” (fig. 21), or round spars as the Studding Sail Halyard Bend (fig. 19), and the Timber Hitch (fig. 20). A “splice” (from the same root as “split”) is made by untwisting two rope ends and weaving them together. A “seizing” (Fr. saisir) is made by fastening two spars to one another by a rope, or two ropes by a third, or by using one rope to make a loop on another—as for example the Racking Seizing (fig. 41), the Round Seizing (fig. 40), and the Midshipman’s Hitch (fig. 29). The use of the words is often arbitrary. There is, for instance, no difference in principle between the Fisherman’s Bend (fig. 18) and the Timber Hitch (fig. 20). Speaking generally, the Knot and the Seizing are meant to be permanent, and must be unwoven in order to be unfastened, while the Bend and Hitch can be undone at once by pulling the ropes in the reverse direction from that in which they are meant to hold. Yet the Reef Knot (figs. 3 and 4) can be cast loose with ease, and is wholly different in principle, for instance, from the Diamond Knot (figs. 42 and 43). These various forms of fastening are employed in many kinds of industry, as for example in scaffolding, as well as in seamanship. The governing principle is that the strain which pulls against them shall draw them tighter. The ordinary “knots and splices” are described in every book on seamanship.

Mathematical Theory of Knots.

In the scientific sense a knot is an endless physical line which cannot be deformed into a circle. A physical line is flexible and inextensible, and cannot be cut—so that no lap of it can be drawn through another.

The founder of the theory of knots is undoubtedly Johann Benedict Listing (1808-1882). In his “Vorstudien zur Topologie” (Göttinger Studien, 1847), a work in many respects of startling originality, a few pages only are devoted to the subject.1 He treats knots from the elementary notion of twisting one physical line (or thread) round another, and shows that from the projection of a knot on a surface we can thus obtain a notion of the relative situation of its coils. He distinguishes “reduced” from “reducible” forms, the number of crossings in the reduced knot being the smallest possible. The simplest form of reduced knot is of two species, as in figs. 49 and 50. Listing points out that these are formed, the first by right-handed the second by left-handed twisting. In fact, if three half-twists be given to a long strip of paper, and the ends be then pasted together, the two edges become one line, which is the knot in question. We may free it by slitting the paper along its middle line; and then we have the juggler’s trick of putting a knot on an endless unknotted band. One of the above forms cannot be deformed into the other. The one is, in Listing’s language, the “perversion” of the other, i.e. its image in a plane mirror. He gives a method of symbolizing reduced knots, but shows that in this method the same knot may, in certain cases, be represented by different symbols. It is clear that the brief notice he published contains a mere sketch of his investigations.

The most extensive dissertation on the properties of knots is that of Peter Guthrie Tait (Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., xxviii. 145, where the substance of a number of papers in the Proceedings of the same society is reproduced). It was for the most part written in ignorance of the work of Listing, and was suggested by an inquiry concerning vortex atoms.

KNOUT (from the French transliteration of a Russian word of Scandinavian origin; cf. A.-S. cnotta, Eng. knot), the whip used in Russia for flogging criminals and political offenders. It is said to have been introduced under Ivan III. (1462-1505). The knout had different forms. One was a lash of raw hide, 16 in. long, attached to a wooden handle, 9 in. long. The lash ended in a metal ring, to which was attached a second lash as long, ending also in a ring, to which in turn was attached a few inches of hard leather ending in a beak-like hook. Another kind consisted of many thongs of skin plaited and interwoven with wire, ending in loose wired ends, like the cat-o’-nine tails. The victim was tied to a post or on a triangle of wood and stripped, receiving the specified number of strokes on the back. A sentence of 100 or 120 lashes was equivalent to a death sentence; but few lived to receive so many. The executioner was usually a criminal who had to pass through a probation and regular training; being let off his own penalties in return for his services. Peter the Great is traditionally accused of knouting his son Alexis to death, and there is little doubt that the boy was actually beaten till he died, whoever was the executioner. The emperor Nicholas I. abolished the earlier forms of knout and substituted the pleti, a three-thonged lash. Ostensibly the knout has been abolished throughout Russia and reserved for the penal settlements.

KNOWLES, SIR JAMES (1831-1908), English architect and editor, was born in London in 1831, and was educated, with a view to following his father’s profession, as an architect at University College and in Italy. His literary tastes also brought him at an early age into the field of authorship. In 1860 he published The Story of King Arthur. In 1867 he was introduced to Tennyson, whose house, Aldworth, on Blackdown, he designed; this led to a close friendship, Knowles assisting Tennyson in business matters, and among other things helping to design scenery for The Cup, when Irving produced that play in 1880. Knowles became intimate with a number of the most interesting men of the day, and in 1869, with Tennyson’s co-operation, he started the Metaphysical Society, the object of which was to attempt some intellectual rapprochement between religion and science by getting the leading representatives of faith and unfaith to meet and exchange views.

Papers were read and discussed at the various meetings on such subjects as the ultimate grounds of belief in the objective and moral sciences, the immortality of the soul, &c. An interesting description of one of the meetings was given by Magee (then bishop of Peterborough) in a letter of 13th of February 1873:—

The last meeting of the society was held on 16th May 1880. Huxley said that it died “of too much love”; Tennyson, “because after ten years of strenuous effort no one had succeeded in even defining metaphysics.” According to Dean Stanley, “We all meant the same thing if we only knew it.” The society formed the nucleus of the distinguished list of contributors who supported Knowles in his capacity as an editor. In 1870 he became editor of the Contemporary Review, but left it in 1877 and founded the Nineteenth Century (to the title of which, in 1901, were added the words And After). Both periodicals became very influential under him, and formed the type of the new sort of monthly review which came to occupy the place formerly held by the quarterlies. In 1904 he received the honour of knighthood. He died at Brighton on the 13th of February 1908.

KNOWLES, JAMES SHERIDAN (1784-1862), Irish dramatist and actor, was born in Cork, on the 12th of May 1784. His father was the lexicographer, James Knowles (1759-1840), cousin-german of Richard Brinsley Sheridan. The family removed to London in 1793, and at the age of fourteen Knowles published a ballad entitled The Welsh Harper, which, set to music, was very popular. The boy’s talents secured him the friendship of Hazlitt, who introduced him to Lamb and Coleridge. He served for some time in the Wiltshire and afterwards in the Tower Hamlets militia, leaving the service to become pupil of Dr Robert Willan (1757-1812). He obtained the degree of M.D., and was appointed vaccinator to the Jennerian Society. Although, however, Dr Willan generously offered him a share in his practice, he resolved to forsake medicine for the stage, making his first appearance probably at Bath, and playing Hamlet at the Crow Theatre, Dublin. At Wexford he married, in October 1809, Maria Charteris, an actress from the Edinburgh Theatre. In 1810 he wrote Leo, in which Edmund Kean acted with great success; another play, Brian Boroihme, written for the Belfast Theatre in the next year, also drew crowded houses, but his earnings were so small that he was obliged to become assistant to his father at the Belfast Academical Institution. In 1817 he removed from Belfast to Glasgow, where, besides conducting a flourishing school, he continued to write for the stage. His first important success was Caius Gracchus, produced at Belfast in 1815; and his Virginius, written for Edmund Kean, was first performed in 1820 at Covent Garden. In William Tell (1825) Macready found one of his favourite parts. His best-known play, The Hunchback, was produced at Covent Garden in 1832; The Wife was brought out at the same theatre in 1833; and The Love Chase in 1837. In his later years he forsook the stage for the pulpit, and as a Baptist preacher attracted large audiences at Exeter Hall and elsewhere. He published two polemical works—the Rock of Rome and the Idol Demolished by its own Priests—in both of which he combated the special doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. Knowles was for some years in the receipt of an annual pension of £200, bestowed by Sir Robert Peel. He died at Torquay on the 30th of November 1862.

KNOW NOTHING (or American) PARTY, in United States history, a political party of great importance in the decade before 1860. Its principle was political proscription of naturalized citizens and of Roman Catholics. Distrust of alien immigrants, because of presumptive attachment to European institutions, has always been more or less widely diffused, and race antagonisms have been recurrently of political moment; while anti-Catholic sentiment went back to colonial sectarianism. These were the elements of the political “nativism”—i.e. hostility to foreign influence in politics—of 1830-1860. In these years Irish immigration became increasingly preponderant; and that of Catholics was even more so. The geographical segregation and the clannishness of foreign voters in the cities gave them a power that Whigs and Democrats alike (the latter more successfully) strove to control, to the great aggravation of naturalization and election frauds. “No one can deny that ignorant foreign suffrage had grown to be an evil of immense proportions” (J. F. Rhodes). In labour disputes, political feuds and social clannishness, the alien elements—especially the Irish and German—displayed their power, and at times gave offence by their hostile criticism of American institutions.1 In immigration centres like Boston, Philadelphia and New York, the Catholic Church, very largely foreign in membership and proclaiming a foreign allegiance of disputed extent, was really “the symbol and strength of foreign influence” (Scisco); many regarded it as a transplanted foreign institution, un-American in organization and ideas.2 Thus it became involved in politics. The decade 1830-1840 was marked by anti-Catholic (anti-Irish) riots in various cities and by party organization of nativists in many places in local elections. Thus arose the American-Republican (later the Native-American) Party, whose national career begun practically in 1845, and which in Louisiana in 1841 first received a state organization. New York City in 1844 and Boston in 1845 were carried by the nativists, but their success was due to Whig support, which was not continued,3 and the national organization was by 1847—in which year it endorsed the Whig nominee for the presidency—practically dead. Though some Whig leaders had strong nativist leanings, and though the party secured a few representatives in Congress, it accomplished little at this time in national politics. In the early ’fifties nativism was revivified by an unparalleled inflow of aliens. Catholics, moreover, had combated the Native-Americans defiantly. In 1852 both Whigs and Democrats were forced to defend their presidential nominees against charges of anti-Catholic sentiment. In 1853-1854 there was a wide-spread “anti-popery” propaganda and riots against Catholics in various cities. Meanwhile the Know Nothing Party had sprung from nativist secret societies, whose relations remain obscure.4 Its organization was secret; and hence its name—for a member, when interrogated, always 878 answered that he knew nothing about it. Selecting candidates secretly from among those nominated by the other parties, and giving them no public endorsement, the Know Nothings, as soon as they gained the balance of power, could shatter at will Whig and Democratic calculations. Their power was evident by 1852—from which time, accordingly, “Know Nothingism” is most properly dated. The charges they brought against naturalization abuses were only too well founded; and those against election frauds not less so—though, unfortunately, the Know Nothings themselves followed scandalous election methods in some cities. The proposed proscription of the foreign-born knew no exceptions: many wished never to concede to them all the rights of natives, nor to their children unless educated in the public schools. As for Catholics, the real animus of Know Nothingism was against political Romanism; therefore, secondarily, against papal allegiance and episcopal church administration (in place of administration by lay trustees, as was earlier common practice in the United States); and, primarily, against public aid to Catholic schools, and the alleged greed (i.e. the power and success) of the Irish in politics. The times were propitious for the success of an aggressive third party; for the Whigs were broken by the death of Clay and Webster and the crushing defeat of 1852, and both the Whig and Democratic parties were disintegrating on the slavery issue. But the Know Nothings lacked aggression. In entering national politics the party abandoned its mysteries, without making compensatory gains; when it was compelled to publish a platform of principles, factions arose in its ranks; moreover, to draw recruits the faster from Whigs and Democrats, it “straddled” the slavery question, and this, although a temporary success, ultimately meant ruin. In 1854, however, Know Nothing gains were remarkable.5 Thereafter the organization spread like wildfire in the South, in which section there were almost no aliens, and the Whig dissolution was far advanced. The Virginia election of May 1855 proved conclusively, however, that Know Nothingism was no stronger against the Democrats than was the Whig party it had absorbed; it was the same organization under a new name. In the North it was even clearer that slavery must be faced. Know Nothing evasion probably helped the South,6 but neither Republicans nor Democrats would endure the evasion; Douglas and Seward, and later (1855-1856) their parties, denounced it. In the North-West the Know Nothings were swept into the anti-slavery movement in 1854 without retaining their organization. In the state campaigns of 1855 professions were measured to the latitude. The national platform of 1856 (adopted by a secret grand council), besides including anti-alien and anti-Catholic planks, offered sops to the North, the South and the “doughfaces” on the slavery issue. Millard Fillmore was nominated for the presidency. The anti-slavery delegates of eight Northern states bolted the convention, and eight months later the Republican wave swept the Know Nothings out of the North.7 The national field being thus lost, the state councils became supreme, and local opportunism fostered variation and weakness. By 1859 the party was confined almost entirely to the border states. The Constitutional Union—the “Do Nothing”—Party of 1860 was mainly composed of Know Nothing remnants.8 The year 1860 practically marked, also, the disappearance of the party as a local power.9

Except in city politics nativism had no vitality; in state and national politics it really had no excuse. Race antipathies gave it local cohesive power in the North; various causes, already mentioned, advanced it in the South; and as a device to win offices it was of wide-spread attraction. Its only real contribution to government was the proof that nativism is not Americanism. Public opinion has never accepted its estimate of the alien nor of Catholic citizens. Some of its anti-Church principles, however—as the non-support of denominational schools—have been generally accepted; others—as the refusal to exclude the (Protestant) Bible from public schools—have been generally rejected; others—as the taxation of all Church property—remain disputed.

KNOX, HENRY (1750-1806), American general, was born in Boston, Massachusetts, of Scottish-Irish parentage, on the 25th of July 1750. He was prominent in the colonial militia and tried to keep the Boston crowd and the British soldiers from the clash known as the Boston massacre (1770). In 1771 he opened the “London Book-Store” in Boston. He had read much of tactics and strategy, joined the American army at the outbreak of the War of Independence, and fought at Bunker Hill, planned the defences of the camps of the army before Boston, and brought from Lake George and border forts much-needed artillery. At Trenton he crossed the river before the main body, and in the attack rendered such good service that he was made brigadier-general and chief of artillery in the Continental army on the following day. He was present at Princeton; was chiefly responsible for the mistake in attacking the “Chew House” at Germantown; urged New York as the objective of the campaign of 1778; served with efficiency at Monmouth and at Yorktown; and after the surrender of Cornwallis was promoted major-general, and served as a commissioner on the exchange of prisoners. His services throughout the war were of great value to the American cause; he was one of General Washington’s most trusted advisers, and he brought the artillery to a high degree of efficiency. From December 1783 until June 1784 he was the senior officer of the United States army. In April 1783 he had drafted a scheme of a society to be formed by the American officers and the French officers who had served in America during the war, and to be called the “Cincinnati”; of this society he was the first secretary-general (1783-1799) and in 1805 became vice-president-general. In 1785-1794 Knox was secretary of war, being the first man to hold this position after the organization of the Federal government in 1789. He urged ineffectually a national militia system, to enroll all citizens over 18 and under 60 in the “advanced corps,” the “main corps” or the “reserve,” and for this and his close friendship with Washington was bitterly assailed by the Republicans. In 1793 he had begun to build his house, Montpelier, at Thomaston, Maine, where he speculated unsuccessfully in the holdings of the Eastern Land Association; and he lived there until his death on the 25th of October 1806.

