Articles in This Slice

119

JACOBITES (from Lat. Jacobus, James), the name given after the revolution of 1688 to the adherents, first of the exiled English king James II., then of his descendants, and after the extinction of the latter in 1807, of the descendants of Charles I., i.e. of the exiled house of Stuart.

The history of the Jacobites, culminating in the risings of 1715 and 1745, is part of the general history of England (q.v.), and especially of Scotland (q.v.), in which country they were comparatively more numerous and more active, while there was also a large number of Jacobites in Ireland. They were recruited largely, but not solely, from among the Roman Catholics, and the Protestants among them were often identical with the Non-Jurors. Owing to a variety of causes Jacobitism began to lose ground after the accession of George I. and the suppression of the revolt of 1715; and the total failure of the rising of 1745 may be said to mark its end as a serious political force. In 1765 Horace Walpole said that “Jacobitism, the concealed mother of the latter (i.e. Toryism), was extinct,” but as a sentiment it remained for some time longer, and may even be said to exist to-day. In 1750, during a strike of coal workers at Elswick, James III. was proclaimed king; in 1780 certain persons walked out of the Roman Catholic Church at Hexham when George III. was prayed for; and as late as 1784 a Jacobite rising was talked about. Northumberland was thus a Jacobite stronghold; and in Manchester, where in 1777 according to an American observer Jacobitism “is openly professed,” a Jacobite rendezvous known as “John Shaw’s Club” lasted from 1733 to 1892. North Wales was another Jacobite centre. The “Cycle of the White Rose”—the white rose being the badge of the Stuarts—composed of members of the principal Welsh families around Wrexham, including the Williams-Wynns of Wynnstay, lasted from 1710 until some time between 1850 and 1860. Jacobite traditions also lingered among the great families of the Scottish Highlands; the last person to suffer death as a Jacobite was Archibald Cameron, a son of Cameron of Lochiel, who was executed in 1753. Dr Johnson’s Jacobite sympathies are well known, and on the death of Victor Emmanuel I., the ex-king of Sardinia, in 1824, Lord Liverpool wrote to Canning saying “there are those who think that the ex-king was the lawful king of Great Britain.” Until the accession of King Edward VII. finger-bowls were not placed upon the royal dinner-table, because in former times those who secretly sympathized with the Jacobites were in the habit of drinking to the king over the water. The romantic side of Jacobitism was stimulated by Sir Walter Scott’s Waverley, and many Jacobite poems were written during the 19th century.

Upon the death of Henry Stuart, Cardinal York, the last of James II.’s descendants, in 1807, the rightful occupant of the British throne according to legitimist principles was to be found among the descendants of Henrietta, daughter of Charles I., who married Philip I., duke of Orleans. Henrietta’s daughter, Anne Marie (1669-1728), became the wife of Victor Amadeus II., duke of Savoy, afterwards king of Sardinia; her son was King Charles Emmanuel III., and her grandson Victor Amadeus III. The latter’s son, King Victor Emmanuel I., left no sons, and his eldest daughter, Marie Beatrice, married Francis IV., duke of Modena, 120 whose son Ferdinand (d. 1849) left an only daughter, Marie Thérèse (b. 1849). This lady, the wife of Prince Louis of Bavaria, was in 1910 the senior member of the Stuart family, and according to the legitimists the rightful sovereign of Great Britain and Ireland.

Table showing the succession to the crown of Great Britain and Ireland according to Jacobite principles.

JACOBS, CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH WILHELM (1764-1847), German classical scholar, was born at Gotha on the 6th of October 1764. After studying philology and theology at Jena and Göttingen, in 1785 he became teacher in the gymnasium of his native town, and in 1802 was appointed to an office in the public library. In 1807 he became classical tutor in the lyceum of Munich, but, disgusted at the attacks made upon him by the old Bavarian Catholic party, who resented the introduction of “north German” teachers, he returned to Gotha in 1810 to take charge of the library and the numismatic cabinet. He remained in Gotha till his death on the 30th of March 1847. Jacobs was an extremely successful teacher; he took great interest in the affairs of his country, and was a publicist of no mean order. But his great work was an edition of the Greek Anthology, with copious notes, in 13 volumes (1798-1814), supplemented by a revised text from the Codex Palatinus (1814-1817). He published also notes on Horace, Stobaeus, Euripides, Athenaeus and the Iliaca of Tzetzes; translations of Aelian (History of Animals); many of the Greek romances; Philostratus; poetical versions of much of the Greek Anthology; miscellaneous essays on classical subjects; and some very successful school books. His translation of the political speeches of Demosthenes was undertaken with the express purpose of rousing his country against Napoleon, whom he regarded as a second Philip of Macedon.

JACOBS CAVERN, a cavern in latitude 36° 35′ N., 2 m. E. of Pineville, McDonald county, Missouri, named after its discoverer, E. H. Jacobs, of Bentonville, Arkansas. It was scientifically explored by him, in company with Professors Charles Peabody and Warren K. Moorehead, in 1903. The results were published in that year by Jacobs in the Benton County Sun; by C. N. Gould in Science, July 31, 1903; by Peabody in the Am. Anthropologist, Sept. 1903; and in the Am. Journ. Archaeology, 1904; and by Peabody and Moorehead, 1904, as Bulletin I. of the Dept. of Archaeology in Phillips Academy, Andover, Mass., in the museum of which are exhibits, maps and photographs.

Jacobs Cavern is one of the smaller caves, hardly more than a rock-shelter, and is entirely in the “St Joe Limestone” of the sub-carboniferous age. Its roof is a single flat stratum of limestone; its walls are well marked by lines of stratification; dripstone also partly covers the walls, fills a deep fissure at the end of the cave, and spreads over the floor, where it mingles with an ancient bed of ashes, forming an ash-breccia (mostly firm and solid) that encloses fragments of sandstone, flint spalls, flint implements, charcoal and bones. Underneath is the true floor of the cave, a mass of homogeneous yellow clay, one metre in thickness. It holds scattered fragments of limestone, and is itself the result of limestone degeneration. The length of the opening is over 21 metres; its depth 14 metres, and the height of roof above the undisturbed ash deposit varied from 1 m. 20 cm. to 2 m. 60 cm. The bone recess at the end was from 50 cm. to 80 cm. in height. The stratum of ashes was from 50 cm. to 1 m. 50 cm. thick.

The ash surface was staked off into square metres, and the substance carefully removed in order. Each stalactite, stalagmite and pilaster was measured, numbered, and removed in sections. Six human skeletons were found buried in the ashes. Seven-tenths of a cubic metre of animal bones were found: deer, bear, wolf, raccoon, opossum, beaver, buffalo, elk, turkey, woodchuck, tortoise and hog; all contemporary with man’s occupancy. Three stone metates, one stone axe, one celt and fifteen hammer-stones were found. Jacobs Cavern was peculiarly rich in flint knives and projectile points. The sum total amounts to 419 objects, besides hundreds of fragments, cores, spalls and rejects, retained for study and comparison. Considerable numbers of bone or horn awls were found in the ashes, as well as fragments of pottery, but no “ceremonial” objects.

The rude type of the implements, the absence of fine pottery, and the peculiarities of the human remains, indicate a race of occupants more ancient than the “mound-builders.” The deepest implement observed was buried 50 cm. under the stalagmitic surface. Dr. Hovey has proved that the rate of stalagmitic growth in Wyandotte Cave, Indiana, is .0254 cm. annually; and if that was the rate in Jacobs Cavern, 1968 years would have been needed for the embedding of that implement. Polished rocks outside the cavern and pictographs in the vicinity indicate the work of a prehistoric race earlier than the Osage Indians, who were the historic owners previous to the advent of the white man.

JACOBSEN, JENS PETER (1847-1885), Danish imaginative writer, was born at Thisted in Jutland, on the 7th of April 1847; he was the eldest of the five children of a prosperous merchant. He became a student at the university of Copenhagen in 1868. As a boy he showed a remarkable turn for science, particularly for botany. In 1870, although he was secretly writing verses already, Jacobsen definitely adopted botany as a profession. He was sent by a scientific body in Copenhagen to report on the flora of the islands of Anholt and Læsö. About this time the discoveries of Darwin began to exercise a fascination over him, and finding them little understood in Denmark, he translated into Danish The Origin of Species and The Descent of Man. In 121 the autumn of 1872, while collecting plants in a morass near Ordrup, he contracted pulmonary disease. His illness, which cut him off from scientific investigation, drove him to literature. He met the famous critic, Dr Georg Brandes, who was struck by his powers of expression, and under his influence, in the spring of 1873, Jacobsen began his great historical romance of Marie Grubbe. His method of composition was painful and elaborate, and his work was not ready for publication until the close of 1876. In 1879 he was too ill to write at all; but in 1880 an improvement came, and he finished his second novel, Niels Lyhne. In 1882 he published a volume of six short stories, most of them written a few years earlier, called, from the first of them, Mogens. After this he wrote no more, but lingered on in his mother’s house at Thisted until the 30th of April 1885. In 1886 his posthumous fragments were collected. It was early recognized that Jacobsen was the greatest artist in prose that Denmark has produced. He has been compared with Flaubert, with De Quincey, with Pater; but these parallelisms merely express a sense of the intense individuality of his style, and of his untiring pursuit of beauty in colour, form and melody. Although he wrote so little, and crossed the living stage so hurriedly, his influence in the North has been far-reaching. It may be said that no one in Denmark or Norway has tried to write prose carefully since 1880 whose efforts have not been in some degree modified by the example of Jacobsen’s laborious art.

JACOB’S WELL, the scene of the conversation between Jesus and the “woman of Samaria” narrated in the Fourth Gospel, is described as being in the neighbourhood of an otherwise unmentioned “city called Sychar.” From the time of Eusebius this city has been identified with Sychem or Shechem (modern Nablus), and the well is still in existence 1½ m. E. of the town, at the foot of Mt Gerizim. It is beneath one of the ruined arches of a church mentioned by Jerome, and is reached by a few rough steps. When Robinson visited it in 1838 it was 105 ft. deep, but it is now much shallower and often dry.

JACOBUS DE VORAGINE (c. 1230-c. 1298), Italian chronicler, archbishop of Genoa, was born at the little village of Varazze, near Genoa, about the year 1230. He entered the order of the friars preachers of St Dominic in 1244, and besides preaching with success in many parts of Italy, taught in the schools of his own fraternity. He was provincial of Lombardy from 1267 till 1286, when he was removed at the meeting of the order in Paris. He also represented his own province at the councils of Lucca (1288) and Ferrara (1290). On the last occasion he was one of the four delegates charged with signifying Nicholas IV.’s desire for the deposition of Munio de Zamora, who had been master of the order from 1285, and was deprived of his office by a papal bull dated the 12th of April 1291. In 1288 Nicholas empowered him to absolve the people of Genoa for their offence in aiding the Sicilians against Charles II. Early in 1292 the same pope, himself a Franciscan, summoned Jacobus to Rome, intending to consecrate him archbishop of Genoa with his own hands. He reached Rome on Palm Sunday (March 30), only to find his patron ill of a deadly sickness, from which he died on Good Friday (April 4). The cardinals, however, “propter honorem Communis Januae,” determined to carry out this consecration on the Sunday after Easter. He was a good bishop, and especially distinguished himself by his’ efforts to appease the civil discords of Genoa. He died in 1298 or 1299, and was buried in the Dominican church at Genoa. A story, mentioned by the chronicler Echard as unworthy of credit, makes Boniface VIII., on the first day of Lent, cast the ashes in the archbishop’s eyes instead of on his head, with the words, “Remember that thou art a Ghibelline, and with thy fellow Ghibellines wilt return to naught.”

JACOTOT, JOSEPH (1770-1840), French educationist, author of the method of “emancipation intellectuelle,” was born 122 at Dijon on the 4th of March 1770. He was educated at the university of Dijon, where in his nineteenth year he was chosen professor of Latin, after which he studied law, became advocate, and at the same time devoted a large amount of his attention to mathematics. In 1788 he organized a federation of the youth of Dijon for the defence of the principles of the Revolution; and in 1792, with the rank of captain, he set out to take part in the campaign of Belgium, where he conducted himself with bravery and distinction. After for some time filling the office of secretary of the “commission d’organisation du mouvement des armées,” he in 1794 became deputy of the director of the Polytechnic school, and on the institution of the central schools at Dijon he was appointed to the chair of the “method of sciences,” where he made his first experiments in that mode of tuition which he afterwards developed more fully. On the central schools being replaced by other educational institutions, Jacotot occupied successively the chairs of mathematics and of Roman law until the overthrow of the empire. In 1815 he was elected a representative to the chamber of deputies; but after the second restoration he found it necessary to quit his native land, and, having taken up his residence at Brussels, he was in 1818 nominated by the Government teacher of the French language at the university of Louvain, where he perfected into a system the educational principles which he had already practised with success in France. His method was not only adopted in several institutions in Belgium, but also met with some approval in France, England, Germany and Russia. It was based on three principles: (1) all men have equal intelligence; (2) every man has received from God the faculty of being able to instruct himself; (3) everything is in everything. As regards (1) he maintained that it is only in the will to use their intelligence that men differ; and his own process, depending on (3), was to give any one learning a language for the first time a short passage of a few lines, and to encourage the pupil to study, first the words, then the letters, then the grammar, then the meaning, until a single paragraph became the occasion for learning an entire literature. After the revolution of 1830 Jacotot returned to France, and he died at Paris on the 30th of July 1840.

JACQUARD, JOSEPH MARIE (1752-1834), French inventor, was born at Lyons on the 7th of July 1752. On the death of his father, who was a working weaver, he inherited two looms, with which he started business on his own account. He did not, however, prosper, and was at last forced to become a lime-burner at Bresse, while his wife supported herself at Lyons by plaiting straw. In 1793 he took part in the unsuccessful defence of Lyons against the troops of the Convention; but afterwards served in their ranks on the Rhône and Loire. After seeing some active service, in which his young son was shot down at his side, he again returned to Lyons. There he obtained a situation in a factory, and employed his spare time in constructing his improved loom, of which he had conceived the idea several years previously. In 1801 he exhibited his invention at the industrial exhibition at Paris; and in 1803 he was summoned to Paris and attached to the Conservatoire des Arts et Métiers. A loom by Jacques de Vaucanson (1700-1782), deposited there, suggested various improvements in his own, which he gradually perfected to its final state. Although his invention was fiercely opposed by the silk-weavers, who feared that its introduction, owing to the saving of labour, would deprive them of their livelihood, its advantages secured its general adoption, and by 1812 there were 11,000 Jacquard looms in use in France. The loom was declared public property in 1806, and Jacquard was rewarded with a pension and a royalty on each machine. He died at Oullins (Rhône) on the 7th of August 1834, and six years later a statue was erected to him at Lyons (see Weaving).

JACQUERIE, THE, an insurrection of the French peasantry which broke out in the Île de France and about Beauvais at the end of May 1358. The hardships endured by the peasants in the Hundred Years’ War and their hatred for the nobles who oppressed them were the principal causes which led to the rising, though the immediate occasion was an affray which took place on the 28th of May at the village of Saint-Leu between “brigands” (militia infantry armoured in brigandines) and countryfolk. The latter having got the upper hand united with the inhabitants of the neighbouring villages and placed Guillaume Karle at their head. They destroyed numerous châteaux in the valleys of the Oise, the Brèche and the Thérain, where they subjected the whole countryside to fire and sword, committing the most terrible atrocities. Charles the Bad, king of Navarre, crushed the rebellion at the battle of Mello on the 10th of June, and the nobles then took violent reprisals upon the peasants, massacring them in great numbers.

JACTITATION (from Lat. jactitare, to throw out publicly), in English law, the maliciously boasting or giving out by one party that he or she is married to the other. In such a case, in order to prevent the common reputation of their marriage that might ensue, the procedure is by suit of jactitation of marriage, in which the petitioner alleges that the respondent boasts that he or she is married to the petitioner, and prays a declaration of nullity and a decree putting the respondent to perpetual silence thereafter. Previously to 1857 such a proceeding took place only in the ecclesiastical courts, but by express terms of the Matrimonial Causes Act of that year it can now be brought in the probate, divorce and admiralty division of the High Court. To the suit there are three defences: (1) denial of the boasting; (2) the truth of the representations; (3) allegation (by way of estoppel) that the petitioner acquiesced in the boasting of the respondent. In Thompson v. Rourke, 1893, Prob. 70, the court of appeal laid down that the court will not make a decree in a jactitation suit in favour of a petitioner who has at any time acquiesced in the assertion of the respondent that they were actually married. Jactitation of marriage is a suit that is very rare.