KNOX, JOHN (c. 1505-1572), Scottish reformer and historian. Of his early life very little is certainly known, in spite of the fact that his History of the Reformation and his private letters, especially the latter, are often vividly autobiographical. Even the year of his birth, usually given as 1505, is matter of dispute. Beza, in his Icones, published in 1580, makes it 1515; Sir Peter Young (tutor to James VI. of Scotland), writing to Beza from Edinburgh in 1579, says 1513; and a strong case has been made out for holding that the generally accepted date is due to an error in transcription (see Dr Hay Fleming in the Bookman, Sept. 1905). But Knox seems to have been reticent about his early life, even to his contemporaries. What is known is that he 879 was a son of William Knox, who lived in or near the town of Haddington, that his mother’s name was Sinclair, and that his forefathers on both sides had fought under the banner of the Bothwells. William Knox was “simple,” not “gentle”—perhaps a prosperous East Lothian peasant. But he sent his son John to school (no doubt the well-known grammar school of Haddington), and thereafter to the university, where, like his contemporary George Buchanan, he sat “at the feet” of John Major. Major was a native of Haddington, who had recently returned to Scotland from Paris with a great academical reputation. He retained to the last, as his History of Greater Britain shows, the repugnance characteristic of the university of Paris to the tyranny of kings and nobles; but like it, he was now alarmed by the revolt of Luther, and ceased to urge its ancient protest against the supremacy of the pope. He exchanged his “regency” or professorship in Glasgow University for one in that of St Andrews in 1523. If Knox’s college time was later than that date (as it must have been, if he was born near 1515), it was no doubt spent, as Beza narrates, at St Andrews, and probably exclusively there. But in Major’s last Glasgow session a “Joannes Knox” (not an uncommon name, however, at that time in the west of Scotland) matriculated there; and if this were the future reformer, he may thereafter either have followed his master to St Andrews or returned from Glasgow straight to Haddington. But till twenty years after that date his career has not been again traced. Then he reappears in his native district as a priest without a university degree (Sir John Knox) and a notary of the diocese of St Andrews. In 1543 he certainly signed himself “minister of the sacred altar” under the archbishop of St Andrews. But in 1546 he was carrying a two-handed sword in defence of the reformer George Wishart, on the day when the latter was arrested by the archbishop’s order. Knox would have resisted, though the arrest was by his feudal superior, Lord Bothwell; but Wishart himself commanded his submission, with the words “One is sufficient for a sacrifice,” and was handed over for trial at St Andrews. And next year the archbishop himself had been murdered, and Knox was preaching in St Andrews a fully developed Protestantism.

Knox gives us no information as to how this startling change in himself was brought about. During those twenty years Scotland had been slowly tending to freedom in religious profession, and to friendship with England rather than with France. The Scottish hierarchy, by this time corrupt and even profligate, saw the twofold danger and met it firmly. James V., the “Commons’ King” had put himself into the hands of the Beatons, who in 1528 burned Patrick Hamilton. On James’s death there was a slight reaction, but the cardinal-archbishop took possession of the weak regent Arran, and in 1546 burned George Wishart. England had by this time rejected the pope’s supremacy. In Scotland by a recent statute it was death even to argue against it; and Knox after Wishart’s execution was fleeing from place to place, when, hearing that certain gentlemen of Fife had slain the cardinal and were in possession of his castle of St Andrews, he gladly joined himself to them. In St Andrews he taught “John’s Gospel” and a certain catechism—probably that which Wishart had got from “Helvetia” and translated; but his teaching was supposed to be private and tutorial and for the benefit of his friends’ “bairns.” The men about him however—among them Sir David Lindsay of the Mount, “Lyon King” and poet—saw his capacity for greater things, and, on his at first refusing “to run where God had not called him,” planned a solemn appeal to Knox from the pulpit to accept “the public office and charge of preaching.” At the close of it the speaker (in Knox’s own narrative) “said to those that were present, ‘Was not this your charge to me? And do ye not approve this vocation?’ They answered, ‘It was, and we approve it.’ Whereat the said Johnne, abashed, burst forth in most abundant tears and withdrew himself to his chamber,” remaining there in “heaviness” for days, until he came forth resolved and prepared. Knox is probably not wrong in regarding this strange incident as the spring of his own public life. The St Andrews invitation was really one to danger and death; John Rough, who spoke it, died a few years after in the flames at Smithfield. But it was a call which many in that ardent dawn were ready to accept, and it had now at length found, or made, a statesman and leader of men. For what to the others was chiefly a promise of personal salvation became for the indomitable will of Knox an assurance also of victory, even in this world, over embattled forces of ancient wrong. It is certain at least that from this date he never changed and scarcely even varied his public course. And looking back upon that course afterwards, he records with much complacency how his earliest St Andrews sermon built up a whole fabric of aggressive Protestantism upon Puritan theory, so that his startled hearers muttered, “Others sned (snipped) the branches; this man strikes at the root.”

Meantime the system attacked was safe for other thirteen years. In June 1547 St Andrews yielded to the French fleet, and the prisoners, including Knox, were thrown into the galleys on the Loire, to remain in irons and under the lash for at least nineteen months. Released at last (apparently through the influence of the young English king, Edward VI.), Knox was appointed one of the licensed preachers of the new faith for England, and stationed in the great garrison of Berwick, and afterwards at Newcastle. In 1551 he seems to have been made a royal chaplain; in 1552 he was certainly offered an English bishopric, which he declined; and during most of this year he used his influence, as preacher at court and in London, to make the new English settlement more Protestant. To him at least is due the Prayer-book rubric which explains that, when kneeling at the sacrament is ordered, “no adoration is intended or ought to be done.” While in Northumberland Knox had been betrothed to Margaret Bowes, one of the fifteen children of Richard Bowes, the captain of Norham Castle. Her mother, Elizabeth, co-heiress of Aske in Yorkshire, was the earliest of that little band of women-friends whose correspondence with Knox on religious matters throws an unexpected light on his discriminating tenderness of heart. But now Mary Tudor succeeded her brother, and Knox in March 1554 escaped into five years’ exile abroad, leaving Mrs. Bowes a fine treatise on “Affliction,” and sending back to England two editions of a more acrid “Faithful Admonition” on the crisis there. He first drifted to Frankfort, where the English congregation divided as English Protestants have always done, and the party opposed to Knox got rid of him at last by a complaint to the authorities of treason against the emperor Charles V. as well as Philip and Mary. At Geneva he found a more congenial pastorate. Christopher Goodman (c. 1520-1603) and he, with other exiles, began there the Puritan tradition, and prepared the earlier English version of the Bible, “the household book of the English-speaking nations” during the great age of Elizabeth. Here, and afterwards at Dieppe (where he preached in French), Knox kept in communication with the other Reformers, studied Greek and Hebrew in the interest of theology, and having brought his wife and her mother from England in 1555 lived for years a peaceful life.

But even here Knox was preparing for Scotland, and facing the difficulties of the future, theoretical as well as practical. In his first year abroad he consulted Calvin and Bullinger as to the right of the civil “authority” to prescribe religion to his subjects—in particular, whether the godly should obey “a magistrate who enforces idolatry and condemns true religion,” and whom should they join “in the case of a religious nobility resisting an idolatrous sovereign.” In August 1555 be visited his native country and found the queen-mother, Mary of Lorraine, acting as regent in place of the real “sovereign,” the youthful and better-known Mary, now being brought up at the court of France. Scripture-reading and the new views had spread widely, and the regent was disposed to wink at this in the case of the “religious nobility.” Knox was accordingly allowed to preach privately for six months throughout the south of Scotland, and was listened to with an enthusiasm which made him break out, “O sweet were the death which should follow such forty days in Edinburgh as here I have had three!” Before leaving he 880 even addressed a letter to the regent, urging her to favour the Evangel. She accepted it jocularly as a “pasquil,” and Knox on his departure was condemned and burned in effigy. But he left behind him a “Wholesome Counsel” to Scottish heads of families, reminding them that within their own houses they were “bishop and kings,” and recommending the institution of something like the early apostolic worship in private congregations. Of the Protestant barons Knox, though in exile, seems to have been henceforward the chief adviser; and before the end of 1557 they, under the name of the “Lords of the Congregation,” had entered into the first of the religious “bands” or “covenants” afterwards famous in Scotland. In 1558 he published his “Appellation” to the nobles, estates and commonalty against the sentence of death recently pronounced upon him, and along with it a stirring appeal “To his beloved brethren, the Commonalty of Scotland,” urging that the care of religion fell to them also as being “God’s creatures, created and formed in His own image,” and having a right to defend their conscience against persecution. About this time, indeed, there was in Scotland a remarkable approximation to that solution of the toleration difficulty which later ages have approved; for the regent was understood to favour the demand of the “congregation” that at least the penal statutes against heretics “be suspended and abrogated,” and “that it be lawful to us to use ourselves in matters of religion and conscience as we must answer to God.” It was a consummation too ideal for that early date; and next year the regent, whose daughter was now queen of France and there mixed up with the persecuting policy of the Guises, forbade the reformed preaching in Scotland. A rupture ensued at once, and Knox appeared in Edinburgh on the 2nd of May 1559 “even in the brunt of the battle.” He was promptly “blown to the horn” at the Cross there as an outlaw, but escaped to Dundee, and commenced public preaching in the chief towns of central Scotland. At Perth and at St Andrews his sermons were followed by the destruction of the monasteries, institutions disliked in that age in Scotland alike by the devout and the profane. But while he notes that in Perth the act was that of “the rascal multitude,” he was glad to claim in St Andrews the support of the civic “authority”; and indeed the burghs, which were throughout Europe generally in favour of freedom, soon became in Scotland a main support of the Reformation. Edinburgh was still doubtful, and the queen regent held the castle; but a truce between her and the lords for six months to the 1st of January 1560 was arranged on the footing that every man there “may have freedom to use his own conscience to the day foresaid”—a freedom interpreted to let Knox and his brethren preach publicly and incessantly.

Scotland, like its capital, was divided. Both parties lapsed from the freedom-of-conscience solution to which each when unsuccessful appealed; both betook themselves to arms; and the immediate future of the little kingdom was to be decided by its external alliances. Knox now took a leading part in the great transaction by which the friendship of France was exchanged for that of England. He had one serious difficulty. Before Elizabeth’s accession to the English crown, and after the queen mother in Scotland had disappointed his hopes, he had published a treatise against what he called “The Monstrous Regiment (regimen or government) of Women”; though the despotism of that despotic age was scarcely appreciably worse when it happened to be in female hands. Elizabeth never forgave him; but Cecil corresponded with the Scottish lords, and their answer in July 1559, in Knox’s handwriting, assures England not only of their own constancy, but of “a charge and commandment to our posterity, that the amity and league between you and us, contracted and begun in Christ Jesus, may by them be kept inviolated for ever.” The league was promised by England; but the army of France was first in the field, and towards the end of the year drove the forces of the “congregation” from Leith into Edinburgh, and then out of it in a midnight rout to Stirling—“that dark and dolorous night,” as Knox long afterwards said, “wherein all ye, my lords, with shame and fear left this town,” and from which only a memorable sermon by their great preacher roused the despairing multitude into new hope. Their leaders renounced allegiance to the regent; she ended her not unkindly, but as Knox calls it “unhappy,” life in the castle of Edinburgh; the English troops, after the usual Elizabethan delays and evasions, joined their Scots allies; and the French embarked from Leith. On the 6th of July 1560 a treaty was at last made, nominally between Elizabeth and the queen of France and Scotland; while Cecil instructed his mistress’s plenipotentiaries to agree “that the government of Scotland be granted to the nation of the land.” The revolution was in the meantime complete; and Knox, who takes credit for having done much to end the enmity with England which was so long thought necessary for Scotland’s independence, was strangely enough destined, beyond all other men, to leave the stamp of a more inward independence upon his country and its history.

At the first meeting of the Estates, in August 1560, the Protestants were invited to present a confession of their faith. Knox and three others drafted it, and were present when it was offered and read to the parliament. The statute-book says it was “by the estates of Scotland ratified and approved, as wholesome and sound doctrine grounded upon the infallible truth of God’s word.” The Scots confession, though of course drawn up independently, is in substantial accord with the others then springing up in the countries of the Reformation, but is Calvinist rather than Lutheran. It remained for two centuries the authorized Scottish creed, though in the first instance the faith of only a fragment of the people. Yet its approval became the basis for three acts passed a week later; the first of which, abolishing the pope’s authority and jurisdiction in Scotland, may perhaps have been consistent with toleration, as the second, rescinding old statutes which had established and enforced that and other catholic tenets, undoubtedly was. But the third, inflicting heavy penalties, with death on a third conviction, on those who should celebrate mass or even be present at it, showed that the reformer and his friends had crossed the line, and that their position could no longer be described as, in Knox’s words, “requiring nothing but the liberty of conscience, and our religion and fact to be tried by the word of God.” He was prepared indeed to fall back upon that, in the event of the Estates at any time refusing sanction to either church or creed, as their sovereign in Paris promptly refused it. But the parliament of 1560 gave no express sanction to the Reformed Church, and Knox did not wait until it should do so. Already “in our towns and places reformed,” as the Confession puts it, there were local or “particular kirks,” and these grew and spread and were provincially united, till, in the last month of this memorable year, the first General Assembly of their representatives met, and became the “universal kirk,” or “the whole church convened.” It had before it the plan for church government and maintenance, drafted in August at the same time with the Confession, under the name of The Book of Discipline, and by the same framers. Knox was even more clearly in this case the chief author, and he had by this time come to desire a much more rigid Presbyterianism than he had sketched in his “Wholesome Counsel” of 1555. In planning it he seems to have used his acquaintance with the “Ordonnances” of the Genevan Church under Calvin, and with the “Forma” of the German Church in London under John Laski (or A. Lasco). Starting with “truth” contained in Scripture as the church’s foundation, and the Word and Sacraments as means of building it up, it provides ministers and elders to be elected by the congregations, with a subordinate class of “readers,” and by their means sermons and prayers each “Sunday” in every parish. In large towns these were to be also on other days, with a weekly meeting for conference or “prophesying.” The “plantation” of new churches is to go on everywhere under the guidance of higher church officers called superintendents. All are to help their brethren, “for no man may be permitted to live as best pleaseth him within the Church of God.” And above all things the young and the ignorant are to be instructed, the former by a regular gradation or ladder of parish or elementary schools, secondary schools and universities. Even the poor were to be fed by the Church’s hands; and behind 881 its moral influence, and a discipline over both poor and rich, was to be not only the coercive authority of the civil power but its money. Knox had from the first proclaimed that “the teinds (tithes of yearly fruits) by God’s law do not appertain of necessity to the kirkmen.” And this book now demands that out of them “must not only the ministers be sustained, but also the poor and schools.” But Knox broadens his plan so as to claim also the property which had been really gifted to the Church by princes and nobles—given by them indeed, as he held, without any moral right and to the injury of the people, yet so as to be Church patrimony. From all such property, whether land or the sheaves and fruits of land, and also from the personal property of burghers in the towns, Knox now held that the state should authorize the kirk to claim the salaries of the ministers, and the salaries of teachers in the schools and universities, but above all, the relief of the poor—not only of the absolutely “indigent” but of “your poor brethren, the labourers and handworkers of the ground.” For the danger now was that some gentlemen were already cruel in exactions of their tenants, “requiring of them whatever before they paid to the Church, so that the papistical tyranny shall only be changed into the tyranny of the lords or of the laird.” The danger foreseen alike to the new Church, and to the commonalty and poor, began to be fulfilled a month later, when the lords, some of whom had already acquired, as others were about to acquire, much of the Church property, declined to make any of it over for Knox’s magnificent scheme. It was, they said, “a devout imagination.” Seven years afterwards, however, when the contest with the Crown was ended, the kirk was expressly acknowledged as the only Church in Scotland, and jurisdiction given it over all who should attempt to be outsiders; while the preaching of the Evangel and the planting of congregations went on in all the accessible parts of Scotland. Gradually too stipends for most Scottish parishes were assigned to the ministers out of the yearly teinds; and the Church received—what it retained even down to recent times—the administration both of the public schools and of the Poor Law of Scotland. But the victorious rush of 1560 was already somewhat stayed, and the very next year raised the question whether the transfer of intolerance to the side of the new faith was as wise as it had at first seemed to be successful.

Mary Queen of Scots had been for a short time also queen of France, and in 1561 returned to her native land, a young widow on whom the eyes of Europe were fixed. Knox’s objections to the “regiment of women” were theoretical, and in the present case he hoped at first for the best, favouring rather his queen’s marriage with the heir of the house of Hamilton. Mary had put herself into the hands of her half-brother, Lord James Stuart afterwards earl of Moray, the only man who could perhaps have pulled her through. A proclamation now continued the “state of religion” begun the previous year; but mass was celebrated in the queen’s household, and Lord James himself defended it with his sword against Protestant intrusion. Knox publicly protested; and Moray, who probably understood and liked both parties, brought the preacher to the presence of his queen. There is nothing revealed to us by “the broad clear light of that wonderful book,”1 The History of the Reformation in Scotland, more remarkable than the four Dialogues or interviews, which, though recorded only by Knox, bear the strongest stamp of truth, and do almost more justice to his opponent than to himself. Mary took the aggressive and very soon raised the real question. “Ye have taught the people to receive another religion than their princes can allow; and how can that doctrine be of God, seeing that God commands subjects to obey their princes?” The point was made keener by the fact that Knox’s own Confession of Faith (like all those of that age, in which an unbalanced monarchical power culminated) had held kings to be appointed “for maintenance of the true religion,” and suppression of the false; and the reformer now fell back on his more fundamental principle, that “right religion took neither original nor authority from worldly princes, but from the Eternal God alone.” All through this dialogue too, as in another at Lochleven two years afterwards, Knox was driven to axioms, not of religion but of constitutionalism, which Buchanan and he may have learned from their teacher Major, but which were not to be accepted till a later age. “’Think ye,’ quoth she, ‘that subjects, having power, may resist their princes?’ ‘If their princes exceed their bounds, Madam, they may be resisted and even deposed,’” Knox replied. But these dialectics, creditable to both parties, had little effect upon the general situation. Knox had gone too far in intolerance, and Moray and Maitland of Lethington gradually withdrew their support. The court and parliament, guided by them, declined to press the queen or to pass the Book of Discipline; and meantime the negotiations as to the queen’s marriage with a Spanish, a French or an Austrian prince revealed the real difficulty and peril of the situation. Her marriage to a great Catholic prince would be ruinous to Scotland, probably also to England, and perhaps to all Protestantism. Knox had already by letter formally broken with the earl of Moray, “committing you to your own wit, and to the conducting of those who better please you”; and now, in one of his greatest sermons before the assembled lords, he drove at the heart of the situation—the risk of a Catholic marriage. The queen sent for him for the last time and burst into passionate tears as she asked, “What have you to do with my marriage? Or what are you within this commonwealth?” “A subject born within the same,” was the answer of the son of the East Lothian peasant; and the Scottish nobility, while thinking him overbold, refused to find him guilty of any crime, even when, later on, he had “convocated the lieges” to Edinburgh to meet a crown prosecution. In 1564 a change came. Mary had wearied of her guiding statesmen, Moray and the more pliant Maitland; the Italian secretary David Rizzio, through whom she had corresponded with the pope, now more and more usurped their place; and a weak fancy for her handsome cousin, Henry Darnley, brought about a sudden marriage in 1565 and swept the opposing Protestant lords into exile. Darnley, though a Catholic, thought it well to go to Knox’s preaching; but was so unfortunate as to hear a very long sermon, with allusions not only to “babes and women” as rulers, but to Ahab who did not control his strong-minded wife. Mary and the lords still in her council ordered Knox not to preach while she was in Edinburgh, and he was absent or silent during the weeks in which the queen’s growing distaste for her husband, and advancement of Rizzio over the nobility remaining in Edinburgh, brought about the conspiracy by Darnley, Morton and Ruthven. Knox does not seem to have known beforehand of Rizzio’s “slaughter,” which had been intended to be a semi-judicial act; but soon after it he records that “that vile knave Davie was justly punished, for abusing of the commonwealth, and for other villainy which we list not to express.” The immediate effect however of what Knox thus approved was to bring his cause to its lowest ebb, and on the very day when Mary rode from Holyrood to her army, he sat down and penned the prayer, “Lord Jesus, put an end to this my miserable life, for justice and truth are not to be found among the sons of men!” He added a short autobiographic fragment, whose mingled self-abasement and exultation are not unworthy of its striking title—“John Knox, with deliberate mind, to his God.” During the rest of the year he was hidden in Ayrshire or elsewhere, and throughout 1566 he was forbidden to preach when the court was in Edinburgh. But he was influential at the December Assembly in the capital where a greater tragedy was now preparing, for Mary’s infatuation for Bothwell was visible to all. At the Assembly’s request, however, Knox undertook a long visit to England, where his two sons by his first wife were being educated, and were afterwards to be Fellows of St John’s, Cambridge, the younger becoming a parish clergyman. It was thus during the reformer’s absence that the murder of Darnley, the abduction and subsequent marriage of Mary, the flight of Bothwell, and the imprisonment in Lochleven of the queen, unrolled themselves 882 before the eyes of Scotland. Knox returned in time to guide the Assembly which sat on the 25th of June 1567 in dealing with this unparalleled crisis, and to wind up the revolution by preaching at Stirling on the 9th of July 1567, after Mary’s abdication, at the coronation of the infant king.

His main work was now really done; for the parliament of 1567 made Moray regent, and Knox was only too glad to have his old friend back in power, though they seem to have differed on the question whether the queen should be allowed to pass into retirement without trial for her husband’s death, as they had differed all along on the question of tolerating her private religion. Knox’s victory had not come too early, for his physical strength soon began to fail. But Mary’s escape in 1568 resulted only in her defeat at Langside, and in a long imprisonment and death in England. In Scotland the regent’s assassination in 1570 opened a miserable civil war, but it made no permanent change. The massacre of St Bartholomew rather united English and Scottish Protestantism; and Knox in St Giles’ pulpit, challenging the French ambassador to report his words, denounced God’s vengeance on the crowned murderer and his posterity. When open war broke out between Edinburgh Castle, held by Mary’s friends, and the town, held for her son, both parties agreed that the reformer, who had already had a stroke of paralysis, should remove to St Andrews. While there he wrote his will, and published his last book, in the preface to which he says, “I heartily take my good-night of the faithful of both realms ... for as the world is weary of me, so am I of it.” And when he now merely signs his name, it is “John Knox, with my dead hand and glad heart.” In the autumn of 1572 he returned to Edinburgh to die, probably in the picturesque house in the “throat of the Bow,” which for generations has been called by his name. With him were his wife and three young daughters; for though he had lost Margaret Bowes at the close of his year of triumph 1560, he had four years after married Margaret Stewart, a daughter of his friend Lord Ochiltree. She was a bride of only seventeen and was related to the royal house; yet, as his Catholic biographer put it, “by sorcery and witchcraft he did so allure that poor gentlewoman that she could not live without him.” But lords, ladies and burghers also crowded around his bed, and his colleague and his servant have severally transmitted to us the words in which his weakness daily strove with pain, rising on the day before his death into a solemn exultation—yet characteristically, not so much on his own account as for “the troubled Church of God.” He died on the 24th of November 1572, and at his funeral in St Giles’ Churchyard the new Regent Morton, speaking under the hostile guns of the castle, expressed the first surprise of those around as they looked back on that stormy life, that one who had “neither flattered nor feared any flesh” had now “ended his days in peace and honour.” Knox himself had a short time before put in writing a larger claim for the historic future, “What I have been to my country, though this unthankful age will not know, yet the ages to come will be compelled to bear witness to the truth.”

Knox was a rather small man, with a well-knit body; he had a powerful face, with dark blue eyes under a ridge of eyebrow, high cheek-bones, and a long black beard which latterly turned grey. This description, taken from a letter in 1579 by his junior contemporary Sir Peter Young, is very like Beza’s fine engraving of him in the Icones—an engraving probably founded on a portrait which was to be sent by Young to Beza along with the letter. The portrait, which was unfortunately adopted by Carlyle, has neither pedigree nor probability. After his two years in the French galleys, if not before, Knox suffered permanently from gravel and dyspepsia, and he confesses that his nature “was for the most part oppressed with melancholy.” Yet he was always a hard worker; as sole minister of Edinburgh studying for two sermons on Sunday and three during the week, besides having innumerable cares of churches at home and abroad. He was undoubtedly sincere in his religious faith, and most disinterested in his devotion to it and to the good of his countrymen. But like too many of them, he was self-conscious, self-willed and dogmatic; and his transformation in middle life, while it immensely enriched his sympathies as well as his energies, left him unable to put himself in the place of those who retained the views which he had himself held. All his training too, university, priestly and in foreign parts, tended to make him logical overmuch. But this was mitigated by a strong sense of humour (not always sarcastic, though sometimes savagely so), and by tenderness, best seen in his epistolary friendships with women; and it was quite overborne by an instinct and passion for great practical affairs. Hence it was that Knox as a statesman so often struck successfully at the centre of the complex motives of his time, leaving it to later critics to reconcile his theories of action. But hence too he more than once took doubtful shortcuts to some of his most important ends; giving the ministry within the new Church more power over laymen than Protestant principles would suggest, and binding the masses outside who were not members of it, equally with their countrymen who were, to join in its worship, submit to its jurisdiction, and contribute to its support. And hence also his style (which contemporaries called anglicized and modern), though it occasionally rises into liturgical beauty, and often flashes into vivid historical portraiture, is generally kept close to the harsh necessities of the few years in which he had to work for the future. That work was indeed chiefly done by the living voice; and in speaking, this “one man,” as Elizabeth’s very critical ambassador wrote from Edinburgh, was “able in one hour to put more life in us than five hundred trumpets continually blustering in our ears.” But even his eloquence was constraining and constructive—a personal call for immediate and universal co-operation; and that personal influence survives to this day in the institutions of his people, and perhaps still more in their character. His countrymen indeed have always believed that to Knox more than to any other man Scotland owes her political and religious individuality. And since his 19th century biography by Dr Thomas McCrie, or at least since his recognition in the following generation by Thomas Carlyle, the same view has taken its place in literature.

KNOX, PHILANDER CHASE (1853-  ), American lawyer and political leader, was born in Brownsville, Pennsylvania, on the 4th of May 1853. He graduated from Mount Union College (Ohio) in 1872, and was admitted to the Pennsylvania bar in 1875. He settled in Pittsburg, where he continued in private practice, with the exception of two years’ service (1876-1877) as assistant United States district attorney, acquiring a large practice as a corporation lawyer. In April 1901 he became attorney-general of the United States in the cabinet of President McKinley, and retained this position after the accession of President Roosevelt until June 1904, when he was appointed by Governor Pennypacker of Pennsylvania to fill the unexpired term of Matthew S. Quay in the United States Senate; in 1905 he 883 was re-elected to the Senate for the full term. In March 1909 he became secretary of state in the cabinet of President Taft.

KNOXVILLE, a city and the county-seat of Knox county, Tennessee, U.S.A., in the E. part of the state, 160 m. E. of Nashville, and about 190 m. S.E. of Louisville, Kentucky, on the right bank of the Tennessee river, 4 m. below the point where it is formed by the junction of the French Broad and Holston Rivers. Pop. (1880), 9693; (1890), 22,535; (1900), 32,637, of whom 7359 were negroes and 895 were foreign-born; (1910 census), 36,346. It is served by the main line and by branches of the Louisville & Nashville and the Southern railways, by the Knoxville & Bristol railway (Morristown to Knoxville, 58 m.), by the short Knoxville & Augusta railroad (Knoxville to Walland, 26 m.), and by passenger and freight steamboat lines on the Tennessee river, which is here navigable for the greater part of the year. A steel and concrete street-car bridge crosses the Tennessee at Knoxville. Knoxville is picturesquely situated at an elevation of from 850 to 1000 ft. in the valley between the Smoky Mountains and the Cumberland Mountains, and is one of the healthiest cities in the United States. There are several beautiful parks, of which Chilhowie and Fountain City are the largest, and among the public buildings are a city-hall, Federal building, court-house, the Knoxville general hospital, the Lincoln memorial hospital, the Margaret McClung industrial home, a Young Men’s Christian Association building and the Lawson-McGhee public library. A monument to John Sevier stands on the site of the blockhouse first built there. Knoxville is the seat of Knoxville College (United Presbyterian, 1875) for negroes, East Tennessee institute, a secondary school for girls, the Baker-Himel school for boys, Tennessee Medical College (1889), two commercial schools and the university of Tennessee. The last, a state co-educational institution, was chartered as Blount College in 1794 and as East Tennessee College in 1807, but not opened until 1820—the present name was adopted in 1879. It had in 1907-1908 106 instructors, 755 students (536 in academic departments), and a library of 25,000 volumes. With the university is combined the state college of agriculture and engineering; and a large summer school for teachers is maintained. At Knoxville are the Eastern State insane asylum, state asylums for the deaf and dumb (for both white and negro), and a national cemetery in which more than 3200 soldiers are buried. Knoxville is an important commercial and industrial centre and does a large jobbing business. It is near hardwood forests and is an important market for hardwood mantels. Coal-mines in the vicinity produce more than 2,000,000 tons annually, and neighbouring quarries furnish the famous Tennessee marble, which is largely exported. Excellent building and pottery clays are found near Knoxville. Among the city’s industrial establishments are flour and grist mills, cotton and woollen mills, furniture, desk, office supplies and sash, door, and blind factories, meat-packing establishments, clothing factories, iron, steel and boiler works, foundries and machine shops, stove works and brick and cement works. The value of the factory product increased from $6,201,840 in 1900 to $12,432,880 in 1905, or 100.5%, in 1905 the value of the flour and grist mill products alone being $2,048,509. Just outside the city the Southern railway maintains large car and repair shops. Knoxville was settled in 1786 by James White (1737-1815), a North Carolina pioneer, and was first known as “White’s Fort”; it was laid out as a town in 1791, and named in honour of General Henry Knox, then secretary of war in Washington’s cabinet. In 1791 the Knoxville Gazette, the first newspaper in Tennessee (the early issue, printed at Rogersville) began publication. From 1792 to 1796 Knoxville was the capital of the “Territory South of the Ohio,” and until 1811 and again in 1817 it was the capital of the state. In 1796 the convention which framed the constitution of the new state of Tennessee met here, and here later in the same year the first state legislature was convened. Knoxville was chartered as a city in 1815. In its early years it was several times attacked by the Indians, but was never captured. During the Civil War there was considerable Union sentiment in East Tennessee, and in the summer of 1863 the Federal authorities determined to take possession of Knoxville as well as Chattanooga and to interrupt railway communications between the Confederates of the East and West through this region. As the Confederates had erected only slight defences for the protection of the city, Burnside, with about 12,000 men, easily gained possession on the 2nd of September 1863. Fortifications were immediately begun for its defence, and on the 4th of November, Bragg, thinking his position at Chattanooga impregnable against Grant, Sherman, Thomas and Hooker, despatched a force of 20,000 men under Longstreet to engage Burnside. Longstreet arrived in the vicinity on the 16th of November, and on the following day began a siege, which was continued with numerous assaults until the 28th, when a desperate but unsuccessful attack was made on Fort Sanders, and upon the approach of a relief force under Sherman, Longstreet withdrew on the night of the 4th of December. The Confederate losses during the siege were 182 killed, 768 wounded and 192 captured or missing; the Union losses were 92 killed, 394 wounded and 207 captured or missing. West Knoxville (incorporated in 1888) and North Knoxville (incorporated in 1889) were annexed to Knoxville in 1898.