JADE, or Jahde, a deep bay and estuary of the North Sea, belonging to the grand-duchy of Oldenburg, Germany. The bay, which was for the most part made by storm-floods in the 13th and 16th centuries, measures 70 sq. m., and has communication with the open sea by a fairway, a mile and a half wide, which never freezes, and with the tide gives access to the largest vessels. On the west side of the entrance to the bay is the Prussian naval port of Wilhelmshaven. A tiny stream, about 14 m. long, also known as the Jade, enters the head of the bay.

JADE, a name commonly applied to certain ornamental stones, mostly of a green colour, belonging to at least two distinct species, one termed nephrite and the other jadeite. Whilst the term jade is popularly used in this sense, it is now usually restricted by mineralogists to nephrite. The word jade1 is derived (through Fr. le jade for l’ejade) from Span. ijada (Lat. ilia), the loins, this mineral having been known to the Spanish conquerors of Mexico and Peru under the name of piedra de ijada or yjada (colic stone). The reputed value of the stone in renal diseases is also suggested by the term nephrite (so named by A. G. Werner from Gr. νεφρός, kidney), and by its old name lapis nephriticus.

Jade, in its wide and popular sense, has always been highly prized by the Chinese, who not only believe in its medicinal value but regard it as the symbol of virtue. It is known, with other ornamental stones, under the name of yu or yu-chi (yu-stone). According to Professor H. A. Giles, it occupies in China the highest place as a jewel, and is revered as “the quintessence of heaven and earth.” Notwithstanding its toughness or tenacity, due to a dense fibrous structure, it is wrought into complicated 123 forms and elaborately carved. On many prehistoric sites in Europe, as in the Swiss lake-dwellings, celts and other carved objects both in nephrite and in jadeite have not infrequently been found; and as no kind of jade had until recent years been discovered in situ in any European locality it was held, especially by Professor L. H. Fischer, of Freiburg im Breisgau, Baden, that either the raw material or the worked objects must have been brought by some of the early inhabitants from a jade locality probably in the East, or were obtained by barter, thus suggesting a very early trade-route to the Orient. Exceptional interest, therefore, attached to the discovery of jade in Europe, nephrite having been found in Silesia, and jadeite or a similar rock in the Alps, whilst pebbles of jade have been obtained from many localities in Austria and north Germany, in the latter case probably derived from Sweden. It is, therefore, no longer necessary to assign the old jade implements to an exotic origin. Dr A. B. Meyer, of Dresden, always maintained that the European jade objects were indigenous, and his views have become generally accepted. Now that the mineral characters of jade are better understood, and its identification less uncertain, it may possibly be found with altered peridotites, or with amphibolites, among the old crystalline schists of many localities.

JAEN, an inland province of southern Spain, formed in 1833 of districts belonging to Andalusia; bounded on the N. by Ciudad Real and Albacete, E. by Albacete and Granada, S. by Granada, and W. by Cordova. Pop. (1900), 474,490; area, 5848 sq. m. Jaen comprises the upper basin of the river Guadalquivir, which traverses the central districts from east to west, and is enclosed on the north, south and east by mountain ranges, while on the west it is entered by the great Andalusian plain. The Sierra Morena, which divides Andalusia from New Castile, extends along the northern half of the province, its most prominent ridges being the Loma de Chiclana and the Loma de Ubeda; the Sierras de Segura, in the east, derive their name from the river Segura, which rises just within the border; and between the last-named watershed, its continuation the Sierra del Pozo, and the parallel Sierra de Cazorla, is the source of the Guadalquivir. The loftiest summits in the province are those of the Sierra Magina (7103 ft.) farther west and south. Apart from the Guadalquivir the only large rivers are its right-hand tributaries the Jándula and Guadalimar, its left-hand tributary the Guadiana Menor, and the Segura, which flows east and south to the Mediterranean.

JAEN, the capital of the Spanish province of Jaen, on the Lináres-Puente Genil railway, 1500 ft. above the sea. Pop. (1900), 26,434. Jaen is finely situated on the well-wooded northern slopes of the Jabalcuz Mountains, overlooking the picturesque valleys of the Jaen and Guadalbullon rivers, which flow north into the Guadalquivir. The hillside upon which the narrow and irregular city streets rise in terraces is fortified with Moorish walls and a Moorish citadel. Jaen is an episcopal see. Its cathedral was founded in 1532; and, although it remained unfinished until late in the 18th century, its main characteristics are those of the Renaissance period. The city contains many churches and convents, a library, art galleries, theatres, barracks and hospitals. Its manufactures include leather, soap, alcohol and linen; and it was formerly celebrated for its silk. There are hot mineral springs in the mountains, 2 m. south.

JAFARABAD, a state of India, in the Kathiawar agency of Bombay, forming part of the territory of the nawab of Janjira; area, 42 sq. m.; pop. (1901), 12,097; estimated revenue, £4000. The town of Jafarabad (pop. 6038), situated on the estuary of a river, carries on a large coasting trade.

JAFFNA, a town of Ceylon, at the northern extremity of the island. The fort was described by Sir J. Emerson Tennent as “the most perfect little military work in Ceylon—a pentagon built of blocks of white coral.” The European part of the town bears the Dutch stamp more distinctly than any other town in the island; and there still exists a Dutch Presbyterian church. Several of the church buildings date from the time of the Portuguese. In 1901 Jaffna had a population of 33,879, while in the district or peninsula of the same name there were 300,851 persons, nearly all Tamils, the only Europeans being the civil servants and a few planters. Coco-nut planting has not been successful of recent years. The natives grow palmyras freely, and have a trade in the fibre of this palm. They also grow and export tobacco, but not enough rice for their own requirements. A steamer calls weekly, and there is considerable trade. The railway extension from Kurunegala due north to Jaffna and the coast was commenced in 1900. Jaffna is the seat of a government agent and district judge, and criminal sessions of the supreme court are regularly held. Jaffna, or, as the natives call it, Yalpannan, was occupied by the Tamils about 204 B.C., and there continued to be Tamil rajahs of Jaffna till 1617, when the Portuguese took possession of the place. As early as 1544 the missionaries under Francis Xavier had made converts in this part of Ceylon, and after the conquest the Portuguese maintained their proselytizing zeal. They had a Jesuit college, a Franciscan and a Dominican monastery. The Dutch drove out the Portuguese in 1658. The Church of England Missionary Society began its work in Jaffna in 1818, and the American Missionary Society in 1822.

JÄGER, GUSTAV (1832-  ), German naturalist and hygienist, was born at Bürg in Württemberg on the 23rd of June 1832. After studying medicine at Tübingen he became a teacher of zoology at Vienna. In 1868 he was appointed professor of zoology at the academy of Hohenheim, and subsequently he became teacher of zoology and anthropology at Stuttgart polytechnic and professor of physiology at the veterinary school. In 1884 he abandoned teaching and started practice as a physician in Stuttgart. He wrote various works on biological subjects, including Die Darwinsche Theorie und ihre Stellung zu Moral und Religion (1869), Lehrbuch der allgemeinen Zoologie (1871-1878), and Die Entdeckung der Seele (1878). In 1876 he suggested an hypothesis in explanation of heredity, resembling the germ-plasm theory subsequently elaborated by August Weismann, to the effect that the germinal protoplasm retains its specific properties from generation to generation, dividing in each reproduction into an ontogenetic portion, out of which the individual is built up, and a phylogenetic portion, which is reserved to form the reproductive material of the mature offspring. In Die Normalkleidung als Gesundheitsschutz (1880) he advocated the system of clothing associated with his name, objecting especially to the use of any kind of vegetable fibre for clothes.

JÄGERNDORF (Czech, Krnov), a town of Austria, in Silesia, 18 m. N.W. of Troppau by rail. Pop. (1900), 14,675, mostly German. It is situated on the Oppa and possesses a château belonging to Prince Liechtenstein, who holds extensive estates in the district. Jägerndorf has large manufactories of cloth, woollens, linen and machines, and carries on an active trade. On the neighbouring hill of Burgberg (1420 ft.) are a church, much visited as a place of pilgrimage, and the ruins of the seat of the former princes of Jägerndorf. The claim of Prussia to the principality of Jägerndorf was the occasion of the first Silesian war (1740-1742), but in the partition, which followed, Austria retained the larger portion of it. Jägerndorf suffered severely during the Thirty Years’ War, and was the scene of engagements between the Prussians and Austrians in May 1745 and in January 1779.

125

JAGERSFONTEIN, a town in the Orange Free State, 50 m. N.W. by rail of Springfontein on the trunk line from Cape Town to Pretoria. Pop. (1904), 5657—1293 whites and 4364 coloured persons. Jagersfontein, which occupies a pleasant situation on the open veld about 4500 ft. above the sea, owes its existence to the valuable diamond mine discovered here in 1870. The first diamond, a stone of 50 carats, was found in August of that year, and digging immediately began. The discovery a few weeks later of the much richer mines at Bultfontein and Du Toits Pan, followed by the great finds at De Beers and Colesberg Kop (Kimberley) caused Jagersfontein to be neglected for several years. Up to 1887 the claims in the mine were held by a large number of individuals, but coincident with the efforts to amalgamate the interest in the Kimberley mines a similar movement took place at Jagersfontein, and by 1893 all the claims became the property of one company, which has a working arrangement with the De Beers corporation. The mine, which is worked on the open system and has a depth of 450 ft., yields stones of very fine quality, but the annual output does not exceed in value £500,000. In 1909 a shaft 950 ft. deep was sunk with a view to working the mine on the underground system. Among the famous stones found in the mine are the “Excelsior” (weighing 971 carats, and larger than any previously discovered) and the “Jubilee” (see Diamond). The town was created a municipality in 1904.

Fourteen miles east of Jagersfontein is Boomplaats, the site of the battle fought in 1848 between the Boers under A. W. Pretorius and the British under Sir Harry Smith (see Orange Free State: History).

JAGO, RICHARD (1715-1781), English poet, third son of Richard Jago, rector of Beaudesert, Warwickshire, was born in 1715. He went up to University College, Oxford, in 1732, and took his degree in 1736. He was ordained to the curacy of Snitterfield, Warwickshire, in 1737, and became rector in 1754; and, although he subsequently received other preferments, Snitterfield remained his favourite residence. He died there on the 8th of May 1781. He was twice married. Jago’s best-known poem, The Blackbirds, was first printed in Hawkesworth’s Adventurer (No. 37, March 13, 1753), and was generally attributed to Gilbert West, but Jago published it in his own name, with other poems, in R. Dodsley’s Collection of Poems (vol. iv., 1755). In 1767 appeared a topographical poem, Edge Hill, or the Rural Prospect delineated and moralized; two separate sermons were published in 1755; and in 1768 Labour and Genius, a Fable. Shortly before his death Jago revised his poems, and they were published in 1784 by his friend, John Scott Hylton, as Poems Moral and Descriptive.

JAGUAR (Felis onca), the largest species of the Felidae found on the American continent, where it ranges from Texas through Central and South America to Patagonia. In the countries which bound its northern limit it is not frequently met with, but in South America it is quite common, and Don Felix de Azara states that when the Spaniards first settled in the district between Montevideo and Santa Fé, as many as two thousand were killed yearly. The jaguar is usually found singly (sometimes in pairs), and preys upon such quadrupeds as the horse, tapir, capybara, dogs or cattle. It often feeds on fresh-water turtles; sometimes following the reptiles into the water to effect a capture, it inserts a paw between the shells and drags out the body of the turtle by means of its sharp claws. Occasionally after having tasted human flesh, the jaguar becomes a confirmed man-eater. The cry of this great cat, which is heard at night, and most frequently during the pairing season, is deep and hoarse in tone, and consists of the sound pu, pu, often repeated. The female brings forth from two to four cubs towards the close of the year, which are able to follow their mother in about fifteen days after birth. The ground colour of the jaguar varies greatly, ranging from white to black, the rosette markings in the extremes being but faintly visible. The general or typical coloration is, however, a rich tan upon the head, neck, body, outside of legs, and tail near the root. The upper part of the head and sides of the face are thickly marked with small black spots, and the rest of body is covered with rosettes, formed of rings of black spots, with a black spot in the centre, and ranged lengthwise along the body in five to seven rows on each side. These black rings are heaviest along the back. The lips, throat, breast and belly, the inside of the legs and the lower sides of tail are pure white, marked with irregular spots of black, those on the breast being long bars and on the belly and inside of legs large blotches. The tail has large black spots near the root, some with light centres, and from about midway of its length to the tip it is ringed with black. The ears are black behind, with a large buff spot near the tip. The nose and upper lip are light rufous brown. The size varies, the total length of a very large specimen measuring 6 ft. 9 in.; the average length, however, is about 4 ft. from the nose to root of tail. In form the jaguar is thick-set; it does not stand high upon its legs; and in comparison with the leopard is heavily built; but its movements are very rapid, and it is fully as agile as its more graceful relative. The skull resembles that of the lion and tiger, but is much broader in proportion to its length, and may be identified by the presence of a tubercle on the inner edge of the orbit. The species has been divided into a number of local forms, regarded by some American naturalists as distinct species, but preferably ranked as sub-species or races.

JAGUARONDI, or Yaguarondi (Felis jaguarondi), a South American wild cat, found in Brazil, Paraguay and Guiana, ranging to north-eastern Mexico. This relatively small cat, uniformly coloured, is generally of some shade of brownish-grey, but in some individuals the fur has a rufous coat, while in others grey predominates. These cats are said by Don Felix de Azara to keep to cover, without venturing into open places. They attack tame poultry and also young fawns. The names jaguarondi and eyra are applied indifferently to this species and Felis eyra.

JAHANABAD, a town of British India in Gaya district, Bengal, situated on a branch of the East Indian railway. Pop. (1901), 7018. It was once a flourishing trading town, and in 1760 it formed one of the eight branches of the East India Company’s central factory at Patna. Since the introduction of Manchester goods, the trade of the town in cotton cloth has almost entirely ceased; but large numbers of the Jolaha or Mahommedan weaver caste live in the neighbourhood.

JAHANGIR, or Jehangir (1569-1627), Mogul emperor of Delhi, succeeded his father Akbar the Great in 1605. His name was Salim, but he assumed the title of Jahangir, “Conqueror of the World,” on his accession. It was in his reign that Sir Thomas Roe came as ambassador of James I., on behalf of the 126 English company. He was a dissolute ruler, much addicted to drunkenness, and his reign is chiefly notable for the influence enjoyed by his wife Nur Jahan, “the Light of the World.” At first she influenced Jahangir for good, but surrounding herself with her relatives she aroused the jealousy of the imperial princes; and Jahangir died in 1627 in the midst of a rebellion headed by his son, Khurram or Shah Jahan, and his greatest general, Mahabat Khan. The tomb of Jahangir is situated in the gardens of Shahdera on the outskirts of Lahore.

JĀḤIẒ (Abū ‘Uthmān ‘Amr Ibn Bahr ul-Jāḥiẓ; i.e. “the man the pupils of whose eyes are prominent”) (d. 869), Arabian writer. He spent his life and devoted himself in Basra chiefly to the study of polite literature. A Mu‘tazilite in his religious beliefs, he developed a system of his own and founded a sect named after him. He was favoured by Ibn uz-Zaiyāt, the vizier of the caliph Wāthiq.

JAHN, FRIEDRICH LUDWIG (1778-1852), German pedagogue and patriot, commonly called Turnvater (“Father of Gymnastics”), was born in Lanz on the 11th of August 1778. He studied theology and philology from 1796 to 1802 at Halle, Göttingen and Greifswald. After Jena he joined the Prussian army. In 1809 he went to Berlin, where he became a teacher at the Gymnasium zum Grauen as well as at the Plamann School. Brooding upon the humiliation of his native land by Napoleon, he conceived the idea of restoring the spirits of his countrymen by the development of their physical and moral powers through the practice of gymnastics. The first Turnplatz, or open-air gymnasium, was opened by him at Berlin in 1811, and the movement spread rapidly, the young gymnasts being taught to regard themselves as members of a kind of gild for the emancipation of their fatherland. This patriotic spirit was nourished in no small degree by the writings of Jahn. Early in 1813 he took an active part at Breslau in the formation of the famous corps of Lützow, a battalion of which he commanded, though during the same period he was often employed in secret service. After the war he returned to Berlin, where he was appointed state teacher of gymnastics. As such he was a leader in the formation of the student Burschenschaften (patriotic fraternities) in Jena.