KNUCKLE (apparently the diminutive of a word for “bone,” found in Ger. Knochen), the joint of a finger, which, when the hand is shut, is brought into prominence. In mechanical use the word is applied to the round projecting part of a hinge through which the pin is run, and in ship-building to an acute angle on some of the timbers. A “knuckle-duster,” said to have originally come from the criminal slang of the United States, is a brass or metal instrument fitting on to the hand across the knuckles, with projecting studs and used for inflicting a brutal blow.

KNUCKLEBONES (Hucklebones, Dibs, Jackstones, Chuck-stones, Five-stones), a game of very ancient origin, played with five small objects, originally the knucklebones of a sheep, which are thrown up and caught in various ways. Modern “knucklebones” consist of six points, or knobs, proceeding from a common base, and are usually of metal. The winner is he who first completes successfully a prescribed series of throws, which, while of the same general character, differ widely in detail. The simplest consists in tossing up one stone, the jack, and picking up one or more from the table while it is in the air; and so on until all five stones have been picked up. Another consists in tossing up first one stone, then two, then three and so on, and catching them on the back of the hand. Different throws have received distinctive names, such as “riding the elephant,” “peas in the pod,” and “horses in the stable.”

The origin of knucklebones is closely connected with that of dice, of which it is probably a primitive form, and is doubtless Asiatic. Sophocles, in a fragment, ascribed the invention of draughts and knucklebones (astragaloi) to Palamedes, who taught them to his Greek countrymen during the Trojan War. Both the Iliad and the Odyssey contain allusions to games similar in character to knucklebones, and the Palamedes tradition, as flattering to the national pride, was generally accepted throughout Greece, as is indicated by numerous literary and plastic evidences. Thus Pausanias (Corinth xx.) mentions a temple of Fortune in which Palamedes made an offering of his newly invented game. According to a still more ancient tradition, Zeus, perceiving that Ganymede longed for his playmates upon Mount Ida, gave him Eros for a companion and golden dibs with which to play, and even condescended sometimes to join in the game (Apollonius). It is significant, however, that both Herodotus and Plato ascribe to the game a foreign origin. Plato (Phaedrus) names the Egyptian god Theuth as its inventor, while Herodotus relates that the Lydians, during a period of famine in the days of King Atys, originated this game and indeed almost all other games except chess. There were two methods of playing in ancient times. The first, and probably the primitive method, consisted in tossing up and catching the bones on the 884 back of the hand, very much as the game is played to-day. In the Museum of Naples may be seen a painting excavated at Pompeii, which represents the goddesses Latona, Niobe, Phoebe, Aglaia and Hileaera, the last two being engaged in playing at Knucklebones (see Greek Art, fig. 42). According to an epigram of Asclepiodotus, astragals were given as prizes to school-children, and we are reminded of Plutarch’s anecdote of the youthful Alcibiades, who, when a teamster threatened to drive over some of his knucklebones that had fallen into the wagon-ruts, boldly threw himself in front of the advancing team. This simple form of the game was generally played only by women and children, and was called pentalitha or five-stones. There were several varieties of it besides the usual toss and catch, one being called tropa, or hole-game, the object having been to toss the bones into a hole in the earth. Another was the simple and primitive game of “odd or even.”

The second, probably derivative, form of the game was one of pure chance, the stones being thrown upon a table, either with the hand or from a cup, and the values of the sides upon which they fell counted. In this game the shape of the pastern-bones used for astralagoi, as well as for the tali of the Romans, with whom knucklebones was also popular, determined the manner of counting. The pastern-bone of a sheep, goat or calf has, besides two rounded ends upon which it cannot stand, two broad and two narrow sides, one of each pair being concave and one convex. The convex narrow side, called chios or “the dog” counted 1; the convex broad side 3; the concave broad side 4; and the concave narrow side 6. Four astragals were used and 35 different scores were possible at a single throw, many receiving distinctive names such as Aphrodite, Midas, Solon, Alexander, and, among the Romans, Venus, King, Vulture, &c. The highest throw in Greece, counting 40, was the Euripides, and was probably a combination throw, since more than four sixes could not be thrown at one time. The lowest throw, both in Greece and Rome, was the Dog.

KNUTSFORD, a market town in the Knutsford parliamentary division of Cheshire, England; on the London & North-Western and Great Central railways, 24 m. E.N.E. of Chester, on the Cheshire Lines and London & North-Western railway. Pop. of urban district (1901), 5172. It is pleasantly situated on an elevated ridge, with the fine domains of Tatton Park and Tabley respectively north and west of it. The meres in these domains are especially picturesque. Knutsford is noted in modern times as the scene of Mrs Gaskell’s novel Cranford. Among several ancient houses the most interesting are a cottage with the date 1411 carved on its woodwork, and the Rose and Crown tavern, dated 1641. A number of curious old customs linger in the town, such as the practice of working designs in coloured sand, when a wedding takes place, before the bride’s house. In what is probably the oldest Unitarian graveyard in the kingdom Mrs Gaskell lies buried; and in a churchyard a mile from the town stood the ancient church, which, though partially rebuilt in the time of Henry VIII., fell into ruin in 1741. The church of St John, built in 1744, and enlarged in 1879, was supplemented, in 1880, by St Cross Church, in Perpendicular style. The town has a grammar school, founded before the reign of Henry VIII., but reorganized in 1885. Lord Egerton built the Egerton schools in 1893. The industries comprise cotton, worsted and leather manufactures; but Knutsford is mainly a residential town, as many Manchester merchants have settled here, attracted by the fine climate and surroundings. Knutsford was the birthplace of Sir Henry Holland, Physician Extraordinary to Queen Victoria (1788-1873); and his son, the second Sir Henry, who was secretary of state for the colonies (1887-1892), was raised to the peerage in 1888 with the title of Baron Knutsford.

The name Knutsford (Cunetesford, Knotesford) is said to signify Cnut’s ford, but there is no evidence of a settlement here previous to Domesday. In 1086 Erthebrand held Knutsford immediately of William FitzNigel, baron of Halton, who was himself a mesne lord of Hugh Lupus earl of Chester. In 1292 William de Tabley, lord of both Over and Nether Knutsford, granted free burgage to his burgesses in both Knutsfords. This charter is the only one which gives Knutsford a claim to the title of borough. It provided that the burgesses might elect a bailiff from amongst themselves every year. The office however carried little real power with it, and soon lapsed. In the same year as the charter to Knutsford the king granted to William de Tabley a market every Saturday at Nether Knutsford, and a three days’ fair at the Feast of St Peter and St Paul. When this charter was confirmed by Edward III. another market (Friday) and another three days’ fair (Feast of St Simon and St Jude) were added. The Friday market was certainly dropped by 1592, if it was ever held. May-day revels are still kept up here and attract large crowds from the neighbourhood. A silk mill was erected here in 1770, and there was also an attempt to foster the cotton trade, but the lack of means of communication made the undertaking impossible.

KOALA (Phascolarctus cinereus), a stoutly built marsupial, of the family Phascolmyidae, which also contains the wombats. This animal, which inhabits the south-eastern parts of the Australian continent, is about 2 ft. in length, and of an ash-grey colour, an excellent climber, residing generally in lofty eucalyptus trees, the buds and tender shoots of which form its principal food, though occasionally it descends to the ground in the night in search of roots. From its shape the koala is called by the colonists the “native bear”; the term “native sloth” being also applied to it, from its arboreal habits and slow deliberate movements. The flesh is highly prized by the natives, and is palatable to Europeans. The skins are largely imported into England, for the manufacture of articles in which a cheap and durable fur is required.

KOBDO, a town of the Chinese Empire, in north-west Mongolia, at the northern foot of the Mongolian Altai, on the right bank of the Buyantu River, 13 m. from its entrance into Lake Khara-usu; 500 m. E.S.E. of Biysk (Russian), and 470 m. W. of Ulyasutai. It is situated amidst a dreary plain, and consists of a fortress, the residence of the governor of the Kobdo district, and a small trading town, chiefly peopled by Chinese and a few Mongols. It is, however, an important centre for trade between the cattle-breeding nomads and Peking. It was founded by the Chinese in 1731, and pillaged by the Mussulmans in 1872. The district of Kobdo occupies the north-western corner of Mongolia, and is peopled chiefly by Mongols, and also by Kirghiz and a few Soyotes, Uryankhes and Khotons. It is governed by a Chinese commissioner, who has under him a special Mongol functionary (Mongol, dzurgan). The chief monastery is at Ulangom. Considerable numbers of sheep (about 1,000,000), sheepskins, sheep and camel wool are exported to China, while Chinese cottons, brick tea and various small goods are imported. Leather, velveteen, cotton, iron and copper goods boxes, &c., are imported from Russia in exchange for cattle, furs and wool. The absence of a cart road to Biysk hinders the development of this trade.

KOBELL, WOLFGANG XAVER FRANZ, Baron Von (1803-1882), German mineralogist, was born at Munich on the 19th of July 1803. He studied chemistry and mineralogy at Landshut (1820-1823), and in 1826 became professor of mineralogy in the university of Munich. He introduced some new methods of mineral analyses, and in 1835 invented the stauroscope for the study of the optical properties of crystals. He contributed numerous papers to scientific journals, and described many new minerals. He died at Munich on the 11th of November, 1882.

885

KOCH, ROBERT (1843-1910), German bacteriologist, was born at Klausthal, Hanover, on the 11th of December 1843. He studied medicine at Göttingen, and it was while he was practising as a physician at Wollstein that he began those bacteriological researches that made his name famous. In 1876 he obtained a pure culture of the bacillus of anthrax, announcing a method of preventive inoculation against that disease seven years later. He became a member of the Sanitary Commission at Berlin and a professor at the School of Medicine in 1880, and five years later he was appointed to a chair in Berlin University and director of the Institute of Health. In 1882, largely as the result of the improved methods of bacteriological investigation he was able to elaborate, he discovered the bacillus of tuberculosis; and in the following year, having been sent on an official mission to Egypt and India to study the aetiology of Asiatic cholera, he identified the comma bacillus as the specific organism of that malady. In 1890 great hopes were aroused by the announcement that in tuberculin he had prepared an agent which exercised an inimical influence on the growth of the tubercle bacillus, but the expectations that were formed of it as a remedy for consumption were not fulfilled, though it came into considerable vogue as a means of diagnosing the existence of tuberculosis in animals intended for food. At the Congress on Tuberculosis held in London in 1901 he maintained that tuberculosis in man and in cattle is not the same disease, the practical inference being that the danger to men of infection from milk and meat is less than from other human subjects suffering from the disease. This statement, however, was not regarded as properly proved, and one of its results was the appointment of a British Royal Commission to study the question. Dr Koch also investigated the nature of rinderpest in South Africa in 1896, and found means of combating the disease. In 1897 he went to Bombay at the head of a commission formed to investigate the bubonic plague, and he subsequently undertook extensive travels in pursuit of his studies on the origin and treatment of malaria. He was summoned to South Africa a second time in 1903 to give expert advice on other cattle diseases, and on his return was elected a member of the Berlin Academy of Sciences. In 1906-1907 he spent eighteen months in East Africa, investigating sleeping-sickness. He died at Baden-Baden of heart-disease on the 28th of May 1910. Koch was undoubtedly one of the greatest bacteriologists ever known, and a great benefactor of humanity by his discoveries. Honours were showered upon him, and in 1905 he was awarded the Nobel prize for medicine.

KOCH, a tribe of north-eastern India, which has given its name to the state of Kuch Behar (q.v.). They are probably of Mongolian stock, akin to the Mech, Kachari, Garo and Tippera tribes, and originally spoke, like these, a language of the Bodo group. But since one of their chiefs established a powerful kingdom at Kuch Behar in the 16th century they have gradually become Hinduized, and now adopt the name of Rajbansi (= “of royal blood”). In 1901 the number in Eastern Bengal and Assam was returned at nearly 2½ millions.

KOCK, CHARLES PAUL DE (1793-1871), French novelist, was born at Passy on the 21st of May 1793. He was a posthumous child, his father, a banker of Dutch extraction, having been a victim of the Terror. Paul de Kock began life as a banker’s clerk. For the most part he resided on the Boulevard St Martin, and was one of the most inveterate of Parisians. He died in Paris on the 27th of April 1871. He began to write for the stage very early, and composed many operatic libretti. His first novel, L’Enfant de ma femme (1811), was published at his own expense. In 1820 he began his long and successful series of novels dealing with Parisian life with Georgette, ou la mère du Tabellion. His period of greatest and most successful activity was the Restoration and the early days of Louis Philippe. He was relatively less popular in France itself than abroad, where he was considered as the special painter of life in Paris. Major Pendennis’s remark that he had read nothing of the novel kind for thirty years except Paul de Kock, “who certainly made him laugh,” is likely to remain one of the most durable of his testimonials, and may be classed with the legendary question of a foreign sovereign to a Frenchman who was paying his respects, “Vous venez de Paris et vous devez savoir des nouvelles. Comment se porte Paul de Kock?” The disappearance of the grisette and of the cheap dissipation described by Henri Murger practically made Paul de Kock obsolete. But to the student of manners his portraiture of low and middle class life in the first half of the 19th century at Paris still has its value.

The works of Paul de Kock are very numerous. With the exception of a few not very felicitous excursions into historical romance and some miscellaneous works of which his share in La Grande ville, Paris (1842), is the chief, they are all stories of middle-class Parisian life, of guinguettes and cabarets and equivocal adventures of one sort or another. The most famous are André le Savoyard (1825) and Le Barbier de Paris (1826).

KODAIKANAL, a sanatorium of southern India, in the Madura district of Madras, situated in the Palni hills, about 7000 ft. above sea-level; pop. (1901), 1912, but the number in the hot season would be much larger. It is difficult of access, being 44 m. from a railway station, and the last 11 m. are impracticable for wheeled vehicles. It contains a government observatory, the appliances of which are specially adapted for the study of terrestrial magnetism, seismology and solar physics.

KODAMA, GENTARO, Count (1852-1907), Japanese general, was born in Choshu. He studied military science in Germany, and was appointed vice-minister of war in 1892. He became governor-general of Formosa in 1900, holding at the same time the portfolio of war. When the conflict with Russia became imminent in 1903, he gave up his portfolio to become vice-chief of the general staff, a sacrifice which elicited much public applause. Throughout the Russo-Japanese War (1904-5) he served as chief of staff to Field Marshal Oyama, and it was well understood that his genius guided the strategy of the whole campaign, as that of General Kawakami had done in the war with China ten years previously. General Kodama was raised in rapid succession to the ranks of baron, viscount and count, and his death in 1907 was regarded as a national calamity.