A man of democratic nature, rugged, honest, eccentric and outspoken, Jahn often came into collision with the reactionary spirit of the time, and this conflict resulted in 1819 in the closing of the Turnplatz and the arrest of Jahn himself. Kept in semi-confinement at the fortress of Kolberg until 1824, he was then sentenced to imprisonment for two years; but this sentence was reversed in 1825, though he was forbidden to live within ten miles of Berlin. He therefore took up his residence at Freyburg on the Unstrut, where he remained until his death, with the exception of a short period in 1828, when he was exiled to Cölleda on a charge of sedition. In 1840 he was decorated by the Prussian government with the Iron Cross for bravery in the wars against Napoleon. In the spring of 1848 he was elected by the district of Naumburg to the German National Parliament. Jahn died on the 15th of October 1852 in Freyburg, where a monument was erected in his honour in 1859.

JAHN, JOHANN (1750-1816), German Orientalist, was born at Tasswitz, Moravia, on the 18th of June 1750. He studied philosophy at Olmütz, and in 1772 began his theological studies at the Premonstratensian convent of Bruck, near Znaim. Having been ordained in 1775, he for a short time held a cure at Mislitz, but was soon recalled to Bruck as professor of Oriental languages and Biblical hermeneutics. On the suppression of the convent by Joseph II. in 1784, Jahn took up similar work at Olmütz, and in 1789 he was transferred to Vienna as professor of Oriental languages, biblical archaeology and dogmatics. In 1792 he published his Einleitung ins Alte Testament (2 vols.), which soon brought him into trouble; the cardinal-archbishop of Vienna laid a complaint against him for having departed from the traditional teaching of the Church, e.g. by asserting Job, Jonah, Tobit and Judith to be didactic poems, and the cases of demoniacal possession in the New Testament to be cases of dangerous disease. An ecclesiastical commission reported that the views themselves were not necessarily heretical, but that Jahn had erred in showing too little consideration for the views of German Catholic theologians in coming into conflict with his bishop, and in raising difficult problems by which the unlearned might be led astray. He was accordingly advised to modify his expressions in future. Although he appears honestly to have accepted this judgment, the hostility of his opponents did not cease until at last (1806) he was compelled to accept a canonry at St Stephen’s, Vienna, which involved the resignation of his chair. This step had been preceded by the condemnation of his Introductio in libros sacros veteris foederis in compendium redacta, published in 1804, and also of his Archaeologia biblica in compendium redacta (1805). The only work of importance, outside the region of mere philology, afterwards published by him, was the Enchiridion Hermeneuticae (1812). He died on the 16th of August 1816.

JAHN, OTTO (1813-1869), German archaeologist, philologist, and writer on art and music, was born at Kiel on the 16th of June 1813. After the completion of his university studies at Kiel, Leipzig and Berlin, he travelled for three years in France and Italy; in 1839 he became privatdocent at Kiel, and in 1842 professor-extraordinary of archaeology and philology at Greifswald (ordinary professor 1845). In 1847 he accepted the chair of archaeology at Leipzig, of which he was deprived in 1851 for having taken part in the political movements of 1848-1849. In 1855 he was appointed professor of the science of antiquity, and director of the academical art museum at Bonn, and in 1867 he was called to succeed E. Gerhard at Berlin. He died at Göttingen, on the 9th of September 1869.

JAHRUM, a town and district of Persia in the province of Fars, S.E. of Shiraz and S.W. of Darab. The district has thirty-three villages and is famous for its celebrated sháhán dates, which are exported in great quantities; it also produces much tobacco and fruit. The water supply is scanty, and most of the irrigation is by water drawn from wells. The town of Jahrum, situated about 90 m. S.E. of Shiraz, is surrounded by a mud-wall 3 m. in circuit which was constructed in 1834. It has a population of about 15,000, one half living inside and the other half outside the walls. It is the market for the produce of the surrounding districts, has six caravanserais and a post office.

JAINS, the most numerous and influential sect of heretics, or nonconformists to the Brahmanical system of Hinduism, in India. They are found in every province of upper Hindustan, in the cities along the Ganges and in Calcutta. But they are more numerous to the west—in Mewar, Gujarat, and in the upper part of the Malabar coast—and are also scattered throughout the whole of the southern peninsula. They are mostly traders, and live in the towns; and the wealth of many of their community gives them a social importance greater than would result from their mere numbers. In the Indian census of 1901 they are returned as being 1,334,140 in number. Their magnificent series of temples and shrines on Mount Abu, one of the seven wonders of India, is perhaps the most striking outward sign of their wealth and importance.

The Jains are the last direct representatives on the continent of India of those schools of thought which grew out of the active philosophical speculation and earnest spirit of religious inquiry that prevailed in the valley of the Ganges during the 5th and 6th centuries before the Christian era. For many centuries Jainism was so overshadowed by that stupendous movement, born at the same time and in the same place, which we call Buddhism, that it remained almost unnoticed by the side of its powerful rival. But when Buddhism, whose widely open doors had absorbed the mass of the community, became thereby corrupted from its pristine purity and gradually died away, the smaller school of the Jains, less diametrically opposed to the victorious orthodox creed of the Brahmans, survived, and in some degree took its place.

Jainism purports to be the system of belief promulgated by Vaddhamāna, better known by his epithet of Mahā-vīra (the great hero), who was a contemporary of Gotama, the Buddha. But the Jains, like the Buddhists, believe that the same system had previously been proclaimed through countless ages by each one of a succession of earlier teachers. The Jains count twenty-four such prophets, whom they call Jinas, or Tīrthankaras, that is, conquerors or leaders of schools of thought. It is from this word Jina that the modern name Jainas, meaning followers of the Jina, or of the Jinas, is derived. This legend of the twenty-four Jinas contains a germ of truth. Mahā-vīra was not an originator; he merely carried on, with but slight changes, a system which existed before his time, and which probably owes its most distinguishing features to a teacher named Pārṣwa, who ranks in the succession of Jinas as the predecessor of Mahā-vīra. Pārṣwa is said, in the Jain chronology, to have been born two hundred years before Mahā-vīra (that is, about 760 B.C.); but the only conclusion that it is safe to draw from this statement is that Pārṣwa was considerably earlier in point of time than Mahā-vīra. Very little reliance can be placed upon the details reported in the Jain books concerning the previous Jinas in the list of the twenty-four Tīrthankaras. The curious will find in them many reminiscences of Hindu and Buddhist legend; and the antiquary must notice the distinctive symbols assigned to each, in order to recognize the statues of the different Jinas, otherwise identical, in the different Jain temples.

The Jains are divided into two great parties—the Digambaras, or Sky-clad Ones, and the Svetāmbaras, or the White-robed Ones. The latter have only as yet been traced, and that doubtfully, as far back as the 5th century after Christ; the former are almost certainly the same as the Nigaṇṭhas, who are referred to in numerous passages of the Buddhist Pāli Piṭakas, and must therefore be at least as old as the 6th century B.C. In many of these passages the Nigaṇṭhas are mentioned as contemporaneous with the Buddha; and details enough are given concerning their leader Nigaṇṭha Nāta-putta (that is, the Nigaṇṭha of the Jñātṛika clan) to enable us to identify him, without any doubt, as the same person as the Vaddhamāna Mahā-vīra of the Jain books. This remarkable confirmation, from the scriptures of a rival religion, of the Jain tradition is conclusive as to the date of Mahā-vīra. The Nigaṇṭhas are referred to in one of Asoka’s edicts (Corpus Inscriptionum, Plate xx.). Unfortunately the account of the teachings of Nigaṇṭha Nāta-putta given in the Buddhist scriptures are, like those of the Buddha’s teachings given in the Brahmanical literature, very meagre.

Jainism.—The most distinguishing outward peculiarity of Mahā-vīra and of his earliest followers was their practice of going quite naked, whence the term Digambara. Against this custom, Gotama, the Buddha, especially warned his followers; and it is referred to in the well-known Greek phrase, Gymnosophist, used already by Megasthenes, which applies very aptly to the Nigaṇṭhas. Even the earliest name Nigaṇṭha, which means “free from bonds,” may not be without allusions to this curious belief in the sanctity of nakedness, though it also alluded to freedom from the bonds of sin and of transmigration. The statues of the Jinas in the Jain temples, some of which are of enormous size, are still always quite naked; but the Jains themselves have abandoned the practice, the Digambaras being sky-clad at meal-time only, and the Svetāmbaras being always completely clothed. And even among the Digambaras it is only the recluses or Yatis, men devoted to a religious life, who carry out this practice. The Jain laity—the Srāvakas, or disciples—do not adopt it.

The Jain views of life were, in the most important and essential respects, the exact reverse of the Buddhist views. The two orders, Buddhist and Jain, were not only, and from the first, independent, but directly opposed the one to the other. In philosophy the Jains are the most thorough-going supporters of the old animistic position. Nearly everything, according to them, has a soul within its outward visible shape—not only men and animals, but also all plants, and even particles of earth, and of water (when it is cold), and fire and wind. The Buddhist theory, as is well known, is put together without the hypothesis of “soul” at all. The word the Jains use for soul is jīva, which means life; and there is much analogy between many of the expressions they use and the view that the ultimate cells and atoms are all, in a more or less modified sense, alive. They regard good and evil and space as ultimate substances which come into direct contact with the minute souls in everything. And their best-known position in regard to the points most discussed in philosophy is Syād-vāda, the doctrine that you may say “Yes” and at the same time “No” to everything. You can affirm the eternity of the world, for instance, from one point of view, and at the same time deny it from another; or, at different times and in different connexions, you may one day affirm it and another day deny it. This position both leads to vagueness of thought and explains why Jainism has had so little influence over other schools of philosophy in India. On the other hand, the Jains are as determined in their views of asceticism (tapas) as they were compromising in their views of philosophy. Any injury done to the “souls” being one of the worst of iniquities, the good monk should not wash his clothes (indeed, the most austere will reject clothes altogether), nor even wash his teeth, for fear of injuring living things. “Subdue the body, chastise thyself, weaken thyself, just as fire consumes dry wood.” It was by suppressing, through such self-torture, the influence on his soul of all sensations that the Jain could obtain salvation. It is related of the founder himself, the Mahā-vīra, that after twelve years’ penance he thus obtained Nirvāna (Jacobi, Jaina Sūtras, i. 201) before he entered upon his career as a teacher. And through the rest of his life, till he died at Pāvā, shortly before the Buddha, he followed the same habit of continual self-mortification. The Buddha, on the other hand, obtained Nirvāna in his 35th year, under the Bo tree, after he had abandoned penance; and through the rest of his life he spoke of penance as quite useless from his point of view.

There is no manual of Jainism as yet published, but there is a great deal of information on various points in the introductions to the works referred to above. Professor Jacobi, who is the best authority on the history of this sect, thus sums up the distinction between the Mahā-vīra and the Buddha: “Mahā-vīra was rather of the ordinary class of religious men in India. He may be allowed a talent for religious matters, but he possessed not the genius which Buddha undoubtedly had.... The Buddha’s philosophy forms a system based on a few fundamental ideas, whilst that of Mahā-vīra scarcely forms a system, but is merely a sum of opinions (pannattis) on various subjects, no fundamental ideas being there to uphold the mass of metaphysical matter. Besides this ... it is the ethical element that gives to the Buddhist writings their superiority over those of the Jains. Mahā-vīra treated ethics as corollary and subordinate to his metaphysics, with which he was chiefly concerned.”

JAIPUR, or Jeypore, a city and native state of India in the Rajputana agency. The city is a prosperous place of comparatively recent date. It derives its name from the famous Maharaja Jai Singh II., who founded it in 1728. It is built of pink stucco in imitation of sandstone, and is remarkable for the width and regularity of its streets. It is the only city in India that is laid out in rectangular blocks, and it is divided by cross streets into six equal portions. The main streets are 111 ft. wide and are paved, while the city is lighted by gas. The regularity of plan, and the straight streets with the houses all built after the same pattern, deprive Jaipur of the charm of the East, while the painted mud walls of the houses give it the meretricious air of stage scenery. The huge palace of the maharaja stands in the centre of the city. Another noteworthy building is Jai Singh’s observatory. The chief industries are in metals and marble, which are fostered by a school of art, founded in 1868. There is also a wealthy and enterprising community of native bankers. The city has three colleges and several hospitals. Pop. (1901), 160,167. The ancient capital of Jaipur was Amber.

The State of Jaipur, which takes its name from the city, has a total area of 15,579 sq. m. Pop. (1901), 2,658,666, showing a decrease of 6% in the decade. The estimated revenue is £430,000, and the tribute £27,000. The centre of the state is a sandy and barren plain 1,600 ft. above sea-level, bounded on the E. by ranges of hills running north and south. On the N. and W. it is bounded by a broken chain of hills, an offshoot of the Aravalli mountains, beyond which lies the sandy desert of Rajputana. The soil is generally sandy. The hills are more or less covered with jungle trees, of no value except for fuel. Towards the S. and E. the soil becomes more fertile. Salt is largely manufactured and exported from the Sambhar lake, which is worked by the government of India under an arrangement with the states of Jaipur and Jodhpur. It yields salt of a very high quality. The state is traversed by the Rajputana railway, with branches to Agra and Delhi.

The maharaja of Jaipur belongs to the Kachwaha clan of Rajputs, claiming descent from Rama, king of Ajodhya. The state is said to have been founded about 1128 by Dhula Rai, from Gwalior, who with his Kachwahas is said to have absorbed or driven out the petty chiefs. The Jaipur house furnished to the Moguls some of their most distinguished generals. Among them were Man Singh, who fought in Orissa and Assam; Jai 129 Singh, commonly known by his imperial title of Mirza Raja, whose name appears in all the wars of Aurangzeb in the Deccan; and Jai Singh II., or Sawai Jai Singh, the famous mathematician and astronomer, and the founder of Jaipur city. Towards the end of the 18th century the Jats of Bharatpur and the chief of Alwar each annexed a portion of the territory of Jaipur. By the end of the century the state was in great confusion, distracted by internal broils and impoverished by the exactions of the Mahrattas. The disputes between the chiefs of Jaipur and Jodhpur had brought both states to the verge of ruin, and Amir Khan with the Pindaris was exhausting the country. By a treaty in 1818 the protection of the British was extended to Jaipur and an annual tribute fixed. In 1835 there was a serious disturbance in the city, after which the British government took measures to insist upon order and to reform the administration as well as to support its effective action; and the state has gradually become well-governed and prosperous. During the Mutiny of 1857 the maharaja assisted the British in every way that lay in his power. Maharaja Madho Singh, G.C.S.I., G.C.V.O., was born in 1861, and succeeded in 1882. He is distinguished for his enlightened administration and his patronage of art. He was one of the princes who visited England at the time of King Edward’s coronation in 1902. It was he who started and endowed with a donation of 15 lakhs, afterwards increased to 20 lakhs, of rupees (£133,000) the “Indian People’s Famine Fund.” The Jaipur imperial service transport corps saw service in the Chitral and Tirah campaigns.

JAISALMER, or Jeysulmere, a town and native state of India in the Rajputana agency. The town stands on a ridge of yellowish sandstone, crowned by a fort, which contains the palace and several ornate Jain temples. Many of the houses and temples are finely sculptured. Pop. (1901), 7137. The area of the state is 16,062 sq. m. In 1901 the population was 73,370, showing a decrease of 37% in ten years, as a consequence of famine. The estimated revenue is about £6000; there is no tribute. Jaisalmer is almost entirely a sandy waste, forming a part of the great Indian desert. The general aspect of the country is that of an interminable sea of sandhills, of all shapes and sizes, some rising to a height of 150 ft. Those in the west are covered with phog bushes, those in the east with tufts of long grass. Water is scarce, and generally brackish; the average depth of the wells is said to be about 250 ft. There are no perennial streams, and only one small river, the Kakni, which, after flowing a distance of 28 m., spreads over a large surface of flat ground, and forms a lake or jhil called the Bhuj-Jhil. The climate is dry and healthy. Throughout Jaisalmer only rain-crops, such as bajra, joar, moth, til, &c., are grown; spring crops of wheat, barley, &c., are very rare. Owing to the scant rainfall, irrigation is almost unknown.