KODUNGALUR (or Cranganur), a town of southern India, in Cochin state, within the presidency of Madras. Though now a place of little importance, its historical interest is considerable. Tradition assigns to it the double honour of having been the first field of St Thomas’s labours (A.D. 52) in India and the seat of Cheraman Perumal’s government. The visit of St Thomas is generally considered mythical; but it is certain that the Syrian Church was firmly established here before the 9th century (Burnell), and probably the Jews’ settlement was still earlier. The latter, in fact, claim to hold grants dated A.D. 378. The cruelty of the Portuguese drove most of the Jews to Cochin. Up to 1314, when the Vypin harbour was formed, the only opening in the Cochin backwater, and outlet for the Periyar, was at Kodungalur, which must then have been the best harbour on the coast. In 1502 the Syrian Christians invoked the protection of the Portuguese. In 1523 the latter built their first fort there, and in 1565 enlarged it. In 1661 the Dutch took the fort, the possession of which for the next forty years was contested between this nation, the zamorin, and the raja of Kodungalur. In 1776 Tippoo seized the stronghold. The Dutch recaptured it two years later, and, having ceded it to Tippoo in 1784, sold it to the Travancore raja, and again in 1789 to Tippoo, who destroyed it in the following year. The country round Kodungalur now forms an autonomous principality, tributary to the raja of Cochin.

886

KOENIG, KARL DIETRICH EBERHARD (1774-1851), German palaeontologist, was born at Brunswick in 1774, and was educated at Göttingen. In 1807 he became assistant keeper, and in 1813 he was appointed keeper, of the department of natural history in the British Museum, and afterwards of geology and mineralogy, retaining the post until the close of his life. He described many fossils in the British Museum in a classic work entitled Icones fossilium sectiles (1820-1825). He died in London on the 6th of September 1851.

KOESFELD, a town of Germany, in the Prussian province of Westphalia, on the Berkel, 38 m. by rail N.N.W. of Dortmund. Pop. (1905), 8449. It has three Roman Catholic churches, one of which—the Gymnasial Kirche—is used by the Protestant community. Here are the ruins of the Ludgeri Castle, formerly the residence of the bishops of Münster, and also the castle of Varlar, the residence of the princes of Salm-Horstmar. The leading industries include the making of linen goods and machinery.

KOHAT, a town and district of British India, in the Peshawar division of the North-West Frontier Province. The town is 37 m. south of Peshawar by the Kohat Pass, along which a military road was opened in 1901. The population in 1901 was 30,762, including 12,670 in the cantonment, which is garrisoned by artillery, cavalry and infantry. In the Tirah campaign of 1897-98 Kohat was the starting-point of Sir William Lockhart’s expedition against the Orakzais and Afridis. It is the military base for the southern Afridi frontier as Peshawar is for the northern frontier of the same tribe, and it lies in the heart of the Pathan country.

The District of Kohat has an area of 2973 sq. m. It consists chiefly of a bare and intricate mountain region east of the Indus, deeply scored with river valleys and ravines, but enclosing a few scattered patches of cultivated lowland. The eastern or Khattak country especially comprises a perfect labyrinth of ranges, which fall, however, into two principal groups, to the north and south of the Teri Toi river. The Miranzai valley, in the extreme west, appears by comparison a rich and fertile tract. In its small but carefully tilled glens, the plane, palm, fig and many orchard trees flourish luxuriantly; while a brushwood of wild olive, mimosa and other thorny bushes clothes the rugged ravines upon the upper slopes. Occasional grassy glades upon their sides form favourite pasture grounds for the Waziri tribes. The Teri Toi, rising on the eastern limit of Upper Miranzai, runs due eastward to the Indus, which it joins 12 m. N. of Makhad, dividing the district into two main portions. The drainage from the northern half flows southward into the Teri Toi itself, and northward into the parallel stream of the Kohat Toi. That of the southern tract falls northwards also into the Teri Toi, and southwards towards the Kurram and the Indus. The frontier mountains, continuations of the Safed Koh system, attain in places a considerable elevation, the two principal peaks, Dupa Sir and Mazi Garh, just beyond the British frontier, being 8260 and 7940 ft. above the sea respectively. The Waziri hills, on the south, extend like a wedge between the boundaries of Bannu and Kohat, with a general elevation of less than 4000 ft. The salt-mines are situated in the low line of hills crossing the valley of the Teri Toi, and extending along both banks of that river. The deposit has a width of a quarter of a mile, with a thickness of 1000 ft.; it sometimes forms hills 200 ft. in height, almost entirely composed of solid rock-salt, and may probably rank as one of the largest veins of its kind in the world. The most extensive exposure occurs at Bahadur Khel, on the south bank of the Teri Toi. The annual output is about 16,000 tons, yielding a revenue of £40,000. Petroleum springs exude from a rock at Panoba, 23 m. east of Kohat; and sulphur abounds in the northern range. In 1901 the population was 217,865, showing an increase of 11% in the decade. The frontier tribes on the Kohat border are the Afridis, Orakzais, Zaimukhts and Turis. All these are described under their separate names. A railway runs from Kushalgarh through Kohat to Thal, and the river Indus has been bridged at Kushalgarh.

KOHAT PASS, a mountain pass in the North-West Frontier Province of India, connecting Kohat with Peshawar. From the north side the defile commences at 4½ m. S.W. of Fort Mackeson, whence it is about 12 or 13 m. to the Kohat entrance. The pass varies from 400 yds. to 1¼ m. in width, and its summit is some 600 to 700 ft. above the plain. It is inhabited by the Adam Khel Afridis, and nearly all British relations with that tribe have been concerned with this pass, which is the only connexion between two British districts without crossing and recrossing the Indus (see Afridi). It is now traversed by a cart-road.

KOHISTAN, a tract of country on the Peshawar border of the North-West Frontier Province of India. Kohistan means the “country of the hills” and corresponds to the English word highlands; but it is specially applied to a district, which is very little known, to the south and west of Chilas, between the Kagan valley and the river Indus. It comprises an area of over 1000 sq. m., and is bounded on the N.W. by the river Indus, on the N.E. by Chilas, and on the S. by Kagan, the Chor Glen and Allai. It consists roughly of two main valleys running east and west, and separated from each other by a mountain range over 16,000 ft. high. Like the mountains of Chilas, those in Kohistan are snow-bound and rocky wastes from their crests downwards to 12,000 ft. Below this the hills are covered with fine forest and grass to 5000 or 6000 ft., and in the valleys, especially near the Indus, are fertile basins under cultivation. The Kohistanis are Mahommedans, but not of Pathan race, and appear to be closely allied to the Chilasis. They are a well-built, brave but quiet people who carry on a trade with British districts, and have never given the government much trouble. There is little doubt that the Kohistanis are, like the Kafirs of Kafiristan, the remnants of old races driven by Mahommedan invasions from the valleys and plains into the higher mountains. The majority have been converted to Islam within the last 200 years. The total population is about 16,000.

An important district also known as Kohistan lies to the north of Kabul in Afghanistan, extending to the Hindu Kush. The Kohistani Tajiks proved to be the most powerful and the best organized clans that opposed the British occupation of Kabul in 1879-80. Part of their country is highly cultivated, abounding in fruit, and includes many important villages. It is here that the remains of an ancient city have been lately discovered by the amir’s officials, which may prove to be the great city of Alexander’s founding, known to be to the north of Kabul, but which had hitherto escaped identification.

The name of Kohistan is also applied to a tract of barren and hilly country on the east border of Karachi district, Sind.

KOHL. (1) The name of the cosmetic used from the earliest times in the East by women to darken the eyelids, in order to increase the lustre of the eyes. It is usually composed of finely powdered antimony, but smoke black obtained from burnt almond-shells or frankincense is also used. The Arabic word koḥl, from which has been derived “alcohol,” is derived from kaḥala, to stain. (2) “Kohl” or “kohl-rabi” (cole-rape, from Lat. caulis, cabbage) is a kind of cabbage (q.v.), with a turnip-shaped top, cultivated chiefly as food for cattle.

KOHLHASE, HANS, a German historical figure about whose personality some controversy exists. He is chiefly known as the hero of Heinrich von Kleist’s novel, Michael Kohlhaas. He was a merchant, and not, as some have supposed, a horsedealer, and he lived at Kölln in Brandenburg. In October 1532, so the story runs, whilst proceeding to the fair at Leipzig, he was attacked and his horses were taken from him by the servants of a Saxon nobleman, one Günter von Zaschwitz. In consequence of the delay the merchant suffered some loss of business at the fair and on his return he refused to pay the small sum which Zaschwitz demanded as a condition of returning the horses. Instead Kohlhase asked for a substantial amount of money as compensation for his loss, and failing to secure this he invoked the aid of his sovereign, the elector of Brandenburg. Finding however that it was impossible to recover his horses, he paid Zaschwitz the sum required for them, but reserved to himself the right to take further action. Then unable to obtain redress 887 in the courts of law, the merchant, in a Fehdebrief, threw down a challenge, not only to his aggressor, but to the whole of Saxony. Acts of lawlessness were soon attributed to him, and after an attempt to settle the feud had failed, the elector of Saxony, John Frederick I., set a price upon the head of the angry merchant. Kohlhase now sought revenge in earnest. Gathering around him a band of criminals and of desperadoes he spread terror throughout the whole of Saxony; travellers were robbed, villages were burned and towns were plundered. For some time the authorities were practically powerless to stop these outrages, but in March 1540 Kohlhase and his principal associate, Georg Nagelschmidt, were seized, and on the 22nd of the month they were broken on the wheel in Berlin.

KOKOMO, a city and the county-seat of Howard county, Indiana, U.S.A., on the Wildcat River, about 50 m. N. of Indianapolis. Pop. (1890), 8261; (1900), 10,609 of whom 499 were foreign-born and 359 negroes; (1910 census), 17,010. It is served by the Lake Erie & Western, the Pittsburg Cincinnati Chicago & St Louis, and the Toledo St Louis & Western railways, and by two interurban electric lines. Kokomo is a centre of trade in agricultural products, and has various manufactures, including flint, plate and opalescent glass, &c. The total value of the factory product increased from $2,062,156 in 1900 to $3,651,105 in 1905, or 77.1%; and in 1905 the glass product was valued at $864,567, or 23.7% of the total. Kokomo was settled about 1840 and became a city (under a state law) in 1865.

KOKO-NOR (or Kuku-Nor) (Tsing-hai of the Chinese, and Tso-ngombo of the Tanguts), a lake of Central Asia, situated at an altitude of 9975 ft., in the extreme N.E. of Tibet, 30 m. from the W. frontier of the Chinese province of Kan-suh, in 100° E. and 37° N. It lies amongst the eastern ranges of the Kuen-lun, having the Nan-shan Mountains to the north, and the southern Koko-nor range (10,000 ft.) on the south. It measures 66 m. by 40 m., and contains half a dozen islands, on one of which is a Buddhist (i.e. Lamaist) monastery, to which pilgrims resort. The water is salt, though an abundance of fish live in it, and it often remains frozen for three months together in winter. The surface is at times subject to considerable variations of level. The lake is entered on the west by the river Buhain-gol. The nomads who dwell round its shores are Tanguts.

KOKSHAROV, NĪKOLAÍ ĪVANOVICH VON (1818-1893), Russian mineralogist and major-general in the Russian army, was born at Ust-Kamenogork in Tomsk, on the 5th of December 1818 (O.S.). He was educated at the military school of mines in St Petersburg. At the age of twenty-two he was selected to accompany R. I. Murchison and De Verneuil, and afterwards De Keyserling, in their geological survey of the Russian Empire. Subsequently he devoted his attention mainly to the study of mineralogy and mining, and was appointed director of the Institute of Mines. In 1865 he became director of the Imperial Mineralogical Society of St Petersburg. He contributed numerous papers on euclase, zircon, epidote, orthite, monazite and other mineralogical subjects to the St Petersburg and Vienna academies of science, to Poggendorf’s Annalen, Leonhard and Brown’s Jahrbuch, &c. He also issued as separate works Materialen zur Mineralogie Russlands (10 vols., 1853-1891), and Vorlesungen über Mineralogie (1865). He died in St Petersburg on the 3rd of January 1893 (O.S.).

KOKSTAD, a town of South Africa, the capital of Griqualand East, 236 m. by rail S.W. of Durban, 110 m. N. by W. of Port Shepstone, and 150 m. N. of Port St John, Pondoland. Pop. (1904), 2903, of whom a third were Griquas. The town is built on the outer slopes of the Drakensberg and is 4270 ft. above the sea. Behind it Mount Currie rises to a height of 7297 ft. An excellent water supply is derived from the mountains. The town is well laid out, and possesses several handsome public buildings. It is the centre of a thriving agricultural district and has a considerable trade in wool, grain, cattle and horses with Basutoland, Pondoland and the neighbouring regions of Natal. The town is named after the Griqua chief Adam Kok, who founded it in 1869. In 1879 it came into the possession of Cape Colony and was granted municipal government in 1893. It is the residence of the Headman of the Griqua nation. (See Kaffraria and Griqualand.)

KOLA, a peninsula of northern Russia, lying between the Arctic Ocean on the N. and the White Sea on the S. It forms part of the region of Lapland and belongs administratively to the government of Archangel. The Arctic coast, known as the Murman coast (Murman being a corruption of Norman), is 260 m. long, and being subject to the influence of the North Atlantic drift, is free from ice all the year round. It is a rocky coast, built of granite, and rising to 650 ft., and is broken by several excellent bays. On one of these, Kola Bay, the Russian government founded in 1895 the naval harbour of Alexandrovsk. From May to August a productive fishery is carried on along this coast. Inland the peninsula rises up to a plateau, 1000 ft. in general elevation, and crossed by several ranges of low mountains, which go up to over 3000 ft. in altitude. The lower slopes of these mountains are clothed with forest up to 1300 ft., and in places thickly studded with lakes, some of them of very considerable extent, e.g. Imandra (330 sq. m.), Ump-jaur, Nuorti-järvi, Guolle-jaur or Kola Lake, and Lu-jaur. From these issue streams of appreciable magnitude, such as the Tuloma, Voronya, Yovkyok or Yokanka, and Ponoi, all flowing into the Arctic, and the Varsuga and Umba, into the White Sea. The area of the peninsula is estimated at 50,000 sq. m.

KOLABA (or Colaba), a district of British India, in the southern division of Bombay. Area, 2131 sq. m.; pop. (1901), 605,566, showing an increase of 2% in the decade. The headquarters are at Alibagh. Lying between the Western Ghats and the sea, Kolaba district abounds in hills, some being spurs running at right angles to the main range, while others are isolated peaks or lofty detached ridges. The sea frontage, of about 20 m., is throughout the greater part of its length fringed by a belt of coco-nut and betel-nut palms. Behind this belt lies a stretch of flat country devoted to rice cultivation. In many places along the banks of the salt-water creeks there are extensive tracts of salt marshland, some of them reclaimed, some still subject to tidal inundation, and others set apart for the manufacture of salt. The district is traversed by a few small streams. Tidal inlets, of which the principal are the Nagothna on the north, the Roha or Chaul in the west, and the Bankot creek in the south, run inland for 30 or 40 m., forming highways for a brisk trade in rice, salt, firewood, and dried fish. Near the coast especially, the district is well supplied with reservoirs. The Western Ghats have two remarkable peaks—Raigarh, where Sivaji built his capital, and Miradongar. There are extensive teak and black wood forests, the value of which is increased by their proximity to Bombay. The Great Indian Peninsula railway crosses part of the district, and communication with Bombay is maintained by a steam ferry. Owing to its nearness to that city, the district has suffered severely from plague. Kolaba district takes its name from a little island off Alibagh, which was one of the strongholds of Angria, the Mahratta pirate of the 18th century. The same island has given its name to Kolaba Point, the spur of Bombay Island running south that protects the entrance to the harbour. On Kolaba Point are the terminus of the Bombay & Baroda railway, barracks for a European regiment, lunatic asylum and observatory.

KOLAR, a town and district of India, in the state of Mysore. The town is 43 m. E. of Bangalore. Pop. (1901), 12,210. Although of ancient foundation, it has been almost completely modernized. Industries include the weaving of blankets and the breeding of turkeys for export.

888

The District of Kolar has an area of 3180 sq. m. It occupies the portion of the Mysore table-land immediately bordering the Eastern Ghats. The principal watershed lies in the north-west, around the hill of Nandidrug (4810 ft.), from which rivers radiate in all directions; and the whole country is broken by numerous hill ranges. The chief rivers are the Palar, the South Pinakini or Pennar, the North Pinakini, and the Papagani, which are industriously utilized for irrigation by means of anicuts and tanks. The rocks of the district are mostly syenite or granite, with a small admixture of mica and feldspar. The soil in the valleys consists of a fertile loam; and in the higher levels sand and gravel are found. The hills are covered with scrub, jungle and brushwood. In 1901 the population was 723,600, showing an increase of 22% in the decade. The district is traversed by the Bangalore line of the Madras railway, with a branch 10 m. long, known as the Kolar Goldfields railway. Gold prospecting in this region began in 1876, and the industry is now settled on a secure basis. Here are situated the mines of the Mysore, Champion Reef, Ooregum, and Nandidrug companies. To the end of 1904 the total value of gold produced was 21 millions sterling, and there had been paid in dividends 9 millions, and in royalty to the Mysore state one million. The municipality called the Kolar Gold Fields had in 1901 a population of 38,204; it has suffered severely from plague. Electricity from the falls of the Cauvery (93 m. distant) is utilized as the motive power in the mines. Sugar manufacture and silk and cotton weaving are the other principal industries in the district. The chief historical interest of modern times centres round the hill fort of Nandidrug, which was stormed by the British in 1791, after a bombardment of 21 days.

KOLBE, ADOLPHE WILHELM HERMANN (1818-1884), German chemist, was born on the 27th of September 1818 at Elliehausen, near Göttingen, where in 1838 he began to study chemistry under F. Wöhler. In 1842 he became assistant to R. W. von Bunsen at Marburg, and three years later to Lyon Playfair at London. From 1847 to 1851 he was engaged at Brunswick in editing the Dictionary of Chemistry started by Liebig, but in the latter year he went to Marburg as successor to Bunsen in the chair of chemistry. In 1865 he was called to Leipzig in the same capacity, and he died in that city on the 25th of November 1884. Kolbe had an important share in the great development of chemical theory that occurred about the middle of the 19th century, especially in regard to the constitution of organic compounds, which he viewed as derivatives of inorganic ones, formed from the latter—in some cases directly—by simple processes of substitution. Unable to accept Berzelius’s doctrine of the unalterability of organic radicals, he also gave a new interpretation to the meaning of copulae under the influence of his fellow-worker Edward Frankland’s conception of definite atomic saturation-capacities, and thus contributed in an important degree to the subsequent establishment of the structure theory. Kolbe was a very successful teacher, a ready and vigorous writer, and a brilliant experimentalist whose work revealed the nature of many compounds the composition of which had not previously been understood. He published a Lehrbuch der organischen Chemie in 1854, smaller textbooks of organic and inorganic chemistry in 1877-1883, and Zur Entwickelungsgeschichte der theoretischen Chemie in 1881. From 1870 he was editor of the Journal für praktische Chemie, in which many trenchant criticisms of contemporary chemists and their doctrines appeared from his pen.

KOLBERG (or Colberg), a town of Germany, and seaport of the Prussian province of Pomerania, on the right bank of the Persante, which falls into the Baltic about a mile below the town, and at the junction of the railway lines to Belgard and Gollnow. Pop. (1905), 22,804. It has a handsome market-place with a statue of Frederick William III.; and there are extensive suburbs, of which the most important is Münde. The principal buildings are the huge red-brick church of St Mary, with five aisles, one of the most remarkable churches in Pomerania, dating from the 14th century; the council-house (Rathaus), erected after the plans of Ernst F. Zwirner; and the citadel. Kolberg also possesses four other churches, a theatre, a gymnasium, a school of navigation, and an exchange. Its bathing establishments are largely frequented and attract a considerable number of summer visitors. It has a harbour at the mouth of the Persante, where there is a lighthouse. Woollen cloth, machinery and spirits are manufactured; there is an extensive salt-mine in the neighbouring Zillenberg; the salmon and lamprey fisheries are important; and a fair amount of commercial activity is maintained. In 1903 a monument was erected to the memory of Gneisenau and the patriot, Joachim Christian Nettelbeck (1738-1824), through whose efforts the town was saved from the French in 1806-7.

Originally a Slavonic fort, Kolberg is one of the oldest places of Pomerania. At an early date it became the seat of a bishop, and although it soon lost this distinction it obtained municipal privileges in 1255. From about 1276 it ranked as the most important place in the episcopal principality of Kamin, and from 1284 it was a member of the Hanseatic League. During the Thirty Years’ War it was captured by the Swedes in 1631, passing by the treaty of Westphalia to the elector of Brandenburg, Frederick William I., who strengthened its fortifications. The town was a centre of conflict during the Seven Years’ War. In 1758 and again in 1760 the Russians besieged Kolberg in vain, but in 1762 they succeeded in capturing it. Soon restored to Brandenburg, it was vigorously attacked by the French in 1806 and 1807, but it was saved by the long resistance of its inhabitants. In 1887 the fortifications of the town were razed, and it has since become a fashionable watering-place, receiving annually nearly 15,000 visitors.

KÖLCSEY, FERENCZ (1790-1838), Hungarian poet, critic and orator, was born at Szodemeter, in Transylvania, on the 8th of August 1790. In his fifteenth year he made the acquaintance of Kazinczy and zealously adopted his linguistic reforms. In 1809 Kölcsey went to Pest and became a “notary to the royal board.” Law proved distasteful, and at Cseke in Szatmár county he devoted his time to aesthetical study, poetry, criticism, and the defence of the theories of Kazinczy. Kölcsey’s early metrical pieces contributed to the Transylvanian Museum did not attract much attention, whilst his severe criticisms of Csokonai, Kis, and especially Berzsenyi, published in 1817, rendered him very unpopular. From 1821 to 1826 he published many separate poems of great beauty in the Aurora, Hebe, Aspasia, and other magazines of polite literature. He joined Paul Szemere in a new periodical, styled Élet és literatura (“Life and Literature”), which appeared from 1826 to 1829, in 4 vols., and gained for Kölcsey the highest reputation as a critical writer. From 1832 to 1835 he sat in the Hungarian Diet, where his extreme liberal views and his singular eloquence soon rendered him famous as a parliamentary leader. Elected on the 17th of November 1830 a member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, he took part in its first grand meeting; in 1832, he delivered his famous oration on Kazinczy, and in 1836 that on his former opponent Daniel Berzsenyi. When in 1838 Baron Wesselényi was unjustly thrown into prison upon a charge of treason, Kölcsey eloquently though unsuccessfully conducted his defence; and he died about a week afterwards (August 24) from internal inflammation. His collected works, in 6 vols., were published at Pest, 1840-1848, and his journal of the diet of 1832-1836 appeared in 1848. A monument erected to the memory of Kölcsey was unveiled at Szatmár-Németi on the 25th of September 1864.

KOLDING, a town of Denmark in the amt (county) of Vejle, on the east coast of Jutland, on the Koldingfjord, an inlet of the 889 Little Belt, 9 m. N. of the German frontier. Pop. (1901), 12,516. It is on the Eastern railway of Jutland. The harbour throughout has a depth of over 20 ft. A little to the north-west is the splendid remnant of the royal castle Koldinghuus, formerly called Oernsborg or Arensborg. It was begun by Duke Abel in 1248; in 1808 it was burned. The large square tower was built by Christian IV. (1588-1648), and was surmounted by colossal statues, of which one is still standing. It contains an antiquarian and historical museum (1892). The name of Kolding occurs in the 10th century, but its earliest known town-rights date from 1321. In 1644 it was the scene of a Danish victory over the Swedes, and on the 22nd of April 1849 of a Danish defeat by the troops of Schleswig-Holstein. A comprehensive view of the Little Belt with its islands, and over the mainland, is obtained from the Skamlingsbank, a slight elevation 8½ m. S.E., where an obelisk (1863) commemorates the effort made to preserve the Danish language in Schleswig.

KOLGUEV, Kolgueff or Kalguyev, an island off the north-west of Russia in Europe, belonging to the government of Archangel. It lies about 50 m. from the nearest point of the mainland, and is of roughly oval form, 54 m. in length from N.N.E. to S.S.W. and 39 m. in extreme breadth. It lies in a shallow sea, and is quite low, the highest point being 250 ft. above the sea. Peat-bogs and grass lands cover the greater part of the surface; there are several considerable streams and a large number of small lakes. The island is of recent geological formation; it consists almost wholly of disintegrated sandstone or clay (which rises at the north-west into cliffs up to 60 ft. high), with scattered masses of granite. Vegetation is scanty, but bears, foxes and other Arctic animals, geese, swans, &c., provide means of livelihood for a few Samoyed hunters.

KOLHAPUR, a native state of India, within the Deccan division of Bombay. It is the fourth in importance of the Mahratta principalities, the other three being Baroda, Gwalior and Indore; and it is the principal state under the political control of the government of Bombay. Together with its jagirs or feudatories, it covers an area of 3165 sq. m. In 1901 the population was 910,011. The estimated revenue is £300,000. Kolhapur stretches from the heart of the Western Ghats eastwards into the plain of the Deccan. Along the spurs of the main chain of the Ghats lie wild and picturesque hill slopes and valleys, producing little but timber, and till recently covered with rich forests. The centre of the state is crossed by several lines of low hills running at right angles from the main range. In the east the country becomes more open and presents the unpicturesque uniformity of a well-cultivated and treeless plain, broken only by an occasional river. Among the western hills are the ancient Mahratta strongholds of Panhala, Vishalgarh, Bavda and Rungna. The rivers, though navigable during the rains by boats of 2 tons burthen, are all fordable during the hot months. Iron ore is found in the hills, and smelting was formerly carried on to a considerable extent; but now the Kolhapur mineral cannot compete with that imported from Europe. There are several good stone quarries. The principal agricultural products are rice, millets, sugar-cane, tobacco, cotton, safflower and vegetables.

The rajas of Kolhapur trace their descent from Raja Ram, a younger son of Sivaji the Great, the founder of the Mahratta power. The prevalence of piracy caused the British government to send expeditions against Kolhapur in 1765 and 1792; and in the early years of the 19th century the misgovernment of the chief compelled the British to resort to military operations, and ultimately to appoint an officer to manage the state. In recent years the state has been conspicuously well governed, on the pattern of British administration. The raja Shahu Chhatrapati, G.C.S.I. (who is entitled to a salute of 21 guns) was born in 1874, and ten years later succeeded to the throne by adoption. The principal institutions are the Rajaram college, the high school, a technical school, an agricultural school, and training-schools for both masters and mistresses. The state railway from Miraj junction to Kolhapur town is worked by the Southern Mahratta company. In recent years the state has suffered from both famine and plague.

The town of Kolhapur, or Karvir, is the terminus of a branch of the Southern Mahratta railway, 30 m. from the main line. Pop. (1901), 54,373. Besides a number of handsome modern public buildings, the town has many evidences of antiquity. Originally it appears to have been an important religious centre, and numerous Buddhist remains have been discovered in the neighbourhood.

KOLIN, or Neu-Kolin (also Kollin; Czech, Nový Kolín), a town of Bohemia, Austria, 40 m. E. of Prague by rail. Pop. (1900), 15,025, mostly Czech. It is situated on the Elbe, and amongst its noteworthy buildings may be specially mentioned the beautiful early Gothic church of St Bartholomew, erected during the latter half of the 14th century. The industries of the town include sugar-refining, steam mills, brewing, and the manufacture of starch, syrup, spirits, potash and tin ware. The neighbourhood is known for the excellence of its fruit and vegetables. Kolin is chiefly famous on account of the battle here on the 18th of June 1757, when the Prussians under Frederick the Great were defeated by the Austrians under Daun (see Seven Years’ War). The result was the raising of the siege of Prague and the evacuation of Bohemia by the Prussians. Kolin was colonized in the 13th century by German settlers and made a royal city. In 1421 it was captured by the men of Prague, and the German inhabitants who refused to accept “the four articles” were expelled. In 1427 the town declared against Prague, was besieged by Prokop the Great, and surrendered to him upon conditions at the close of the year.

KOLIS, a caste or tribe of Western India, of uncertain origin. Possibly the name is derived from the Turki kuleh a slave; and, according to one theory, this name has been passed on to the familiar word “cooly” for an agricultural labourer. They form the main part of the inferior agricultural population of Gujarat, where they were formerly notorious as robbers; but they also extend into the Konkan and the Deccan. In 1901 the number of Kolis in all India was returned as nearly 3¾ millions; but this total includes a distinct weaving caste of Kolis or Koris in northern India.

KÖLLIKER, RUDOLPH ALBERT VON (1817-1905), Swiss anatomist and physiologist, was born at Zürich on the 6th of July 1817. His father and his mother were both Zürich people, and he in due time married a lady from Aargau, so that Switzerland can claim him as wholly her own, though he lived the greater part of his life in Germany. His early education was carried on in Zürich, and he entered the university there in 1836. After two years, however, he moved to the university of Bonn, and later to that of Berlin, becoming at the latter place the pupil of Johannes Müller and of F. G. J. Henle. He graduated in philosophy at Zürich in 1841, and in medicine at Heidelberg in 1842. The first academic post which he held was that of prosector of anatomy under Henle; but his tenure of this office was brief, for in 1844 his native city called him back to its university to occupy a chair as professor extraordinary of physiology and comparative anatomy. His stay here too, however, was brief, for in 1847 the university of Würzburg, attracted by his rising fame, offered him the post of professor of physiology and of microscopical and comparative anatomy. He accepted the appointment, and at Würzburg he remained thenceforth, refusing all offers tempting him to leave the quiet academic life of the Bavarian town, where he died on the 2nd of November 1905.