JAJCE (pronounced Yaïtse), a town of Bosnia, situated on the Pliva and Vrbas rivers, and at the terminus of a branch railway from Serajevo, 62 m. S.E. Pop. (1895), about 4000. Jajce occupies a conical hill, overlooking one of the finest waterfalls in Europe, where the Pliva rushes down into the Vrbas, 100 ft. below. The 14th century citadel which crowns this hill is said to have been built for Hrvoje, duke of Spalato, on the model of the Castel del’ Uovo at Naples; but the resemblance is very slight, and although both jajce and uovo signify “an egg,” the town probably derives its name from the shape of the hill. The ruined church of St Luke, said by legend to be the Evangelist’s burial place, has a fine Italian belfry, and dates from the 15th century. Jezero, 5 m. W. of Jajce, contains the Turkish fort of Djöl-Hissar, or “the Lake-Fort.” In this neighbourhood a line of waterfalls and meres, formed by the Pliva, stretches for several miles, enclosed by steep rocks and forest-clad mountains. The power supplied by the main fall, at Jajce, is used for industrial purposes, but the beauty of the town remains unimpaired.

From 1463 to 1528 Jajce was the principal outwork of eastern Christendom against the Turks. Venice contributed money for its defence, and Hungary provided armies; while the pope entreated all Christian monarchs to avert its fall. In 1463 Mahomet II. had seized more than 75 Bosnian fortresses, including Jajce itself; and the last independent king of Bosnia, Stephen Tomašević, had been beheaded, or, according to one tradition, flayed alive, before the walls of Jajce, on a spot still called Kraljeva Polje, the “King’s Field.” His coffin and skeleton are still displayed in St Luke’s Church. The Hungarians, under King Matthias I., came to the rescue, and reconquered the greater part of Bosnia during the same year; and, although Mahomet returned in 1464, he was again defeated at Jajce, and compelled to flee before another Hungarian advance. In 1467 Hungarian bans, or military governors, were appointed to rule in north-west Bosnia, and in 1472 Matthias appointed Nicolaus Ujlaki king of the country, with Jajce for his capital. This kingdom lasted, in fact, for 59 years; but, after the death of Ujlaki, in 1492, its rulers only bore the title of ban, and of vojvod. In 1500 the Turks, under Bajazet II., were crushed at Jajce by the Hungarians under John Corvinus; and several other attacks were repelled between 1520 and 1526. But in 1526 the Hungarian power was destroyed at Mohács; and in 1528 Jajce was forced to surrender.

JĀJPUR, or Jajpore, a town of British India, in Cuttack district, Bengal, situated on the right bank of the Baitarani river. Pop. (1901), 12,111. It was the capital of Orissa under the Kesari dynasty until the 11th century, when it was superseded by Cuttack. In Jājpur are numerous ruins of temples, sculptures, &c., and a large and beautiful sun pillar.

JAKOB, LUDWIG HEINRICH VON (1759-1827), German economist, was born at Wettin on the 26th of February 1759. In 1777 he entered the university of Halle. In 1780 he was appointed teacher at the gymnasium, and in 1791 professor of philosophy at the university. The suppression of the university of Halle having been decreed by Napoleon, Jakob betook himself to Russia, where in 1807 he was appointed professor of political economy at Kharkoff, and in 1809 a member of the government commission to inquire into the finances of the empire. In the following year he became president of the commission for the revision of criminal law, and he at the same time obtained an important office in the finance department, with the rank of counsellor of state; but in 1816 he returned to Halle to occupy the chair of political economy. He died at Lauchstädt on the 22nd of July 1827.

JAKOVA (also written Diakova, Gyakovo and Gjakovica), a town of Albania, European Turkey, in the vilayet of Kossovo; on the river Erenik, a right-hand tributary of the White Drin. Pop. (1905) about 12,000. Jakova is the chief town of the Alpine region which extends from the Montenegrin frontier to the Drin and White Drin. This region has never been thoroughly explored, or brought under effective Turkish rule, on account of the inaccessible character of its mountains and forests, and the lawlessness of its inhabitants—a group of two Roman Catholic and three Moslem tribes, known collectively as the Malsia Jakovs, whose official representative resides in Jakova.

JAKUNS, an aboriginal race of the Malay Peninsula. They have become much mixed with other tribes, and are found throughout the south of the peninsula and along the coasts. The purest types are straight-haired, exhibit marked Mongolian characteristics and are closely related to the Malays. They are probably a branch of the Pre-Malays, the “savage Malays” of A. R. Wallace. They are divided into two groups: (1) Jakuns of the jungle, (2) Jakuns of the sea or Orang Laut. The latter set of tribes now comprise the remnants of the pirates or “sea-gipsies” of the Malaccan straits. The Jakuns, who must be studied in conjunction with the other aboriginal peoples of the Malay Peninsula, the Semangs and the Sakais, are not so dwarfish as those. The head is round; the skin varies from olive-brown to dark copper; the face is flat and the lower jaw square. The nose is thick and short, with wide, open nostrils. The cheekbones are high and well marked. The hair has a blue-black tint, eyes are black and the beard is scanty. The Jakuns live a wild forest life, and in general habits much resemble the Sakai, being but little in advance of the latter in social conditions except where they come into close contact with the Malay peoples.

JALALABAD, or Jellalabad, a town and province of Afghanistan. The town lies at a height of 1950 ft. in a plain on the south side of the Kabul river, 96 m. from Kabul and 76 from Peshawar. Estimated pop., 4000. Between it and Peshawar intervenes the Khyber Pass, and between it and Kabul the passes of Jagdalak, Khurd Kabul, &c. The site was chosen by the emperor Baber, and he laid out some gardens here; but the town itself was built by his grandson Akbar in A.D. 1560. It resembles the city of Kabul on a smaller scale, and has one central bazaar, the streets generally being very narrow. The most notable episode in the history of the place is the famous defence by Sir Robert Sale during the first Afghan war, when he held the town from November 1841 to April 1842. On its evacuation in 1842 General Pollock destroyed the defences, but they were rebuilt in 1878. The town is now fortified, surrounded by a high wall with bastions and loopholes. The province of Jalalabad is about 80 m. in length by 35 in width, and includes the large district of Laghman north of the Kabul river, as well as that on the south called Ningrahar. The climate of Jalalabad is similar to that of Peshawar. As a strategical centre Jalalabad is one of the most important positions in Afghanistan, for it dominates the entrances to the Laghman and the Kunar valleys; commanding routes to Chitral or India north of the Khyber, as well as the Kabul-Peshawar road.

JALAP, a cathartic drug consisting of the tuberous roots of Ipomaea Purga, a convolvulaceous plant growing on the eastern declivities of the Mexican Andes at an elevation of 5000 to 8000 ft. above the level of the sea, more especially about the neighbourhood of Chiconquiaco, and near San Salvador on the eastern slope of the Cofre de Perote. Jalap has been known in Europe since the beginning of the 17th century, and derives its name from the city of Jalapa in Mexico, near which it grows, but its botanical source was not accurately determined until 1829, when Dr. J. R. Coxe of Philadelphia published a description and coloured figure taken from living plants sent him two years previously from Mexico. The jalap plant has slender herbaceous twining stems, with alternately placed heart-shaped pointed leaves and salver-shaped deep purplish-pink flowers. The underground stems are slender and creeping; their vertical roots enlarge and form turnip-shaped tubers. The roots are dug up in Mexico throughout the year, and are suspended to dry in a net over the hearth of the Indians’ huts, and hence acquire a smoky odour. The large tubers are often gashed to cause them to dry more quickly. In their form they vary from spindle-shaped to ovoid or globular, and in size from a pigeon’s egg to a man’s fist. Externally they are brown and marked with small transverse paler scars, and internally they present a dirty white resinous or starchy fracture. The ordinary drug is distinguished in commerce as Vera Cruz jalap, from the name of the port whence it is shipped.

Jalap has been cultivated for many years in India, chiefly at Ootacamund, and grows there as easily as a yam, often producing clusters of tubers weighing over 9 ℔; but these, as they differ in appearance from the commercial article, have not as yet obtained a place in the English market. They are found, however, to be rich in resin, containing 18%. In Jamaica also the plant has been grown, at first amongst the cinchona trees, but more recently in new ground, as it was found to exhaust the soil.

Besides Mexican or Vera Cruz jalap, a drug called Tampico jalap has been imported for some years in considerable quantity. It has a much more shrivelled appearance and paler colour than ordinary jalap, and lacks the small transverse scars present in the true drug. This kind of jalap, the Purga de Sierra Gorda of the Mexicans, was traced by Hanbury to Ipomaea simulans. 131 It grows in Mexico along the mountain range of the Sierra Gorda in the neighbourhood of San Luis de la Paz, from which district it is carried down to Tampico, whence it is exported. A third variety of jalap known as woody jalap, male jalap, or Orizaba root, or by the Mexicans as Purgo macho, is derived from Ipomaea orizabensis, a plant of Orizaba. The root occurs in fibrous pieces, which are usually rectangular blocks of irregular shape, 2 in. or more in diameter, and are evidently portions of a large root. It is only occasionally met with in commerce.

JALAPA, Xalapa, or Halapa, a city of the state of Vera Cruz, Mexico, 70 m. by rail N.W. of the port of Vera Cruz. Pop. (1900), 20,388. It is picturesquely situated on the slopes of the sierra which separates the central plateau from the tierra caliente of the Gulf Coast, at an elevation of 4300 ft., and with the Cofre de Perote behind it rising to a height of 13,419 ft. Its climate is cool and healthy and the town is frequented in the hot season by the wealthier residents of Vera Cruz. The city is well built, in the old Spanish style. Among its public buildings are a fine old church, a Franciscan convent founded by Cortez in 1556, and three hospitals, one of which, that of San Juan de Dios, dates from colonial times. The neighbouring valleys and slopes are fertile, and in the forests of this region is found the plant (jalap), which takes its name from the place. Jalapa was for a time the capital of the state, but its political and commercial importance has declined since the opening of the railway between Vera Cruz and the city of Mexico. It manufactures pottery and leather.

JALAUN, a town and district of British India, in the Allahabad division of the United Provinces. Pop. of town (1901), 8573. Formerly it was the residence of a Mahratta governor, but never the headquarters of the district, which are at Orai.

The District of Jalaun has an area of 1477 sq. m. It lies entirely within the level plain of Bundelkhand, north of the hill country, and is almost surrounded by the Jumna and its tributaries the Betwa and Pahuj. The central region thus enclosed is a dead level of cultivated land, almost destitute of trees, and sparsely dotted with villages. The southern portion presents almost one unbroken sheet of cultivation. The boundary rivers form the only interesting feature in Jalaun. The river Non flows through the centre of the district, which it drains by innumerable small ravines instead of watering. Jalaun has suffered much from the noxious kans grass, owing to the spread of which many villages have been abandoned and their lands thrown out of cultivation. Pop. (1901), 399,726, showing an increase of 1%. The two largest towns are Kunch (15,888), and Kalpi (10,139). The district is traversed by the line of the Indian Midland railway from Jhansi to Cawnpore. A small part of it is watered by the Betwa canal. Grain, oil-seeds, cotton and ghi are exported.

In early times Jalaun seems to have been the home of two Rajput clans, the Chandels in the east and the Kachwahas in the west. The town of Kalpi on the Jumna was conquered for the princes of Ghor as early as 1196. Early in the 14th century the Bundelas occupied the greater part of Jalaun, and even succeeded in holding the fortified post of Kalpi. That important possession was soon recovered by the Mussulmans, and passed under the sway of the Mogul emperors. Akbar’s governors at Kalpi maintained a nominal authority over the surrounding district; and the Bundela chiefs were in a state of chronic revolt, which culminated in the war of independence under Chhatar Sal. On the outbreak of his rebellion in 1671 he occupied a large province to the south of the Jumna. Setting out from this basis, and assisted by the Mahrattas, he reduced the whole of Bundelkhand. On his death he bequeathed one-third of his dominions to his Mahratta allies, who before long succeeded in annexing the whole of Bundelkhand. Under Mahratta rule the country was a prey to constant anarchy and intestine strife. To this period must be traced the origin of the poverty and desolation which are still conspicuous throughout the district. In 1806 Kalpi was made over to the British, and in 1840, on the death of Nana Gobind Ras, his possessions lapsed to them also. Various interchanges of territory took place, and in 1856 the present boundaries were substantially settled. Jalaun had a bad reputation during the Mutiny. When the news of the rising at Cawnpore reached Kalpi, the men of the 53rd native infantry deserted their officers, and in June the Jhansi mutineers reached the district, and began their murder of Europeans. The inhabitants everywhere revelled in the licence of plunder and murder which the Mutiny had spread through all Bundelkhand, and it was not till September 1858 that the rebels were finally defeated.

JALISCO, Xalisco, or Guadalajara, a Pacific coast state of Mexico, of very irregular shape, bounded, beginning on the N., by the territory of Tepic and the states of Durango, Zacatecas, Aguas Calientes, Guanajuato, Michoacán, and Colima. Pop. (1900), 1,153,891. Area, 31,846 sq. m. Jalisco is traversed from N.N.W. to S.S.E. by the Sierra Madre, locally known as the Sierra de Nayarit and Sierra de Jalisco, which divides the state into a low heavily forested coastal plain and a high plateau region, part of the great Anáhuac table-land, with an average elevation of about 5000 ft., broken by spurs and flanking ranges of moderate height. The sierra region is largely volcanic and earthquakes are frequent; in the S. are the active volcanoes of Colima (12,750 ft.) and the Nevado de Colima (14,363 ft.). The tierra caliente zone of the coast is tropical, humid, and unfavourable to Europeans, while the inland plateaus vary from subtropical to temperate and are generally drier and healthful. The greater part of the state is drained by the Rio Grande de Lerma (called the Santiago on its lower course) and its tributaries, chief of which is the Rio Verde. Lakes are numerous; the largest are the Chapala, about 80 m. long by 10 to 35 m. wide, which is considered one of the most beautiful inland sheets of water in Mexico, the Sayula and the Magdalena, noted for their abundance of fish. The agricultural products of Jalisco include Indian corn, wheat and beans on the uplands, and sugar-cane, cotton, rice, indigo and tobacco in the warmer districts. Rubber and palm oil are natural forest products of the coastal zone. Stock-raising is an important occupation in some of the more elevated districts. The mineral resources include silver, gold, cinnabar, copper, bismuth, and various precious stones. There are reduction works of the old-fashioned type and some manufactures, including cotton and woollen goods, pottery, refined sugar and leather. The commercial activities of the state contribute much to its prosperity. There is a large percentage of Indians and mestizos in the population. The capital is Guadalajara, and other important towns with their populations in 1900 (unless otherwise stated) are: Zapotlanejo (20,275), 21 m. E. by N. of Guadalajara; Ciudad Guzmán (17,374 in 1895), 60 m. N.E. of Colima; Lagos (14,716 in 1895), a mining town 100 m. E.N.E. of Guadalajara on the Mexican Central railway; Tamazula (8783 in 1895); Sayula (7883); Autlán (7715); Teocaltiche (8881); Ameca (7212 in 1895), in a fertile agricultural 132 region on the western slopes of the sierras; Cocula (7090 in 1895); and Zacoalco (6516). Jalisco was first invaded by the Spaniards about 1526 and was soon afterwards conquered by Nuño de Guzman. It once formed part of the reyno of Nueva Galicia, which also included Aguas Calientes and Zacatecas. In 1889 its area was much reduced by a subdivision of its coastal zone, which was set apart as the territory of Tepic.

JALNA, or Jaulna, a town in Hyderabad state, India, on the Godavari branch of the Nizam’s railway, and 210 m. N.E. of Bombay. Pop. (1901), 20,270. Until 1903 it was a cantonment of the Hyderabad contingent, originally established in 1827. Its gardens produce fruit, which is largely exported. On the opposite bank of the river Kundlika is the trading town of Kadirabad; pop. (1901), 11,159.

JALPAIGURI, or Julpigoree, a town and district of British India, in the Rajshahi division of Eastern Bengal and Assam. The town is on the right bank of the river Tista, with a station on the Eastern Bengal railway about 300 m. due N. of Calcutta. Pop. (1901), 9708. It is the headquarters of the commissioner of the division.

The District of Jalpaiguri (organized in 1869) occupies an irregularly shaped tract south of Darjeeling and Bhutan and north of the state of Kuch Behar. It includes the Western Dwars, annexed from Bhutan after the war of 1864-1865. Area, 2,962 sq. m. Pop. (1901), 787,380, an increase of 16% in the decade. The district is divided into a “regulation” tract, lying towards the south-west, and a strip of country, about 22 m. in width, running along the foot of the Himalayas, and known as the Western Dwars. The former is a continuous expanse of level paddy fields, only broken by groves of bamboos, palms, and fruit-trees. The frontier towards Bhutan is formed by the Sinchula mountain range, some peaks of which attain an elevation of 6000 ft. It is thickly wooded from base to summit. The principal rivers, proceeding from west to east, are the Mahananda, Karatoya, Tista, Jaldhaka, Duduya, Mujnai, Tursa, Kaljani, Raidak, and Sankos. The most important is the Tista, which forms a valuable means of water communication. Lime is quarried in the lower Bhutan hills. The Western Dwars are the principal centre of tea cultivation in Eastern Bengal. The other portion of the district produces jute. Jalpaiguri is traversed by the main line of the Eastern Bengal railway to Darjeeling. It is also served by the Bengal Dwars railway.

JAMAICA, the largest island in the British West Indies. It lies about 80 m. S. of the eastern extremity of Cuba, between 17° 43′ and 18° 32′ N. and 76° 10′ and 78° 20′ W., is 144 m. long, 50 m. in extreme breadth, and has an area of 4207 sq. m. The coast-line has the form of a turtle, the mountain ridges representing the back. A mountainous backbone runs through the island from E. to W., throwing off a number of subsidiary ridges, mostly in a north-westerly or south-easterly direction. In the east this range is more distinctly marked, forming the Blue Mountains, with cloud-capped peaks and numerous bifurcating branches. They trend W. by N., and are crossed by five passes at altitudes varying from 3000 to 4000 ft. They culminate in Blue Mountain Peak (7360 ft.), after which the heights gradually decrease until the range is merged into the hills of the western plateau. Two-thirds of the island are occupied by this limestone plateau, a region of great beauty broken by innumerable hills, valleys and sink-holes, and covered with luxuriant vegetation. The uplands usually terminate in steep slopes or bluffs, separated from the sea, in most cases, by a strip of level land. On the south coast, especially, the plains are often large, the Liguanea plain, on which Kingston stands, having an area of 200 sq. m. Upwards of a hundred rivers and streams find their way to the sea, besides the numerous tributaries which issue from every ravine in the mountains. These streams for the most part are not navigable, and in times of flood they become devastating torrents. In the parish of Portland, the Rio Grande receives all the smaller tributaries from the west. In St Thomas in the east the main range is drained by the Plantain Garden river, the tributaries of which form deep ravines and narrow gorges. The valley of the Plantain Garden expands into a picturesque and fertile plain. The Black river flows through a level country, and is navigable by small craft for about 30 m. The Salt river and the Cabaritta, also in the south, are navigable by barges. Other rivers of the south are the Rio Cobre (on which are irrigation works for the sugar and fruit plantations), the Yallahs and the Rio Minho; in the north are the Martha Brae, the White river, the Great Spanish river, and the Rio Grande. Vestiges of intermittent volcanic action occur, and there are several medicinal springs. Jamaica has 16 harbours, the chief of which are Port Morant, Kingston, Old Harbour, Montego Bay, Falmouth, St Ann’s Bay, Port Maria and Port Antonio.

Climate.—The climate is one of the island’s chief attractions. Near the coast it is warm and humid, but that of the uplands is delightfully mild and equable. At Kingston the temperature ranges from 70.7° to 87.8° F., and this is generally the average of all the low-lying coast land. At Cinchona, 4907 ft. above the sea, it varies from 57.5° to 68.5°. The vapours from the rivers and the ocean produce in the upper regions clouds saturated with moisture which induce vegetation belonging to a colder climate. During the rainy seasons there is such an accumulation of these vapours as to cause a general coolness and occasion sudden heavy showers, and sometimes destructive floods. The rainy seasons, in May and October, last for about three weeks, although, as a rule no month is quite without rain. The fall varies greatly; while the annual average for the island is 66.3 in., at Kingston it is 32.6 in., at Cinchona 105.5 in., and at some places in the north-east it exceeds 200 in. The climate of the Santa Cruz Mountains is extremely favourable to sufferers from tubercular and rheumatic diseases. Excepting near morasses and lagoons, the island is very healthy, and yellow fever, once prevalent, now rarely occurs. In the early part of the 19th century, hurricanes often devastated Jamaica, but now, though they pass to the N.E. and S.W. with comparative frequency, they rarely strike the island itself.

People.—The population of the island was estimated in 1905 at 806,690. Jamaica is rich in traces of its former Arawâk inhabitants. Aboriginal petaloid celts and other implements, flattened skulls and vessels are common, and images are sometimes found in the large limestone caverns of the island. The present inhabitants, of whom only 2% are white, include Maroons, the descendants of the slaves of the Spaniards who fled into the interior when the island was captured by the British; descendants of imported African slaves; mixed race of British and African blood; coolies from India; a few Chinese, and the British officials and white settlers. The Maroons live by themselves and are few in number, while the half-castes enter into trade and sometimes into the professions. The number of white inhabitants other than British is very small. A negro peasant population is encouraged, with a view to its being a support to the industries of the island; but, in many cases a field negro will not work for his employer more than four days a week. He may till his own plot of ground on one of the other days or not, as the spirit moves him, but four days’ work a week will keep him easily. He has little or no care for the future. He has probably squatted on someone’s land, and has no rent to pay. Clothes he need hardly buy, fuel he needs only for cooking, and food is ready to his hand for the picking. Unfortunately a widespread indulgence in predial larceny is a great hindrance to agriculture as well as to moral progress. But that habits of thrift are being inculcated is shown by the steady increase in the accounts in the government savings banks. That gross superstition is still prevalent is shown by the cases of obeah or witchcraft that come before the courts from time to time. Another indication of the status of the negro may be found in the fact that more than 60% of the births are illegitimate, a percentage that shows an unfortunate tendency to increase rather than diminish.

Administration, &c.—The island is divided into three counties, Surrey in the east, Middlesex in the centre, and Cornwall in the west, and each of these is subdivided into five parishes. The parish is the unit of local government, and has jurisdiction over roads, markets, sanitation, poor relief and waterworks. The management is vested in a parish board, the members of which are elected. The chairman or custos is appointed by the governor. The island is administered by a governor, who bears the old Spanish title of captain-general, assisted by a legislative council of five ex officio members, not more than ten nominated members, and fourteen members elected on a limited suffrage. There is also a privy council of three ex officio and not more than eight nominated members. There is an Imperial garrison of about 2000 officers and men, with headquarters at Newcastle, consisting of Royal Engineers, Royal Artillery, infantry and four companies of the West India Regiment. There is a naval station at Port Royal, and the entrance to its harbour is strongly fortified. In addition there is a militia of infantry and artillery, about 800 strong.

Previous to 1870 the Church of England was established in Jamaica, but in that year a disestablishment act was passed which provided for gradual disendowment. It is still the most numerous body, and is presided over by the bishop of Jamaica, who is also archbishop of the West Indies. The Baptists, 134 Wesleyans, Presbyterians, Moravians and Roman Catholics are all represented; there is a Jewish synagogue at Kingston, and the Salvation Army has a branch on the island. The Church of England maintains many schools, a theological college, a deaconesses’ home and an orphanage. The Baptists have a theological college; and the Roman Catholics support a training college for teachers, two industrial schools and two orphanages. Elementary education is in private hands, but fostered, since 1867, by government grants; it is free but not compulsory, although the governor has the right to compel the attendance of all children from 6 to 14 years of age in such towns and districts as he may designate. The teachers in these schools are for the most part trained in the government-aided training colleges of the various denominations. For higher education there are the University College and high school at Hope near Kingston, Potsdam School in St Elizabeth, the Mico School and Wolmer’s Free School in Kingston, founded (for boys and girls) in 1729, the Montego Bay secondary school, and numerous other endowed and self-supporting establishments. The Cambridge Local Examinations have been held regularly since 1882.

History.—Jamaica was discovered by Columbus on the 3rd of May 1494. Though he called it Santiago, it has always been known by its Indian name Jaymaca, “the island of springs,” modernized in form and pronunciation into Jamaica. Excepting that in 1505 Columbus once put in for shelter, the island remained unvisited until 1509, when Diego, the discoverer’s son, sent Don Juan d’Esquivel to take possession, and thenceforward it passed under Spanish rule. Sant’ Iago de la Vega, or Spanish Town, which remained the capital of the island until 1872, was founded in 1523. Sir Anthony Shirley, a British admiral, attacked the island in 1596, and plundered and burned the capital, but did not follow up his victory. Upon his retirement the Spaniards restored their capital and were unmolested until 1635, when the island was again raided by the British under Colonel Jackson. The period of the Spanish occupation is mainly memorable for the annihilation of the gentle and peaceful Arawâk Indian inhabitants; Don Pedro d’Esquivel was one of their cruellest oppressors. The whole island was divided among eight noble Spanish families, who discouraged immigration to such an extent that when Jamaica was taken by the British the white and slave population together did not exceed 3000. Under the vigorous foreign policy of Cromwell an attempt was made to crush the Spanish power in the West Indies, and an expedition under Admirals Penn and Venables succeeded in capturing and holding Jamaica in 1655. The Spanish were entirely expelled in 1658. Their slaves then took to the mountains, and down to the end of the 18th century the disaffection of these Maroons, as they were called, caused constant trouble. Jamaica continued to be governed by military authority until 1661, when Colonel D’Oyley was appointed captain-general and governor-in-chief with an executive council, and a constitution was introduced resembling that of England. He was succeeded in the next year by Lord Windsor, under whom a legislative council was established. Jamaica soon became the chief resort of the buccaneers, who not infrequently united the characters of merchant or planter with that of pirate or privateer. By the Treaty of Madrid, 1670, the British title to the island was recognized, and the buccaneers were suppressed. The Royal African Company was formed in 1672 with a monopoly of the slave trade, and from this time Jamaica was one of the greatest slave marts in the world. The sugar-industry was introduced about this period, the first pot of sugar being sent to London in 1673. An attempt was made in 1678 to saddle the island with a yearly tribute to the Crown and to restrict the free legislature. The privileges of the legislative assembly, however, were restored in 1682; but not till 46 years later was the question of revenue settled by a compromise by which Jamaica undertook to settle £8000 (an amount afterwards commuted to £6000) per annum on the Crown, provided that English statute laws were made binding in Jamaica.

During these years of political struggle the colony was thrice afflicted by nature. A great earthquake occurred in 1692, when the chief part of the town of Port Royal, built on a shelving bank of sand, slipped into the sea. Two dreadful hurricanes devastated the island in 1712 and 1722, the second of which did so much damage that the seat of commerce had to be transferred from Port Royal to Kingston.

The only prominent event in the history of the island during the later years of the 18th century, was the threatened invasion by the French and Spanish in 1782, but Jamaica was saved by the victory of Rodney and Hood off Dominica. The last attempt at invasion was made in 1806, when the French were defeated by Admiral Duckworth. When the slave trade was abolished the island was at the zenith of its prosperity; sugar, coffee, cocoa, pimento, ginger and indigo were being produced in large quantities, and it was the dépôt of a very lucrative trade with the Spanish main. The anti-slavery agitation in Great Britain found its echo in the island, and in 1832 the negroes revolted, believing that emancipation had been granted. They killed a number of whites and destroyed a large amount of valuable property. Two years later the Emancipation Act was passed, and, subject to a short term of apprenticeship, the slaves were free. Emancipation left the planters in a pitiable condition financially. The British government awarded them compensation at the rate of £19 per slave, the market value of slaves at the time being £35, but most of this compensation went into the hands of the planters’ creditors. They were left with over-worked estates, a poor market and a scarcity of labour. Nor was this the end of their misfortunes. During the slavery times the British government had protected the planter by imposing a heavy differential duty on foreign sugar; but on the introduction of free trade the price of sugar fell by one-half and reduced the profits of the already impoverished planter. Many estates, already heavily mortgaged, were abandoned, and the trade of the island was at a standstill. Differences between the executive, the legislature, and the home government, as to the means of retrenching the public expenditure, created much bitterness. Although some slight improvement marked the administration of Sir Charles Metcalfe and the earl of Elgin, when coolie immigration was introduced to supply the scarcity and irregularity of labour and the railway was opened, the improvement was not permanent. In 1865 Edward John Eyre became governor. Financial affairs were at their lowest ebb and the colonial treasury showed a deficit of £80,000. To meet this difficulty new taxes were imposed and discontent was rife among the negroes. Dr Underhill, the secretary of a Baptist organization known as the British Union, wrote to the colonial secretary in London, pointing out the state of affairs. This letter became public in Jamaica, and in the opinion of the governor added in no small measure to the popular excitement. On the 11th of October 1865 the negroes rose at Morant Bay and murdered the custos and most of the white inhabitants. The slight encounter which followed filled the island with terror, and there is no doubt that many excesses were committed on both sides. The assembly passed an act by which martial law was proclaimed, and the legislature passed an act abrogating the constitution.

The action of Governor Eyre, though generally approved throughout the West Indies, caused much controversy in England, and he was recalled. A prosecution was instituted against him, resulting in an elaborate exposition of martial law by Chief Justice Cockburn, but the jury threw out the bill and Eyre was discharged. He was succeeded in the government of Jamaica by Sir Henry Storks, and under the crown colony system of government the state of the island made slow but steady progress. In 1868 the first fruit shipment took place from Port Antonio, the immigration of coolies was revived, and cinchona planting was introduced. The method of government was changed in 1884, when a new constitution, slightly modified in 1895, was granted to the island.

In the afternoon of the 14th of January 1907 a terrible earthquake visited Kingston. Almost every building in the capital and in Port Royal, and many in St Andrews, were destroyed or seriously injured. The loss of life was variously estimated, but probably exceeded one thousand. Among those killed was 135 Sir James Fergusson, 6th baronet (b. 1832). The principal shock was followed by many more of slighter intensity during the ensuing fortnight and later. On the 17th of January assistance was brought by three American war-ships under Rear-Admiral Davis, who however withdrew them on the 19th, owing to a misunderstanding with the governor of the island, Sir Alexander Swettenham, on the subject of the landing of marines from the vessels with a view to preserving order. The incident caused considerable sensation, and led to Sir A. Swettenham’s resignation in the following March, Sir Sydney Olivier, K.C.M.G., being appointed governor. Order was speedily restored; but the destructive effect of the earthquake was a severe check to the prosperity of the island.

JAMAICA, formerly a village of Queens county, Long Island, New York, U.S.A., but after the 1st of January 1898 a part of the borough of Queens, New York City. Pop. (1890) 5361. It is served by the Long Island railroad, the lines of which from Brooklyn and Manhattan meet here and then separate to serve the different regions of the island.1 King’s Park (about 10 acres) comprises the estate of John Alsop King (1788-1867), governor of New York in 1857-1859, from whose heirs in 1897 the land was purchased by the village trustees. In South Jamaica there is a race track, at which meetings are held in the spring and autumn. The headquarters of the Queens Borough Department of Public Works and Police are in the Jamaica town-hall, and Jamaica is the seat of a city training school for teachers (until 1905 one of the New York State normal schools). For two guns, a coat, and a quantity of powder and lead, several New Englanders obtained from the Indians a deed for a tract of land here in September 1655. In March 1657 they received permission from Governor Stuyvesant to found a town, which was chartered in 1660 and was named Rustdorp by Stuyvesant, but the English called it Jamaica; it was rechartered in 1666, 1686 and 1788. The village was incorporated in 1814 and reincorporated in 1855. In 1665 it was made the seat of justice of the north riding; in 1683-1788 it was the shire town of Queens county. With Hempstead, Gravesend, Newtown and Flushing, also towns of New England origin and type, Jamaica was early disaffected towards the provincial government of New York. In 1669 these towns complained that they had no representation in a popular assembly, and in 1670 they protested against taxation without representation. The founders of Jamaica were mostly Presbyterians, and they organized one of the first Presbyterian churches in America. At the beginning of the War of Independence Jamaica was under the control of Loyalists; after the defeat of the Americans in the battle of Long Island (27th August 1776) it was occupied by the British; and until the end of the war it was the headquarters of General Oliver Delancey, who had command of all Long Island.