Kölliker’s name will ever be associated with that of the tool with which during his long life he so assiduously and successfully worked, the microscope. The time at which he began his studies coincided with that of the revival of the microscopic investigation of living beings. Two centuries earlier the great Italian Malpighi had started, and with his own hand had carried far the study by the help of the microscope of the minute structure of animals and plants. After Malpighi this branch of knowledge, though continually progressing, made no remarkable bounds forward until the second quarter of the 19th century, when the improvement of the compound microscope on the one hand, and the promulgation by Theodor Schwann and Matthias Schleiden of the “cell theory” on the other, inaugurated a new era of 890 microscopic investigation. Into this new learning Kölliker threw himself with all the zeal of youth, wisely initiated into it by his great teacher Henle, whose sober and exact mode of inquiry went far at the time to give the new learning a right direction and to counteract the somewhat fantastic views which, under the name of the cell theory, were tending to be prominent. Henle’s labours were for the most part limited to the microscopic investigation of the minute structure of the tissues of man and of the higher animals, the latter being studied by him mainly with the view of illustrating the former. But Kölliker had another teacher besides Henle, the even greater Johannes Müller, whose active mind was sweeping over the whole animal kingdom, striving to pierce the secrets of the structure of living creatures of all sorts, and keeping steadily in view the wide biological problems of function and of origin, which the facts of structure might serve to solve. We may probably trace to the influence of these two great teachers, strengthened by the spirit of the times, the threefold character of Kölliker’s long-continued and varied labours. In all of them, or in almost all of them, the microscope was the instrument of inquiry, but the problem to be solved by means of the instrument belonged now to one branch of biology, now to another.

At Zürich, and afterwards at Würzburg, the title of the chair which he held laid upon him the duty of teaching comparative anatomy, and very many of the numerous memoirs which he published, including the very first paper which he wrote, and which appeared in 1841 before he graduated, “On the Nature of the so-called Seminal Animalcules,” were directed towards elucidating, by help of the microscope, the structure of animals of the most varied kinds—that is to say, were zoological in character. Notable among these were his papers on the Medusae and allied creatures. His activity in this direction led him to make zoological excursions to the Mediterranean Sea and to the coasts of Scotland, as well as to undertake, conjointly with his friend C. T. E. von Siebold, the editorship of the Zeitschrift für Wissenschaftliche Zoologie, which, founded in 1848, continued under his hands to be one of the most important zoological periodicals.

At the time when Kölliker was beginning his career the influence of Karl Ernst von Baer’s embryological teaching was already being widely felt, men were learning to recognize the importance to morphological and zoological studies of a knowledge of the development of animals; and Kölliker plunged with enthusiasm into the relatively new line of inquiry. His earlier efforts were directed to the invertebrata, and his memoir on the development of cephalopods, which appeared in 1844, is a classical work; but he soon passed on to the vertebrata, and studied not only the amphibian embryo and the chick, but also the mammalian embryo. He was among the first, if not the very first, to introduce into this branch of biological inquiry the newer microscopic technique—the methods of hardening, section-cutting and staining. By doing so, not only was he enabled to make rapid progress himself, but he also placed in the hands of others the means of a like advance. The remarkable strides forward which embryology made during the middle and during the latter half of the 19th century will always be associated with his name. His Lectures on Development, published in 1861, at once became a standard work.

But neither zoology nor embryology furnished Kölliker’s chief claim to fame. If he did much for these branches of science, he did still more for histology, the knowledge of the minute structure of the animal tissues. This he made emphatically his own. It may indeed be said that there is no fragment of the body of man and of the higher animals on which he did not leave his mark, and in more places than one his mark was a mark of fundamental importance. Among his earlier results may be mentioned the demonstration in 1847 that smooth or unstriated muscle is made up of distinct units, of nucleated muscle-cells. In this work he followed in the footsteps of his master Henle. A few years before this men were doubting whether arteries were muscular, and no solid histological basis as yet existed for those views as to the action of the nervous system on the circulation, which were soon to be put forward, and which had such a great influence on the progress of physiology. By the above discovery Kölliker completed that basis.

Even to enumerate, certainly to dwell on, all his contributions to histology would be impossible here: smooth muscle, striated muscle, skin, bone, teeth, blood-vessels and viscera were all investigated by him; and he touched none of them without striking out some new truths. The results at which he arrived were recorded partly in separate memoirs, partly in his great textbook on microscopical anatomy, which first saw the light in 1850, and by which he advanced histology no less than by his own researches. In the case of almost every tissue our present knowledge contains something great or small which we owe to Kölliker; but it is on the nervous system that his name is written in largest letters. So early as 1845, while still at Zürich, he supplied what was as yet still lacking, the clear proof that nerve-fibres are continuous with nerve-cells, and so furnished the absolutely necessary basis for all sound speculations as to the actions of the central nervous system. From that time onward he continually laboured, and always fruitfully, at the histology of the nervous system, and more especially at the difficult problems presented by the intricate patterns in which fibres and cells are woven together in the brain and spinal cord. In his old age, at a time when he had fully earned the right to fold his arms, and to rest and be thankful, he still enriched neurological science with results of the highest value. From his early days a master of method, he saw at a glance the value of the new Golgi method for the investigation of the central nervous system, and, to the great benefit of science, took up once more in his old age, with the aid of a new means, the studies for which he had done so much in his youth. It may truly be said that much of that exact knowledge of the inner structure of the brain, which is rendering possible new and faithful conceptions of its working, came from his hands.

Lastly, Kölliker was in his earlier years professor of physiology as well as of anatomy; and not only did his histological labours almost always carry physiological lessons, but he also enriched physiology with the results of direct researches of an experimental kind, notably those on curare and some other poisons. In fact, we have to go back to the science of centuries ago to find a man of science of so many-sided an activity as he. His life constituted in a certain sense a protest against that specialized differentiation which, however much it may under certain aspects be regretted, seems to be one of the necessities of modern development. In Johannes Müller’s days no one thought of parting anatomy and physiology; nowadays no one thinks of joining them together. Kölliker did in his work join them together, and indeed said himself that he thought they ought never to be kept apart.

Naturally a man of so much accomplishment was not left without honours. Formerly known simply as Kölliker, the title “von” was added to his name. He was made a member of the learned societies of many countries; in England, which he visited more than once, and where he became well known, the Royal Society made him a fellow in 1860, and in 1897 gave him its highest token of esteem, the Copley medal.

KOLLONTAJ, HUGO (1750-1812), Polish politician and writer, was born in 1750 at Niecislawice in Sandomir, and educated at Pinczow and Cracow. After taking orders he went (1770) to Rome, where he obtained the degree of doctor of theology and common law, and devoted himself enthusiastically to the study of the fine arts, especially of architecture and painting. At Rome too he obtained a canonry attached to Cracow cathedral, and on his return to Poland in 1755 threw himself heart and soul into the question of educational reform. His efforts were impeded by the obstruction of the clergy of Cracow, who regarded him as an adventurer; but he succeeded in reforming the university after his own mind, and was its rector for three years (1782-1785). Kollontaj next turned his attention to politics. In 1786 he was appointed referendarius of Lithuania, and during the Four Years’ Diet (1788-1792) displayed an amazing and many-sided activity as one of the reformers of the constitution. He grouped around him all the leading writers, publicists and progressive young men 891 of the day; declaimed against prejudices; stimulated the timid; inspired the lukewarm with enthusiasm; and never rested till the constitution of the 3rd of May 1791 had been carried through. In June 1791 Kollontaj was appointed vice-chancellor. On the triumph of the reactionaries and the fall of the national party, he secretly placed in the king’s hands his adhesion to the triumphant Confederation of Targowica, a false step, much blamed at the time, but due not to personal ambition but to a desire to save something from the wreck of the constitution. He then emigrated to Dresden. On the outbreak of Kosciuszko’s insurrection he returned to Poland, and as member of the national government and minister of finance took a leading part in affairs. But his radicalism had now become of a disruptive quality, and he quarrelled with and even thwarted Kosciuszko because the dictator would not admit that the Polish republic could only be saved by the methods of Jacobinism. On the other hand, the more conservative section of the Poles regarded Kollontaj as “a second Robespierre,” and he is even suspected of complicity in the outrages of the 17th and 18th of June 1794, when the Warsaw mob massacred the political prisoners. On the collapse of the insurrection Kollontaj emigrated to Austria, where from 1795 to 1802 he was detained as a prisoner. He was finally released through the mediation of Prince Adam Czartoryski, and returned to Poland utterly discredited. The remainder of his life was a ceaseless struggle against privation and prejudice. He died at Warsaw on the 28th of February 1812.

KOLOMEA (Polish, Kolomyja), a town of Austria, in Galicia, 122 m. S. of Lemberg by rail. Pop. (1900), 34,188, of which half were Jews. It is situated on the Pruth, and has an active trade in agricultural products. To the N.E. of Kolomea, near the Dniester, lies the village of Czernelica, with ruins of a strongly fortified castle, which served as the residence of John Sobieski during his campaigns against the Turks. Kolomea is a very old town and is mentioned already in 1240, but the assertion that it was a Roman settlement under the name of Colonia is not proved. It was the principal town of the Polish province of Pokutia, and it suffered severely during the 15th and 16th centuries from the attacks of the Moldavians and the Tatars.

KOLOMNA, a town of Russia, in the government of Moscow, situated on the railway between Moscow and Ryazan, 72 m. S.E. of Moscow, at the confluence of the Moskva river with the Kolomenka. Pop. (1897), 20,970. It is an old town, mentioned in the annals in 1177, and until the 14th century was the capital of the Ryazan principality. It suffered greatly from the invasions of the Tatars in the 13th century, who destroyed it four times, as well as from the wars of the 17th century; but it always recovered and has never lost its commercial importance. During the 19th century it became a centre for the manufacture of silks, cottons, ropes and leather. Here too are railway workshops, where locomotives and wagons are made. Kolomna carries on an active trade in grain, cattle, tallow, skins, salt and timber. It has several old churches of great archaeological interest, including two of the 14th century, one being the cathedral. One gate (restored in 1895) of the fortifications of the Kreml still survives.

KOLOZSVÁR (Ger. Klausenburg; Rum. Cluj), a town of Hungary, in Transylvania, the capital of the county of Kolozs, and formerly the capital of the whole of Transylvania, 248 m. E.S.E. of Budapest by rail. Pop. (1900), 46,670. It is situated in a picturesque valley on the banks of the Little Szamos, and comprises the inner town (formerly surrounded with walls) and five suburbs. The greater part of the town lies on the right bank of the river, while on the other side is the so-called Bridge Suburb and the citadel (erected in 1715). Upon the slopes of the citadel hill there is a gipsy quarter. With the exception of the old quarter, Kolozsvár is generally well laid out, and contains many broad and fine streets, several of which diverge at right angles from the principal square. In this square is situated the Gothic church of St Michael (1396-1432); in front is a bronze equestrian statue of King Matthias Corvinus by the Hungarian sculptor Fadrusz (1902). Other noteworthy buildings are the Reformed church, built by Matthias Corvinus in 1486 and ceded to the Calvinists by Bethlen Gabor in 1622; the house in which Matthias Corvinus was born (1443), which contains an ethnographical museum; the county and town halls, a museum, and the university buildings. A feature of Kolozsvár is the large number of handsome mansions belonging to the Transylvanian nobles, who reside here during the winter. It is the seat of a Unitarian bishop, and of the superintendent of the Calvinists for the Transylvanian circle. Kolozsvár is the literary and scientific centre of Transylvania, and is the seat of numerous literary and scientific associations. It contains a university (founded in 1872), with four faculties—theology, philosophy, law and medicine—frequented by about 1900 students in 1905; and amongst its other educational establishments are a seminary for Unitarian priests, an agricultural college, two training schools for teachers, a commercial academy, and several secondary schools for boys and girls. The industry comprises establishments for the manufacture of woollen and linen cloth, paper, sugar, candles, soap, earthenwares, as well as breweries and distilleries.

Kolozsvár is believed to occupy the site of a Roman settlement named Napoca. Colonized by Saxons in 1178, it then received its German name of Klausenburg, from the old word Klause, signifying a “mountain pass.” Between the years 1545 and 1570 large numbers of the Saxon population left the town in consequence of the introduction of Unitarian doctrines. In 1798 the town was to a great extent destroyed by fire. As capital of Transylvania and the seat of the Transylvanian diets, Kolozsvár from 1830 to 1848 became the centre of the Hungarian national movement in the grand principality; and in December 1848 it was taken and garrisoned by the Hungarians under General Bem.

KOLPINO, one of the chief iron-works of the crown in Russia, in the government of St Petersburg, 16 m. S.E. of the city of St Petersburg, on the railway to Moscow, and on the Izhora river. Pop. (1897), 8076. A sacred image of St Nicholas in the Trinity church is visited by numerous pilgrims on the 22nd of May every year. Here is an iron-foundry of the Russian admiralty.

KOLS, a generic name applied by Hindus to the Munda, Ho and Oraon tribes of Bengal. The Mundas are an aboriginal tribe of Dravidian physical type, inhabiting the Chota Nagpur division, and numbering 438,000 in 1901. The majority of them are animists in religion, but Christianity is making rapid strides among them. The village community in its primitive form still exists among the Mundas; the discontent due to the oppression of their landlords led to the Munda rising of 1899, and to the remedy of the alleged grievances by a new settlement of the district. The Hos, who are closely akin to the Mundas, also inhabit the Chota Nagpur division; in 1901 they numbered 386,000. They were formerly a very pugnacious race, who successfully defended their territory against all comers until they were subdued by the British in the early part of the 19th century, being known as the Larka (or fighting) Kols. They are still great sportsmen, using the bow and arrow. Like the Mundas they are animists, but they show little inclination for Christianity. Both Mundas and Hos speak dialects of the obscure linguistic family known as Munda or Kol.

KOLYVAÑ. (1) A town of West Siberia, in the government of Tomsk, on the Chaus river, 5 m. from the Ob and 120 m. S.S.W. of the city of Tomsk. It is a wealthy town, the merchants carrying on a considerable export trade in cattle, hides, tallow, corn and fish. It was founded in 1713 under the name of Chausky Ostrog, and has grown rapidly. Pop. (1897), 11,703. (2) Kolyvañskiy Zavod, another town of the same government, in the district of Biysk, Altai region, on the Byelaya river, 192 m. 892 S.E. of Barnaul; altitude, 1290 ft. It is renowned for its stone-cutting factory, where marble, jasper, various porphyries and breccias are worked into vases, columns, &c. Pop., 5000. (3) Old name of Reval (q.v.).

KOMÁROM (Ger., Komorn), the capital of the county of Komárom, Hungary, 65 m. W.N.W. of Budapest by rail. Pop. (1900), 16,816. It is situated at the eastern extremity of the island Csallóköz or Grosse Schütt, at the confluence of the Waag with the Danube. Just below Komárom the two arms into which the Danube separates below Pressburg, forming the Grosse Schütt island, unite again. Since 1896 the market-town of Uj-Szöny, which lies on the opposite bank of the Danube, has been incorporated with Komárom. The town is celebrated chiefly for its fortifications, which form the centre of the inland fortifications of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. A brisk trade in cereals, timber, wine and fish is carried on. Komárom is one of the oldest towns of Hungary, having received its charter in 1265. The fortifications were begun by Matthias Corvinus, and were enlarged and strengthened during the Turkish wars (1526-64). New forts were constructed in 1663 and were greatly enlarged between 1805 and 1809. In 1543, 1594, 1598 and 1663 it was beleaguered by the Turks. It was raised to the dignity of a royal free town in 1751. During the revolutionary war of 1848-49 Komárom was a principal point of military operations, and was long unsuccessfully besieged by the Austrians, who on the 11th of July 1849 were defeated there by General Görgei, and on the 3rd of August by General Klapka. On the 27th of September the fortress capitulated to the Austrians upon honourable terms, and on the 3rd and 4th of October was evacuated by the Hungarian troops. The treasure of the Austrian national bank was removed here from Vienna in 1866, when that city was threatened by the Prussians.