JAMB (from Fr. jambe, leg), in architecture, the side-post or lining of a doorway or other aperture. The jambs of a window outside the frame are called “reveals.” Small shafts to doors and windows with caps and bases are known as “jamb-shafts”; when in the inside arris of the jamb of a window they are sometimes called “scoinsons.”

JAMES (a variant of the name Jacob, Heb. יעקב, one who holds by the heel, outwitter, through O. Fr. James, another form of Jacques, Jaques, from Low Lat. Jacobus; cf. Ital. Jacopo [Jacob], Giacomo [James], Prov. Jacme, Cat. Jaume, Cast. Jaime), a masculine proper name popular in Christian countries as having been that of two of Christ’s apostles. It has been borne by many sovereigns and other princes, the most important of whom are noticed below, after the heading devoted to the characters in the New Testament, in the following order: (1) kings of England and Scotland, (2) other kings in the alphabetical order of their countries, (3) the “Old Pretender.” The article on the Epistle of James in the New Testament follows after the remaining biographical articles in which James is a surname.

JAMES (Gr. Ἰάκωβος, the Heb. Ya‘akob or Jacob), the name of several persons mentioned in the New Testament.

1. James, the son of Zebedee. He was among the first who were called to be Christ’s immediate followers (Mark i. 19 seq.; Matt. iv. 21 seq., and perhaps Luke v. 10), and afterwards obtained an honoured place in the apostolic band, his name twice occupying the second place after Peter’s in the lists (Mark iii. 17; Acts i. 13), while on at least three notable occasions he was, along with Peter and his brother John, specially chosen by Jesus to be with him (Mark v. 37; Matt. xvii. i, xxvi. 37). This same prominence may have contributed partly to the title “Boanerges” or “sons of thunder” which, according to Mark iii. 17, Jesus himself gave to the two brothers. But its most natural interpretation is to be found in the impetuous disposition which would have called down fire from heaven on the offending Samaritan villagers (Luke ix. 54), and afterwards found expression, though in a different way, in the ambitious request to occupy the places of honour in Christ’s kingdom (Mark x. 35 seq.). James is included among those who after the ascension waited at Jerusalem (Acts i. 13) for the descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost. And though on this occasion only his name is mentioned, he must have been a zealous and prominent member of the Christian community, to judge from the fact that when a victim had to be chosen from among the apostles, who should be sacrificed to the animosity of the Jews, it was on James that the blow fell first. The brief notice is given in Acts xii. 1, 2. Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. ii. 9) has preserved for us from Clement of Alexandria the additional information that the accuser of the apostle “beholding his confession and moved thereby, confessed that he too was a Christian. So they were both led away to execution together; and on the road the accuser asked James for forgiveness. Gazing on him for a little while, he said, ‘Peace be with thee,’ and kissed him. And then both were beheaded together.”

2. James, the son of Alphaeus. He also was one of the apostles, and is mentioned in all the four lists (Matt. x. 3; Mark iii. 18; Luke vi. 15; Acts i. 13) by this name. We know nothing further regarding him, unless we believe him to be the same as James “the little.”

3. James, the little. He is described as the son of a Mary (Matt, xxvii. 56; Mark xv. 40), who was in all probability the wife of Clopas (John xix. 25). And on the ground that Clopas is another form of the name Alphaeus, this James has been thought by some to be the same as 2. But the evidence of the Syriac versions, which render Alphaeus by Chalphai, while Clopas is simply transliterated Kleopha, makes it extremely improbable that the two names are to be identified. And as we have no better ground for finding in Clopas the Cleopas of Luke xxiv. 18, we must be content to admit that James the little is again an almost wholly unknown personality, and has no connexion with any of the other Jameses mentioned in the New Testament.

4. James, the father of Judas. There can be no doubt that in the mention of “Judas of James” in Luke vi. 16 the ellipsis should be supplied by “the son” and not as in the A.V. by “the brother” (cf. Luke iii. 1, vi. 14; Acts xii. 2, where the word 136 ἀδελφός is inserted). This Judas, known as Thaddaeus by Matthew and Mark, afterwards became one of the apostles, and is expressly distinguished by St John from the traitor as “not Iscariot” (John xiv. 22).

5. James, the Lord’s brother. In Matt. xiii. 55 and Mark vi. 3 we read of a certain James as, along with Joses and Judas and Simon, a “brother” of the Lord. The exact nature of the relationship there implied has been the subject of much discussion. Jerome’s view (de vir. ill. 2), that the “brothers” were in reality cousins, “sons of Mary the sister of the Lord’s mother,” rests on too many unproved assumptions to be entitled to much weight, and may be said to have been finally disposed of by Bishop Lightfoot in his essay on “The Brothers of the Lord” (Galatians, pp. 252 sqq., Dissertations on the Apostolic Age, pp. 1 sqq.). Even however if we understand the word “brethren” in its natural sense, it may be applied either to the sons of Joseph by a former wife, in which case they would be the step-brothers of Jesus, or to sons born to Joseph and Mary after the birth of Jesus. The former of these views, generally known as the Epiphanian view from its most zealous advocate in the 4th century, can claim for its support the preponderating voice of tradition (see the catena of references given by Lightfoot, loc. cit., who himself inclines to this view). On the other hand the Helvidian theory as propounded by Helvidius, and apparently accepted by Tertullian (cf. adv. Marc. iv. 29), which makes James a brother of the Lord, as truly as Mary was his mother, undoubtedly seems more in keeping with the direct statements of the Gospels, and also with the after history of the brothers in the Church (see W. Patrick, James the Brother of the Lord, 1906, p. 5). In any case, whatever the exact nature of James’s antecedents, there can be no question as to the important place which he occupied in the early Church. Converted to a full belief in the living Lord, perhaps through the special revelation that was granted to him (1 Cor. xv. 7), he became the recognized head of the Church at Jerusalem (Acts xii. 17, xv. 13, xxi. 18), and is called by St Paul (Gal. ii. 9), along with Peter and John, a “pillar” of the Christian community. He was traditionally the author of the epistle in the New Testament which bears his name (see James, Epistle of). From the New Testament we learn no more of the history of James the Lord’s brother, but Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. ii. 23) has preserved for us from Hegesippus the earliest ecclesiastical traditions concerning him. By that authority he is described as having been a Nazarite, and on account of his eminent righteousness called “Just” and “Oblias.” So great was his influence with the people that he was appealed to by the scribes and Pharisees for a true and (as they hoped) unfavourable judgment about the Messiahship of Christ. Placed, to give the greater publicity to his words, on a pinnacle of the temple, he, when solemnly appealed to, made confession of his faith, and was at once thrown down and murdered. This happened immediately before the siege. Josephus (Antiq. xx. 9, 1) tells that it was by order of Ananus the high priest, in the interval between the death of Festus and the arrival of his successor Albinus, that James was put to death; and his narrative gives the idea of some sort of judicial examination, for he says that along with some others James was brought before an assembly of judges, by whom they were condemned and delivered to be stoned. Josephus is also cited by Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. ii. 23) to the effect that the miseries of the siege were due to divine vengeance for the murder of James. Later writers describe James as an ἐπίσκοπος (Clem. Al. apud Eus. Hist. Ecc. ii. 1) and even as an ἐπίσκοπος ἐπισκόπων (Clem. Hom., ad init.). According to Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. vii. 19) his episcopal chair was still shown at Jerusalem at the time when Eusebius wrote.

JAMES I. (1566-1625), king of Great Britain and Ireland, formerly king of Scotland as James VI., was the only child of Mary Queen of Scots, and her second husband, Henry Stewart Lord Darnley. He was born in the castle of Edinburgh on the 19th of June 1566, and was proclaimed king of Scotland on the 24th of July 1567, upon the forced abdication of his mother. Until 1578 he was treated as being incapable of taking any real part in public affairs, and was kept in the castle of Stirling for safety’s sake amid the confused fighting of the early years of his minority.

The young king was a very weakly boy. It is said that he could not stand without support until he was seven, and although he lived until he was nearly sixty, he was never a strong man. In after life he was a constant and even a reckless rider, but the weakness in his legs was never quite cured. During a great part of his life he found it necessary to be tied to the saddle. When on one occasion in 1621 his horse threw him into the New River near his palace of Theobalds in the neighbourhood of London, he had a very narrow escape of being drowned; yet he continued to ride as before. At all times he preferred to lean on the shoulder of an attendant when walking. This feebleness of body, which had no doubt a large share in causing certain corresponding deficiencies of character, was attributed to the agitations and the violent efforts forced on his mother by the murder of her secretary Rizzio when she was in the sixth month of her pregnancy. The fact that James was a bold rider, in spite of this serious disqualification for athletic exercise, should be borne in mind when he is accused of having been a coward.

The circumstances surrounding him in boyhood were not favourable to the development of his character. His immediate guardian or foster-father, the earl of Mar, was indeed an honourable man, and the countess, who had charge of the nursing of the king, discharged her duty so as to win his lasting confidence. James afterwards entrusted her with the care of his eldest son, Henry. When the earl died in 1572 his place was well filled by his brother, Sir Alexander Erskine. The king’s education was placed under the care of George Buchanan, assisted by Peter Young, and two other tutors. Buchanan, who did not spare the rod, and the other teachers, who had more reverence for the royal person, gave the boy a sound training in languages. The English envoy, Sir Henry Killigrew, who saw him in 1574, testified to his proficiency in translating from and into Latin and French. As it was very desirable that he should be trained a Protestant king, he was well instructed in theology. The exceptionally scholastic quality of his education helped to give him a taste for learning, but also tended to make him a pedant.

James was only twelve when the earl of Morton was driven from the regency, and for some time after he can have been no more than a puppet in the hands of intriguers and party leaders. When, for instance, in 1582 he was seized by the faction of nobles who carried out the so-called raid of Ruthven, which was in fact a kidnapping enterprise carried out in the interest of the Protestant party, he cried like a child. One of the conspirators, the master of Glamis, Sir Thomas Lyon, told him that it was better “bairns should greet [children should cry] than bearded men.” It was not indeed till 1583, when he broke away from his captors, that James began to govern in reality.

For the history of his reign reference may be made to the articles on the histories of England and Scotland. James’s work as a ruler can be divided, without violating any sound rule of criticism, into black and white—into the part which was a failure and a preparation for future disaster, and the part which was solid achievement, honourable to himself and profitable to his people. His native kingdom of Scotland had the benefit of the second. Between 1583 and 1603 he reduced the anarchical baronage of Scotland to obedience, and replaced the subdivision of sovereignty and consequent confusion, which had been the very essence of feudalism, by a strong centralized royal authority. In fact he did in Scotland the work which had been done by the Tudors in England, by Louis XI. in France, and by Ferdinand and Isabella in Spain. It was the work of all the strong rulers of the Renaissance. But James not only 137 brought his disobedient and intriguing barons to order—that was a comparatively easy achievement and might well have been performed by more than one of his predecessors, had their lives been prolonged—he also quelled the attempts of the Protestants to found what Hallam has well defined as a “Presbyterian Hildebrandism.” He enforced the superiority of the state over the church. Both before his accession to the throne of England (1603) and afterwards he took an intelligent interest in the prosperity of his Scottish kingdom, and did much for the pacification of the Hebrides, for the enforcement of order on the Borders, and for the development of industry. That he did so much although the crown was poor (largely it must be confessed because he made profuse gifts of the secularized church lands), and although the armed force at his disposal was so small that to the very end he was exposed to the attacks of would-be kidnappers (as in the case of the Gowrie conspiracy of 1600), is proof positive that he was neither the mere poltroon nor the mere learned fool he has often been called.

James’s methods of achieving ends in themselves honourable and profitable were indeed of a kind which has made posterity unjust to his real merits. The circumstances in which he passed his youth developed in him a natural tendency to craft. He boasted indeed of his “king-craft” and probably believed that he owed it to his studies. But it was in reality the resource of the weak, the art of playing off one possible enemy against another by trickery, and so deceiving all. The marquis de Fontenay, the French ambassador, who saw him in the early part of his reign, speaks of him as cowed by the violence about him. It is certain that James was most unscrupulous in making promises which he never meant to keep, and the terror in which he passed his youth sufficiently explains his preference for guile. He would make promises to everybody, as when he wrote to the pope in 1584 more than hinting that he would be a good Roman Catholic if helped in his need. His very natural desire to escape from the poverty and insecurity of Scotland to the opulent English throne not only kept him busy in intrigues to placate the Roman Catholics or anybody else who could help or hinder him, but led him to behave basely in regard to the execution of his mother in 1587. He blustered to give himself an air of courage, but took good care to do nothing to offend Elizabeth. When the time came for fulfilling his promises and half-promises, he was not able, even if he had been willing, to keep his word to everybody. The methods which had helped him to success in Scotland did him harm in England, where his reign prepared the way for the great civil war. In his southern kingdom his failure was in fact complete. Although England accepted him as the alternative to civil war, and although he was received and surrounded with fulsome flattery, he did not win the respect of his English subjects. His undignified personal appearance was against him, and so were his garrulity, his Scottish accent, his slovenliness and his toleration of disorders in his court, but, above all, his favour for handsome male favourites, whom he loaded with gifts and caressed with demonstrations of affection which laid him open to vile suspicions. In ecclesiastical matters he offended many, who contrasted his severity and rudeness to the Puritan divines at the Hampton Court conference (1604) with his politeness to the Roman Catholics, whom he, however, worried by fits and starts. In a country where the authority of the state had been firmly established and the problem was how to keep it from degenerating into the mere instrument of a king’s passions, his insistence on the doctrine of divine right aroused distrust and hostility. In itself, and in its origin, the doctrine was nothing more than a necessary assertion of the independence of the state in face of the “Hildebrandism” of Rome and Geneva alike. But when Englishmen were told that the king alone had indefeasible rights, and that all the privileges of subjects were revocable gifts, they were roused to hostility. His weaknesses cast suspicion on his best-meant schemes. His favour for his countrymen helped to defeat his wise wish to bring about a full union between England and Scotland. His profusion, which had been bad in the poverty of Scotland and was boundless amid the wealth of England, kept him necessitous, and drove him to shifts. Posterity can give him credit for his desire to forward religious peace in Europe, but his Protestant subjects were simply frightened when he sought a matrimonial alliance with Spain. Sagacious men among his contemporaries could not see the consistency of a king who married his daughter Elizabeth to the elector palatine, a leader of the German Protestants, and also sought to marry his son to an infanta of Spain. The king’s subservience to Spain was indeed almost besotted. He could not see her real weakness, and he allowed himself to be befooled by the ministers of Philip III. and Philip IV. The end of his scheming was that he was dragged into a needless war with Spain by his son Charles and his favourite George Villiers, duke of Buckingham, just before his death on the 5th of March 1625 at his favourite residence, Theobalds.

James married in 1589 Anne, second daughter of Frederick II., king of Denmark. His voyage to meet his bride, whose ship had been driven into a Norwegian port by bad weather, is the only episode of a romantic character in the life of this very prosaic member of a poetic family. By this wife James had three children who survived infancy: Henry Frederick, prince of Wales, who died in 1612; Charles, the future king; and Elizabeth, wife of the elector palatine, Frederick V.

Not the least of James’s many ambitions was the desire to excel as an author. He left a body of writings which, though of mediocre quality as literature, entitle him to a unique place among English kings since Alfred for width of intellectual interest and literary faculty. His efforts were inspired by his preceptor George Buchanan, whose memory he cherished in later years. His first work was in verse, Essayes of a Prentise in the Divine Art of Poesie (Edin. Vautrollier, 1584), containing fifteen sonnets, “Ane Metaphoricall invention of a tragedie called Phoenix,” a short poem “Of Time,” translations from Du Bartas, Lucan and the Book of Psalms (“out of Tremellius”), and a prose tract entitled “Ane short treatise, containing some Reulis and Cautelis to be observit and eschewit in Scottis Poesie.” The volume is introduced by commendatory sonnets, including one by Alexander Montgomerie. The chief interest of the book lies in the “Treatise” and the prefatory sonnets “To the Reader” and “Sonnet decifring the perfyte poete.” There is little originality in this youthful production. It has been surmised that it was compiled from the exercises written when the author was Buchanan’s pupil at Stirling, and that it was directly suggested by his preceptor’s De Prosodia and his annotations on Vives. On the other hand, it shows intimate acquaintance with the critical reflections of Ronsard and Du Bellay, and of Gascoigne in his Notes of Instruction (1575). In 1591 James published Poeticall Exercises at Vacant Houres, including a translation of the Furies of Du Bartas, his own Lepanto, and Du Bartas’s version of it, La Lepanthe. His Daemonologie, a prose treatise denouncing witchcraft and exhorting the civil power to the strongest measures of suppression, appeared in 1599. In the same year he printed the first edition (seven copies) of his Basilikon Doron, strongly Protestant in tone. A French edition, specially translated for presentation to the pope, has a disingenuous preface explaining that certain phrases (e.g. “papistical doctrine”) are omitted, because of the difficulty of rendering them in a foreign tongue. The original edition was, however, translated by order of the suspicious pope, and was immediately placed on the Index. Shortly after going to England James produced his famous Counterblaste to Tobacco (London, 1604), in which he forsakes his Scots tongue for Southern English. The volume was published anonymously. James’s prose works (including his speeches) were collected and edited (folio, 1616) by James Montagu, bishop of Winchester, and were translated into Latin by the same hand in a companion folio, in 1619 (also Frankfort, 1689). A tract, entitled “The True Law of Free Monarchies,” appeared in 1603; “An Apology for the Oath of Allegiance” in 1607; and a “Déclaration du Roy Jacques I. ... pour le droit des Rois” in 1615. In 1588 and 1589 James issued two small volumes of Meditations on some verses of (a) Revelations and (b) 1 Chronicles. Other two “meditations” were printed posthumously.

138

JAMES II. (1633-1701), king of Great Britain and Ireland, second surviving son of Charles I. and Henrietta Maria, was born at St James’s on the 15th of October 1633, and created duke of York in January 1643. During the Civil War James was taken prisoner by Fairfax (1646), but contrived to escape to Holland in 1648. Subsequently he served in the French army under Turenne, and in the Spanish under Condé, and was applauded by both commanders for his brilliant personal courage. Returning to England with Charles II. in 1660 he was appointed lord high admiral and warden of the Cinque Ports. Pepys, who was secretary to the navy, has recorded the patient industry and unflinching probity of his naval administration. His victory over the Dutch in 1665, and his drawn battle with De Ruyter in 1672, show that he was a good naval commander as well as an excellent administrator. These achievements won him a reputation for high courage, which, until the close of 1688, was amply deserved. His private record was not as good as his public. In December 1660 he admitted to having contracted, under discreditable circumstances, a secret marriage with Anne Hyde (1637-1671), daughter of Lord Clarendon, in the previous September. Both before and after the marriage he seems to have been a libertine as unblushing though not so fastidious as Charles himself. In 1672 he made a public avowal of his conversion to Roman Catholicism. Charles II. had opposed this project, but in 1673 allowed him to marry the Catholic Mary of Modena as his second wife. Both houses of parliament, who viewed this union with abhorrence, now passed the Test Act, forbidding Catholics to hold office. In consequence of this James was forced to resign his posts. It was in vain that he married his daughter Mary to the Protestant prince of Orange in 1677. Anti-Catholic feeling ran so high that, after the discovery of the Popish Plot, he found it wiser to retire to Brussels (1679), while Shaftesbury and the Whigs planned to exclude him from the succession. He was lord high commissioner of Scotland (1680-1682), where he occupied himself in a severe persecution of the Covenanters. In 1684 Charles, having triumphed over the Exclusionists, restored James to the office of high admiral by use of his dispensing power.

James ascended the throne on the 16th of February 1685. The nation showed its loyalty by its firm adherence to him during the rebellions of Argyll in Scotland and Monmouth in England (1685). The savage reprisals on their suppression, in especial the “Bloody Assizes” of Jeffreys, produced a revulsion of public feeling. James had promised to defend the existing Church and government, but the people now became suspicious. James was not a mere tyrant and bigot, as the popular imagination speedily assumed him to be. He was rather a mediocre but not altogether obtuse man, who mistook tributary streams for the main currents of national thought. Thus he greatly underrated the strength of the Establishment, and preposterously exaggerated that of Dissent and Catholicism. He perceived that opinion was seriously divided in the Established Church, and thought that a vigorous policy would soon prove effective. Hence he publicly celebrated Mass, prohibited preaching against Catholicism, and showed exceptional favour to renegades from the Establishment. By undue pressure he secured a decision of the judges, in the test case of Godden v. Hale (1687), by which he was allowed to dispense Catholics from the Test Act. Catholics were now admitted to the chief offices in the army, and to some important posts in the state, in virtue of the dispensing power of James. The judges had been intimidated or corrupted, and the royal promise to protect the Establishment violated. The army had been increased to 20,000 men and encamped at Hounslow Heath to overawe the capital. Public alarm was speedily manifested and suspicion to a high degree awakened. In 1687 James made a bid for the support of the Dissenters by advocating a system of joint toleration for Catholics and Dissenters. In April 1687 he published a Declaration of Indulgence—exempting Catholics and Dissenters from penal statutes. He followed up this measure by dissolving parliament and attacking the universities. By an unscrupulous use of the dispensing power he introduced Dissenters and Catholics into all departments of state and into the municipal corporations, which were remodelled in their interests. Then in April 1688 he took the suicidal step of issuing a proclamation to force the clergy and bishops to read the Declaration in their pulpits, and thus personally advocate a measure they detested. Seven bishops refused, were indicted by James for libel, but acquitted amid the indescribable enthusiasm of the populace. Protestant nobles of England, enraged at the tolerant policy of James, had been in negotiation with William of Orange since 1687. The trial of the seven bishops, and the birth of a son to James, now induced them to send William a definite invitation (June 30, 1688). James remained in a fool’s paradise till the last, and only awakened to his danger when William landed at Torbay (November 5, 1688) and swept all before him. James pretended to treat, and in the midst of the negotiations fled to France. He was intercepted at Faversham and brought back, but the politic prince of Orange allowed him to escape a second time (December 23, 1688).

At the end of 1688 James seemed to have lost his old courage. After his defeat at the Boyne (July 1, 1690) he speedily departed from Ireland, where he had so conducted himself that his English followers had been ashamed of his incapacity, while French officers had derided him. His proclamations and policy towards England during these years show unmistakable traces of the same incompetence. On the 17th of May 1692 he saw the French fleet destroyed before his very eyes off Cape La Hogue. He was aware of, though not an open advocate of the “Assassination Plot,” which was directed against William. By its revelation and failure (February 10, 1696) the third and last serious attempt of James for his restoration failed. He refused in the same year to accept the French influence in favour of his candidature to the Polish throne, on the ground that it would exclude him from the English. Henceforward he neglected politics, and Louis of France ceased to consider him as a political factor. A mysterious conversion had been effected in him by an austere Cistercian abbot. The world saw with astonishment this vicious, rough, coarse-fibred man of the world transformed into an austere penitent, who worked miracles of healing. Surrounded by this odour of sanctity, which greatly edified the faithful, James lived at St Germain until his death on the 17th of September 1701.

The political ineptitude of James is clear; he often showed firmness when conciliation was needful, and weakness when resolution alone could have saved the day. Moreover, though he mismanaged almost every political problem with which he personally dealt, he was singularly tactless and impatient of advice. But in general political morality he was not below his age, and in his advocacy of toleration decidedly above it. He was more honest and sincere than Charles II., more genuinely patriotic in his foreign policy, and more consistent in his religious attitude. That his brother retained the throne while James lost it is an ironical demonstration that a more pitiless fate awaits the ruler whose faults are of the intellect, than one whose faults are of the heart.

By Anne Hyde James had eight children, of whom two only, Mary and Anne, both queens of England, survived their father. By Mary of Modena he had seven children, among them being James Francis Edward (the Old Pretender) and Louisa Maria Theresa, who died at St Germain in 1712. By one mistress, Arabella Churchill (1648-1730), he had two sons, James, duke of Berwick, and Henry (1673-1702), titular duke of Albemarle and 139 grand prior of France, and a daughter, Henrietta (1667-1730), who married Sir Henry Waldegrave, afterwards Baron Waldegrave; and by another, Catherine Sedley, countess of Dorchester (1657-1717), a daughter, Catherine (d. 1743), who married James Annesley, 5th earl of Anglesey, and afterwards John Sheffield, duke of Buckingham and Normanby.

JAMES I. (1394-1437), king of Scotland and poet, the son of King Robert III., was born at Dunfermline in July 1394. After the death of his mother, Annabella Drummond of Stobhall, in 1402, he was placed under the care of Henry Wardlaw (d. 1440), who became bishop of St Andrews in 1403, but soon his father resolved to send him to France. Robert doubtless decided upon this course owing to the fact that in 1402 his elder son, David, duke of Rothesay, had met his death in a mysterious fashion, being probably murdered by his uncle, Robert, duke of Albany, who, as the king was an invalid, was virtually the ruler of Scotland. On the way to France, however, James fell into the hands of some English sailors and was sent to Henry IV., who refused to admit him to ransom. The chronicler Thomas Walsingham, says that James’s imprisonment began in 1406, while the future king himself places it in 1404; February 1406 is probably the correct date. On the death of Robert III. in April 1406 James became nominally king of Scotland, but he remained a captive in England, the government being conducted by his uncle, Robert of Albany, who showed no anxiety to procure his nephew’s release. Dying in 1420, Albany was succeeded as regent by his son, Murdoch. At first James was confined in the Tower of London, but in June 1407 he was removed to the castle at Nottingham, whence about a month later he was taken to Evesham. His education was continued by capable tutors, and he not only attained excellence in all manly sports, but became perhaps more cultured than any other prince of his age. In person he was short and stout, but well-proportioned and very strong. His agility was not less remarkable than his strength; he excelled in all athletic feats which demanded suppleness of limb and quickness of eye. As regards his intellectual attainments he is reported to have been acquainted with philosophy, and it is evident from his subsequent career that he had studied jurisprudence; moreover, besides being proficient in vocal and instrumental music, he cultivated the art of poetry with much success. When Henry V. became king in March 1413, James was again imprisoned in the Tower of London, but soon afterwards he was taken to Windsor and was treated with great consideration by the English king. In 1420, with the intention of detaching the Scottish auxiliaries from the French standard, he was sent to take part in Henry’s campaign in France; this move failed in its immediate object and he returned to England after Henry’s death in 1422. About this time negotiations for the release of James were begun in earnest, and in September 1423 a treaty was signed at York, the Scottish nation undertaking to pay a ransom of 60,000 marks “for his maintenance in England.” By the terms of the treaty James was to wed a noble English lady, and on the 12th of February 1424 he was married at Southwark to Jane, daughter of John Beaufort, earl of Somerset, a lady to whom he was faithful through life. Ten thousand marks of his ransom were remitted as Jane’s dowry, and in April 1424 James and his bride entered Scotland.

With the reign of James I., whose coronation took place at Scone on the 21st of May 1424, constitutional sovereignty may be said to begin in Scotland. By the introduction of a system of statute law, modelled to some extent on that of England, and by the additional importance assigned to parliament, the leaven was prepared which was to work towards the destruction of the indefinite authority of the king, and of the unbridled licence of the nobles. During the parliament held at Perth in March 1425 James arrested Murdoch, duke of Albany, and his son, Alexander; together with Albany’s eldest son, Walter, and Duncan, earl of Lennox, who had been seized previously; they were sentenced to death, and the four were executed at Stirling. In a parliament held at Inverness in 1427 the king arrested many turbulent northern chiefs, and his whole policy was directed towards crushing the power of the nobles. In this he was very successful. Expeditions reduced the Highlands to order; earldom after earldom was forfeited; but this vigour aroused the desire for revenge, and at length cost James his life. Having been warned that he would never again cross the Forth, the king went to reside in Perth just before Christmas 1436. Among those whom he had angered was Sir Robert Graham (d. 1437), who had been banished by his orders. Instigated by the king’s uncle, Walter Stewart, earl of Atholl (d. 1437), and aided by the royal chamberlain, Sir Robert Stewart, and by a band of Highlanders, Graham burst into the presence of James on the night of the 20th of February 1437 and stabbed the king to death. Graham and Atholl were afterwards tortured and executed. James had two sons: Alexander, who died young, and James II., who succeeded to the throne; and six daughters, among them being Margaret, the queen of Louis XI. of France. His widow, Jane, married Sir James Stewart, the “black knight of Lorne,” and died on the 15th of July 1445.

During the latter part of James’s reign difficulties arose between Scotland and England and also between Scotland and the papacy. Part of the king’s ransom was still owing to England; other causes of discord between the two nations existed, and in 1436 these culminated in a short war. In ecclesiastical matters James showed himself merciless towards heretics, but his desire to reform the Scottish Church and to make it less dependent on Rome brought him into collision with Popes Martin V. and Eugenius IV.

James was the author of two poems, the Kingis Quair and Good Counsel (a short piece of three stanzas). The Song of Absence, Peblis to the Play and Christis Kirk on the Greene have been ascribed to him without evidence. The Kingis Quair (preserved in the Selden MS. B. 24 in the Bodleian) is an allegorical poem of the cours d’amour type, written in seven-lined Chaucerian stanzas and extending to 1379 lines. It was composed during James’s captivity in England and celebrates his courtship of Lady Jane Beaufort. Though in many respects a Chaucerian pastiche, it not rarely equals its model in verbal and metrical felicity. Its language is an artificial blend of northern and southern (Chaucerian) forms, of the type shown in Lancelot of the Laik and the Quair of Jelusy.

JAMES II. (1430-1460), king of Scotland, the only surviving son of James I. and his wife, Jane, daughter of John Beaufort, earl of Somerset, was born on the 16th of October 1430. Crowned 140 king at Holyrood in March 1437, shortly after the murder of his father, he was at first under the guardianship of his mother, while Archibald, 5th earl of Douglas, was regent of the kingdom, and considerable power was possessed by Sir Alexander Livingstone and Sir William Crichton (d. 1454). When about 1439 Queen Jane was married to Sir James Stewart, the knight of Lorne, Livingstone obtained the custody of the young king, whose minority was marked by fierce hostility between the Douglases and the Crichtons, with Livingstone first on one side and then on the other. About 1443 the royal cause was espoused by William, 8th earl of Douglas, who attacked Crichton in the king’s name, and civil war lasted until about 1446. In July 1449 James was married to Mary (d. 1463), daughter of Arnold, duke of Gelderland, and undertook the government himself; and almost immediately Livingstone was arrested, but Douglas retained the royal favour for a few months more. In 1452, however, this powerful earl was invited to Stirling by the king, and, charged with treachery, was stabbed by James and then killed by the attendants. Civil war broke out at once between James and the Douglases, whose lands were ravaged; but after the Scots parliament had exonerated the king, James, the new earl of Douglas, made his submission. Early in 1455 this struggle was renewed. Marching against the rebels James gained several victories, after which Douglas was attainted and his lands forfeited. Fortified by this success and assured of the support of the parliament and of the great nobles, James, acting as an absolute king, could view without alarm the war which had broken out with England. After two expeditions across the borders, a truce was made in July 1457, and the king employed the period of peace in strengthening his authority in the Highlands. During the Wars of the Roses he showed his sympathy with the Lancastrian party after the defeat of Henry VI. at Northampton by attacking the English possessions to the south of Scotland. It was while conducting the siege of Roxburgh Castle that James was killed, through the bursting of a cannon, on the 3rd of August 1460. He left three sons, his successor, James III., Alexander Stewart, duke of Albany, and John Stewart, earl of Mar (d. 1479); and two daughters. James, who is sometimes called “Fiery Face,” was a vigorous and popular prince, and, although not a scholar like his father, showed interest in education. His reign is a period of some importance in the legislative history of Scotland, as measures were passed with regard to the tenure of land, the reformation of the coinage, and the protection of the poor, while the organization for the administration of justice was greatly improved.