KOMATI, a river of south-eastern Africa. It rises at an elevation of about 5000 ft. in the Ermelo district of the Transvaal, 11 m. W. of the source of the Vaal, and flowing in a general N. and E. direction reaches the Indian Ocean at Delagoa Bay, after a course of some 500 miles. In its upper valley near Steynsdorp are gold-fields, but the reefs are almost entirely of low grade ore. The river descends the Drakensberg by a pass 30 m. S. of Barberton, and at the eastern border of Swaziland is deflected northward, keeping a course parallel to the Lebombo mountains. Just W. of 32° E. and in 25° 25´ S. it is joined by one of the many rivers of South Africa named Crocodile. This tributary rises, as the Elands river, in the Bergendal (6437 ft.) near the upper waters of the Komati, and flows E. across the high veld, being turned northward as it reaches the Drakensberg escarpment. The fall to the low veld is over 2000 ft. in 30 m., and across the country between the Drakensberg and the Lebombo (100 m.) there is a further fall of 3000 ft. A mile below the junction of the Crocodile and Komati, the united stream, which from this point is also known as the Manhissa, passes to the coast plain through a cleft 626 ft. high in the Lebombo known as Komati Poort, where are some picturesque falls. At Komati Poort, which marks the frontier between British and Portuguese territory, the river is less than 60 m. from its mouth in a direct line, but in crossing the plain it makes a wide sweep of 200 m., first N. and then S., forming lagoon-like expanses and backwaters and receiving from the north several tributaries. In flood time there is a connexion northward through the swamps with the basin of the Limpopo. The Komati enters the sea 15 m. N. of Lourenço Marques. It is navigable from its mouth, where the water is from 12 to 18 ft. deep, to the foot of the Lebombo.

The railway from Lourenço Marques to Pretoria traverses the plain in a direct line, and at mile 45 reaches the Komati. It follows the south bank of the river and enters the high country at Komati Poort. At a small town with the same name, 2 m. W. of the Poort, on the 23rd of September 1900, during the war with England, 3000 Boers crossed the frontier and surrendered to the Portuguese authorities. From the Poort westward the railway skirts the south bank of the Crocodile river throughout its length.

KOMOTAU (Czech, Chomútov), a town of Bohemia, Austria 79 m. N.N.W. of Prague by rail. Pop. (1900), 15,925, almost exclusively German. It has an old Gothic church, and its town-hall was formerly a commandery of the Teutonic knights. The industrial establishments comprise manufactories of woollen cloth, linen and paper, dyeing houses, breweries, distilleries, vinegar works and the central workshops of the Buschtĕhrad railway. Lignite is worked in the neighbourhood. Komotau was originally a Czech market-place, but in 1252 it came into the possession of the Teutonic Order and was completely Germanized. In 1396 it received a town charter; and in 1416 the knights sold both town and lordship to Wenceslaus IV. On the 16th of March 1421, the town was stormed by the Taborites, sacked and burned. After several changes of ownership, Komotau came in 1588 to Popel of Lobkovic, who established the Jesuits here, which led to trouble between the Protestant burghers and the over-lord. In 1594 the lordship fell to the crown, and in 1605 the town purchased its freedom and was created a royal city.

KOMURA, JUTARO, Count (1855-  ), Japanese statesman, was born in Hiuga. He graduated at Harvard in 1877, and entered the foreign office in Tokyo in 1884. He served as chargé d’affaires in Peking, as Japanese minister in Seoul, in Washington, in St Petersburg, and in Peking (during the Boxer trouble), earning in every post a high reputation for diplomatic ability. In 1901 he received the portfolio of foreign affairs, and held it throughout the course of the negotiations with Russia and the subsequent war (1904-5), being finally appointed by his sovereign to meet the Russian plenipotentiaries at Portsmouth, and subsequently the Chinese representatives in Peking, on which occasions the Portsmouth treaty of September 1905 and the Peking treaty of November in the same year were concluded. For these services, and for negotiating the second Anglo-Japanese alliance, he received the Japanese title of count and was made a K.C.B. by King Edward VII. He resigned his portfolio in 1906 and became privy councillor, from which post he was transferred to the embassy in London, but he returned to Tokyo in 1908 and resumed the portfolio of foreign affairs in the second Katsura cabinet.

KONARAK or Kanarak, a ruined temple in India, in the Puri district of Orissa, which has been described as for its size “the most richly ornamented building—externally at least—in the whole world.” It was erected in the middle of the 13th century, and was dedicated to the sun-god. It consisted of a tower, probably once over 180 ft. high, with a porch in front 140 ft. high, sculptured with figures of lions, elephants, horses, &c.

KONG, the name of a town, district and range of hills in the N.W. of the Ivory Coast colony, French West Africa. The hills are part of the band of high ground separating the inner plains of West Africa from the coast regions. In maps of the first half of the 19th century the range is shown as part of a great mountain chain supposed to run east and west across Africa, and is thus made to appear a continuation of the Mountains of the Moon, or the snow-clad heights of Ruwenzori. The culminating point of the Kong system is the Pic des Kommono, 4757 ft. high. In general the summits of the hills are below 2000 ft. and not more than 700 ft. above the level of the country. The “circle of Kong,” one of the administrative divisions of the Ivory Coast colony, covers 46,000 sq. m. and has a population of some 400,000. The inhabitants are negroes, chiefly Bambara and Mandingo. About a fourth of the population profess Mahommedanism; the remainder are spirit worshippers. The town of Kong, situated in 9° N., 4° 20´ W., is not now of great importance. Probably René Caillié, who spent some time in the western part of the country in 1827, was the first European to visit Kong. In 1888 Captain L. G. Binger induced the native chiefs to place themselves under the protection of France, and in 1893 the protectorate was attached to the Ivory Coast colony. For a time Kong was overrun by the armies of Samory (see Senegal), but the capture of that chief in 1898 was followed by the peaceful development of the district by France (see Ivory Coast).

KONGSBERG, a mining town of Norway in Buskerud amt (county), on the Laagen, 500 ft. above the sea, and 61 m. W.S.W. 893 of Christiania by rail. Pop. (1900), 5585. With the exception of the church and the town-house, the buildings are mostly of wood. The origin and whole industry of the town are connected with the government silver-mines in the neighbourhood. Their first discovery was made by a peasant in 1623, since which time they have been worked with varying success. During the 18th century Kongsberg was more important than now, and contained double its present population. Within the town are situated the smelting-works, the mint, and a Government weapon factory. Three miles below the Laagen forms a fine fall of 140 ft. (Labrofos). The neighbouring Jonksnut (2950 ft.) commands extensive views of the Telemark. A driving-road from Kongsberg follows a favourite route for travellers through this district, connecting with routes to Sand and Odde on the west coast.

KONIA. (1) A vilayet in Asia Minor which includes the whole, or parts of, Pamphylia, Pisidia, Phrygia, Lycaonia, Cilicia and Cappadocia. It was formed in 1864 by adding to the old eyalet of Karamania the western half of Adana, and part of south-eastern Anadoli. It is divided into five sanjaks: Adalia, Buldur, Hamid-abad, Konia and Nigdeh. The population (990,000 Moslems and 80,000 Christians) is for the most part agricultural and pastoral. The only industries are carpet-weaving and the manufacture of cotton and silk stuffs. There are mines of chrome, mercury, cinnabar, argentiferous lead and rock salt. The principal exports are salt, minerals, opium, cotton, cereals, wool and livestock; and the imports cloth-goods, coffee, rice and petroleum. The vilayet is now traversed by the Anatolian railway, and contains the railhead of the Ottoman line from Smyrna.

(2) The chief town [anc. Iconium (q.v.)], altitude 3320 ft., situated at the S.W. edge of the vast central plain of Asia Minor, amidst luxuriant orchards famous in the middle ages for their yellow plums and apricots and watered by streams from the hills. Pop. 45,000, including 5000 Christians. There are interesting remains of Seljuk buildings, all showing strong traces of Persian influence in their decorative details. The principal ruin is that of the palace of Kilij Arslan II., which contained a famous hall. The most important mosques are the great Tekke, which contains the tomb of the poet Mevlana Jelal ed-din Rumi, a mystic (sufi) poet, founder of the order of Mevlevi (whirling) dervishes, and those of his successors, the “Golden” mosque and those of Ala ed-Din and Sultan Selim. The walls, largely the work of Ala ed-Din I., are preserved in great part and notable for the number of ancient inscriptions built into them. They once had twelve gates and were 30 ells in height. The climate is good—hot in summer and cold, with snow, in winter. Konia is connected by railway with Constantinople and is the starting-point of the extension towards Bagdad. After the capture of Nicaea by the Crusaders (1097), Konia became the capital of the Seljuk Sultans of Rum (see Seljuks and Turks). It was temporarily occupied by Godfrey, and again by Frederick Barbarossa, but this scarcely affected its prosperity. During the reign of Ala ed-Din I. (1219-1236) the city was thronged with artists, poets, historians, jurists and dervishes, driven westwards from Persia and Bokhara by the advance of the Mongols, and there was a brief period of great splendour. After the break up of the empire of Rum, Konia became a secondary city of the amirate of Karamania and in part fell to ruin. In 1472 it was annexed to the Osmanli empire by Mahommed II. In 1832 it was occupied by Ibrahim Pasha who defeated and captured the Turkish general, Reshid Pasha, not far from the walls. It had come to fill only part of its ancient circuit, but of recent years it has revived considerably, and, since the railway reached it, has acquired a semi-European quarter, with a German hotel, cafés and Greek shops, &c.

KONIECPOLSKI, STANISLAUS (1591-1646), Polish soldier, was the most illustrious member of an ancient Polish family which rendered great services to the Republic. Educated at the academy of Cracow, he learned the science of war under the great Jan Chodkiewicz, whom he accompanied on his Muscovite campaigns, and under the equally great Stanislaus Zolkiewski, whose daughter Catherine he married. On the death of his first wife he wedded, in 1619, Christina Lubomirska. In 1619 he took part in the expedition against the Turks which terminated so disastrously at Cecora, and after a valiant resistance was captured and sent to Constantinople, where he remained a close prisoner for three years. On his return he was appointed commander of all the forces of the Republic, and at the head of an army of 25,000 men routed 60,000 Tatars at Martynow, following up this success with fresh victories, for which he received the thanks of the diet and the palatinate of Sandomeria from the king. In 1625 he was appointed guardian of the Ukraine against the Tatars, but in 1626 was transferred to Prussia to check the victorious advance of Gustavus Adolphus. Swedish historians have too often ignored the fact that Koniecpolski’s superior strategy neutralized all the efforts of the Swedish king, whom he defeated again and again, notably at Homerstein (April 1627) and at Trzciand (April 1629). But for the most part the fatal parsimony of his country compelled Koniecpolski to confine himself to the harassing guerrilla warfare in which he was an expert. In 1632 he was appointed to the long vacant post of hetman wielki koronny, or commander in chief of Poland, and in that capacity routed the Tatars at Sasowy Rogi (April 1633) and at Paniawce (April and October 1633), and the Turks, with terrific loss, at Abazd Basha. To keep the Cossacks of the Ukraine in order he also built the fortress of Kudak. As one of the largest proprietors in the Ukraine he suffered severely from Cossack depredations and offered many concessions to them. Only after years of conflict, however, did he succeed in reducing these unruly desperadoes to something like obedience. In 1644 he once more routed the Tatars at Ockmatow, and again in 1646 at Brody. This was his last exploit, for he died the same year, to the great grief of Wladislaus IV., who had already concerted with him the plan for a campaign on a grand scale against the Turks, and relied principally upon the Grand Hetman for its success. Though less famous than his contemporaries Zolkiehwski and Chodkiewicz, Koniecpolski was fully their equal as a general, and his inexorable severity made him an ideal lord-marcher.

KÖNIG, KARL RUDOLPH (1832-1901), German physicist, was born at Königsberg (Prussia) on the 26th of November 1832, and studied at the university of his native town, taking the degree of Ph.D. About 1852 he went to Paris, and became apprentice to the famous violin-maker, J. B. Vuillaume, and some six years later he started business on his own account. He called himself a “maker of musical instruments,” but the instruments for which his name is best known are tuning-forks, which speedily gained a high reputation among physicists for their accuracy and general excellence. From this business König derived his livelihood for the rest of his life. He was, however, very far from being a mere tradesman, and even as a manufacturer he regarded the quality of the articles that left his workshop as a matter of greater solicitude than the profits they yielded. Acoustical research was his real interest, and to that he devoted all the time and money he could spare from his business. An exhibit which he sent to the London Exhibition of 1862 gained a gold medal, and at the Philadelphia Exposition at 1876 great admiration was expressed for a tonometric apparatus of his manufacture. This consisted of about 670 tuning-forks, of as many different pitches, extending over four octaves, and it afforded a perfect means for testing, by enumeration of the beats, the number of vibrations producing any given note and for accurately tuning any musical instrument. An attempt was made to secure this apparatus for the university of Pennsylvania, and König was induced to leave it behind him in America on the assurance that it would be purchased; but, ultimately, the money not being forthcoming, the arrangement fell through, to his great disappointment and pecuniary loss. Some of the forks he disposed of to the university of Toronto and the remainder he used as a 894 nucleus for the construction of a still more elaborate tonometer. While the range of the old apparatus was only between 128 and 4096 vibrations a second, the lowest fork of the new one made only 16 vibrations a second, while the highest gave a sound too shrill to be perceptible by the human ear. König will also be remembered as the inventor and constructor of many other beautiful pieces of apparatus for the investigation of acoustical problems, among which may be mentioned his wave-sirens, the first of which was shown at Philadelphia in 1876. His original work dealt, among other things, with Wheatstone’s sound-figures, the characteristic notes of the different vowels, manometric flames, &c.; but perhaps the most important of his researches are those devoted to the phenomena produced by the interference of two tones, in which he controverted the views of H. von Helmholtz as to the existence of summation and difference tones. He died in Paris on the 2nd of October 1901.

KÖNIGGRÄTZ (Czech, Hradec Králové), a town and episcopal see of Bohemia, Austria, 74 m. E. of Prague by rail. Pop. (1900), 9773, mostly Czech. It is situated in the centre of a very fertile region called the “Golden Road,” and contains many buildings of historical and architectural interest. The cathedral was founded in 1303 by Elizabeth, wife of Wenceslaus II; and the church of St John, built in 1710, stands on the ruins of the old castle. The industries include the manufacture of musical instruments, machinery, colours, and carton-pierre, as well as gloves and wax candles. The original name of Königgrätz, one of the oldest settlements in Bohemia, was Chlumec Dobroslavský; the name Hradec, or “the Castle,” was given to it when it became the seat of a count, and Kralove, “of the queen” (Ger. Königin), was prefixed when it became one of the dower towns of the queen of Wenceslaus II., Elizabeth of Poland, who lived here for thirty years. It remained a dower town till 1620. Königgrätz was the first of the towns to declare for the national cause during the Hussite wars. After the battle of the White Mountain (1620) a large part of the Protestant population left the place. In 1639 the town was occupied for eight months by the Swedes. Several churches and convents were pulled down to make way for the fortifications erected under Joseph II. The fortress was finally dismantled in 1884. Near Königgrätz took place, on the 3rd of July 1866, the decisive battle (formerly called Sadowa) of the Austro-Prussian war (see Seven Weeks’ War).