JAMES III. (1451-1488), king of Scotland, eldest son of James II., was born on the 10th of July 1451. Becoming king in 1460 he was crowned at Kelso. After the death of his mother in 1463, and of her principal supporter, James Kennedy, bishop of St Andrews, two years later, the person of the young king, and with it the chief authority in the kingdom, were seized by Sir Alexander Boyd and his brother Lord Boyd, while the latter’s son, Thomas, was created earl of Arran and married to the king’s sister, Mary. In July 1469 James himself was married to Margaret (d. 1486), daughter of Christian I., king of Denmark and Norway, but before the wedding the Boyds had lost their power. Having undertaken the government in person, the king received the submission of the powerful earl of Ross, and strengthened his authority in other ways. But his preference for a sedentary and not for an active life and his increasing attachment to favourites of humble birth diminished his popularity, and he had some differences with his parliament. About 1479, probably with reason both suspicious and jealous, James arrested his brothers, Alexander, duke of Albany, and John, earl of Mar; Mar met his death in a mysterious fashion at Craigmillar, but Albany escaped to France and then visited England, where in 1482 Edward IV. recognized him as king of Scotland by the gift of the king of England. War broke out with England, but James, made a prisoner by his nobles, was unable to prevent Albany and his ally, Richard, duke of Gloucester (afterwards Richard III.), from taking Berwick and marching to Edinburgh. Peace with Albany followed, but soon afterwards the duke was again in communication with Edward, and was condemned by the parliament after the death of the English king in April 1483. Albany’s death in France in 1485 did not end the king’s troubles. His policy of living at peace with England and of arranging marriages between the members of the royal families of the two countries did not commend itself to the turbulent section of his nobles; his artistic tastes and lavish expenditure added to the discontent, and a rebellion broke out. Fleeing into the north of his kingdom James collected an army and came to terms with his foes; but the rebels, having seized the person of the king’s eldest son, afterwards James IV., renewed the struggle. The rival armies met at the Sauchieburn near Bannockburn, and James soon fled. Reaching Beaton’s Mill he revealed his identity, and, according to the popular story, was killed on the 11th of June 1488 by a soldier in the guise of a priest who had been called in to shrive him. He left three sons—his successor, James IV.; James Stewart, duke of Ross, afterwards archbishop of St Andrews, and John Stewart, earl of Mar. James was a cultured prince with a taste for music and architecture, but was a weak and incapable king. His character is thus described by a chronicler: “He was ane man that loved solitude, and desired nevir to hear of warre, bot delighted more in musick and policie and building nor he did in the government of the realme.”

JAMES IV. (1473-1513), king of Scotland, eldest son of James III., was born on the 17th of March 1473. He was nominally the leader of the rebels who defeated the troops of James III. at the Sauchieburn in June 1488, and became king when his father was killed. As he adopted an entirely different policy with the nobles from that of his father, and, moreover, showed great affability towards the lower class of his subjects, among whom he delighted to wander incognito, few if any of the kings of Scotland have won such general popularity, or passed a reign so untroubled by intestine strife. Crowned at Scone a few days after his accession, James began at once to take an active part in the business of government. A slight insurrection was easily suppressed, and a plot formed by some nobles to hand him over to the English king, Henry VII., came to nothing. In spite of this proceeding Henry wished to live at peace with his northern neighbour, and soon contemplated marrying his daughter to James, but the Scottish king was not equally pacific. When, in 1495, Perkin Warbeck, pretending to be the duke of York, Edward IV.’s younger son, came to Scotland, James bestowed upon him both an income and a bride, and prepared to invade England in his interests. For various reasons the war was confined to a few border forays. After Warbeck left Scotland in 1497, the Spanish ambassador negotiated a peace, and in 1502 a marriage was definitely arranged between James and Henry’s daughter Margaret (1489-1541). The wedding took place at Holyrood in August 1503, and it was this union which led to the accession of the Stewart dynasty to the English throne.

About the same time James crushed a rebellion in the western isles, into which he had previously led expeditions, and parliament took measures to strengthen the royal authority therein. At this date too, or a little earlier, the king of Scotland began to treat as an equal with the powerful princes of Europe, Maximilian I., Louis XII. and others; sending assistance to his uncle Hans, king of Denmark, and receiving special marks of favour from Pope Julius II., anxious to obtain his support. But his position was weakened when Henry VIII. followed Henry VII. on the English throne in 1509. Causes of quarrel already existed, and other causes, both public and private, soon arose between the two kings; sea-fights took place between their ships, while war was brought nearer by the treaty of alliance which James concluded with Louis XII. in 1512. Henry made a vain effort to prevent, or to postpone, the outbreak of hostilities; but urged on by his French ally and his queen, James declared for war, in spite of the counsels of some of his advisers, and (it is said) of the warning of an apparition. Gathering a large and well-armed force, he took Norham and other castles in August 1513, spending some time at Ford Castle, where, according to report, he was engaged in an amorous intrigue with the wife of its owner. Then 141 he moved out to fight the advancing English army under Thomas Howard, earl of Surrey. The battle, which took place at Flodden, or more correctly, at the foot of Brankston Hill, on Friday the 9th of September 1513, is among the most famous and disastrous, if not among the most momentous, in the history of Scotland. Having led his troops from their position of vantage, the king himself was killed while fighting on foot, together with nearly all his nobles; there was no foundation for the rumour that he had escaped from the carnage. He left one legitimate child, his successor James V., but as his gallantries were numerous he had many illegitimate children, among them (by Marion Boyd) Alexander Stewart, archbishop of St Andrews and chancellor of Scotland, who was killed at Flodden, and (by Janet Kennedy) James Stewart, earl of Moray (d. 1544). One of his other mistresses was Margaret Drummond (d. 1501).

James appears to have been a brave and generous man, and a wise and energetic king. According to one account, he was possessed of considerable learning; during his reign the Scottish court attained some degree of refinement, and Scotland counted in European politics as she had never done before. Literature flourished under the royal patronage, education was encouraged, and the material condition of the country improved enormously. Prominent both as an administrator and as a lawgiver, the king by his vigorous rule did much to destroy the tendencies to independence which existed in the Highlands and Islands; but, on the other hand, his rash conduct at Flodden brought much misery upon his kingdom. He was specially interested in his navy. The tournaments which took place under his auspices were worthy of the best days of chivalry in France and England. James shared to the full in the superstitions of the age which was quickly passing away. He is said to have worn an iron belt as penance for his share in his father’s death; and by his frequent visits to shrines, and his benefactions to religious foundations, he won a reputation for piety.

JAMES V. (1512-1542), king of Scotland, son of James IV., was born at Linlithgow on the 10th of April 1512, and became king when his father was killed at Flodden in 1513. The regency was at first vested in his mother, but after Queen Margaret’s second marriage, with Archibald Douglas, 6th earl of Angus, in August 1514, it was transferred by the estates to John Stewart, duke of Albany. Henceforward the minority of James was disturbed by constant quarrels between a faction, generally favourable to England, under Angus, and the partisans of France under Albany; while the queen-mother and the nobles struggled to gain and to regain possession of the king’s person. The English had not followed up their victory at Flodden, although there were as usual forays on the borders, but Henry VIII. was watching affairs in Scotland with an observant eye, and other European sovereigns were not indifferent to the possibility of a Scotch alliance. In 1524, when Albany had retired to France, the parliament declared that James was fit to govern, but that he must be advised by his mother and a council. This “erection” of James as king was mainly due to the efforts of Henry VIII. In 1526 Angus obtained control of the king, and kept him in close confinement until 1528, when James, escaping from Edinburgh to Stirling, put vigorous measures in execution against the earl, and compelled him to flee to England. In 1529 and 1530 the king made a strong effort to suppress his turbulent vassals in the south of Scotland; and after several raids and counter-raids negotiations for peace with England were begun, and in May 1534 a treaty was signed. At this time, as on previous occasions, Henry VIII. wished James to marry his daughter Mary, while other ladies had been suggested by the emperor Charles V.; but the Scottish king, preferring a French bride, visited France, and in January 1537 was married at Paris to Madeleine, daughter of King Francis I. Madeleine died soon after her arrival in Scotland, and in 1538 James made a much more important marriage, being united to Mary (1515-1560), daughter of Claude, duke of Guise, and widow of Louis of Orleans, duke of Longueville. It was this connexion, probably, which finally induced James to forsake his vacillating foreign policy, and to range himself definitely among the enemies of England. In 1536 he had refused to meet Henry VIII. at York, and in the following year had received the gift of a cap and sword from Pope Paul III., thus renouncing the friendship of his uncle. Two plots to murder the king were now discovered, and James also foiled the attempts of Henry VIII. to kidnap him. Although in 1540 the English king made another attempt to win the support, or at least the neutrality, of James for his religious policy, the relations between the two countries became very unfriendly, and in 1542 Henry sent an army to invade Scotland. James was not slow to make reprisals, but his nobles were angry or indifferent, and on the 25th of November 1542 his forces were easily scattered at the rout of Solway Moss. This blow preyed upon the king’s mind, and on the 14th of December he died at Falkland, having just heard of the birth of his daughter. His two sons had died in infancy, and his successor was his only legitimate child, Mary. He left several bastards, among them James Stewart, earl of Murray (the regent Murray), Lord John Stewart (1531-1563) prior of Coldingham, and Lord Robert Stewart, earl of Orkney (d. 1592).

Although possessing a weak constitution, which was further impaired by his irregular manner of life, James showed great vigour and independence as a sovereign, both in withstanding the machinations of his uncle, Henry VIII., and in opposing the influence of the nobles. The persecutions to which heretics were exposed during this reign were due mainly to the excessive influence exercised by the ecclesiastics, especially by David Beaton, archbishop of St Andrews. The king’s habit of mingling with the peasantry secured for him a large amount of popularity, and probably led many to ascribe to him the authorship of poems describing scenes in peasant life, Christis Kirk on the Grene, The Gaberlunzie Man and The Jolly Beggar. There is no proof that he was the author of any of these poems, but from expressions in the poems of Sir David Lindsay, who was on terms of intimacy with him, it appears that occasionally he wrote verses.

JAMES I., the Conqueror (1208-1276), king of Aragon, son of Peter II., king of Aragon, and of Mary of Montpellier, whose mother was Eudoxia Comnena, daughter of the emperor Manuel, was born at Montpellier on the 2nd of February 1208. His father, a man of immoral life, was with difficulty persuaded to cohabit with his wife. He endeavoured to repudiate her, and she fled to Rome, where she died in April 1213. Peter, whose possessions in Provence entangled him in the wars between the Albigenses and Simon of Montfort, endeavoured to placate the northern crusaders by arranging a marriage between his son James and Simon’s daughter. In 1211 the boy was entrusted to Montfort’s care to be educated, but the aggressions of the crusaders on the princes of the south forced Peter to take up arms against them, and he was slain at Muret on the 12th of September 1213. Montfort would willingly have used James as a means of extending his own power. The Aragonese and Catalans, however, appealed to the pope, who forced Montfort to surrender him in May or June 1214. James was now entrusted to the care of Guillen de Monredon, the head of the Templars in Spain and Provence. The kingdom was given over to confusion till in 1216 the Templars and some of the more loyal nobles brought the young king to Saragossa. At the age of thirteen he was married to Leonora, daughter of Alphonso VIII. of Castile, whom he divorced later on the ground of consanguinity. A son born of the marriage, Alphonso, was recognized as legitimate, but died before his father, childless. It was only by slow steps that the royal authority was asserted, but the young king, who was of gigantic stature and immense strength, was also astute and patient. By 1228 he had so far brought his vassals to obedience, that he was able to undertake the conquest of the Balearic Islands, which he achieved within four years. At the same time he endeavoured to bring about a union of Aragon with Navarre, by a contract of mutual adoption between himself and the Navarrese king, Sancho, who was old enough to be his grandfather. The scheme broke down, and James abstained from a policy of conquest. He wisely turned to the more feasible course of extending his dominions at the expense of the decadent 142 Mahommedan princes of Valencia. On the 28th of September 1238 the town of Valencia surrendered, and the whole territory was conquered in the ensuing years. Like all the princes of his house, James took part in the politics of southern France. He endeavoured to form a southern state on both sides of the Pyrenees, which should counterbalance the power of France north of the Loire. Here also his policy failed against physical, social and political obstacles. As in the case of Navarre, he was too wise to launch into perilous adventures. By the Treaty of Corbeil, with Louis IX., signed the 11th of May 1258, he frankly withdrew from conflict with the French king, and contented himself with the recognition of his position, and the surrender of antiquated French claims to the overlordship of Catalonia. During the remaining twenty years of his life, James was much concerned in warring with the Moors in Murcia, not on his own account, but on behalf of his son-in-law Alphonso the Wise of Castile. As a legislator and organizer he occupies a high place among the Spanish kings. He would probably have been more successful but for the confusion caused by the disputes in his own household. James, though orthodox and pious, had an ample share of moral laxity. After repudiating Leonora of Castile he married Yolande (in Spanish Violante) daughter of Andrew II. of Hungary, who had a considerable influence over him. But she could not prevent him from continuing a long series of intrigues. The favour he showed his bastards led to protest from the nobles, and to conflicts between his sons legitimate and illegitimate. When one of the latter, Fernan Sanchez, who had behaved with gross ingratitude and treason to his father, was slain by the legitimate son Pedro, the old king recorded his grim satisfaction. At the close of his life King James divided his states between his sons by Yolande of Hungary, Pedro and James, leaving the Spanish possessions on the mainland to the first, the Balearic Islands and the lordship of Montpellier to the second—a division which inevitably produced fratricidal conflicts. The king fell very ill at Alcira, and resigned his crown, intending to retire to the monastery of Poblet, but died at Valencia on the 27th of July 1276.

JAMES II. (c. 1260-1327), king of Aragon, grandson of James I., and son of Peter III. by his marriage with Constance, daughter of Manfred of Beneventum, was left in 1285 as king of Sicily by his father. In 1291, on the death of his elder brother, Alphonso, to whom Aragon had fallen, he resigned Sicily and endeavoured to arrange the quarrel between his own family and the Angevine House, by marriage with Blanca, daughter of Charles of Anjou, king of Naples.

JAMES II. (1243-1311), king of Majorca, inherited the Balearic Islands from his father James I. of Aragon. He was engaged in constant conflict with his brother Pedro III. of Aragon, and in alliance with the French king against his own kin.

JAMES III. (1315-1349), king of Majorca, grandson of James II., was driven out of his little state and finally murdered by his cousin Pedro IV. of Aragon, who definitely reannexed the Balearic Islands to the crown.

JAMES (James Francis Edward Stuart) (1688-1766), prince of Wales, known to the Jacobites as James III. and to the Hanoverian party as the Old Pretender, the son and heir of James II. of England, was born in St James’s Palace, London, on the 10th of June 1688. The scandalous story that he was a supposititious child, started and spread abroad by interested politicians at the time of his birth, has been completely disproved, and most contemporary writers allude to his striking family likeness to the Royal Stuarts. Shortly before the flight of the king to Sheerness, the infant prince together with his mother was sent to France, and afterwards he continued to reside with his father at the court of St Germain. On the death of his father, on the 16th of September 1701, he was immediately proclaimed king by Louis XIV. of France, but a fantastic attempt to perform a similar ceremony in London so roused the anger of the populace that the mock pursuivants barely escaped with their lives. A bill of attainder against him received the royal assent a few days before the death of William III. in 1702, and the Princess Anne, half-sister of the Pretender, succeeded William on the throne. An influential party still, however, continued to adhere to the Jacobite cause; but an expedition from Dunkirk planned in favour of James in the spring of 1708 failed of success, although the French ships under the comte de Fourbin, with James himself on board, reached the Firth of Forth in safety. At the Peace of Utrecht James withdrew from French territory to Bar-le-Duc in Lorraine. A rebellion in the Highlands of Scotland was inaugurated in September 1715 by the raising of the standard on the braes of Mar, and by the solemn proclamation of James Stuart, “the chevalier of St George,” in the midst of the assembled clans, but its progress was arrested in November by the indecisive battle of Sheriffmuir and by the surrender at Preston. Unaware of the gloomy nature of his prospects, the chevalier landed in December 1715 at Peterhead, and advanced as far south as Scone, accompanied by a small force under the earl of Mar; but on learning of the approach of the duke of Argyll, he retreated to Montrose, where the Highlanders dispersed to the mountains, and he embarked again for France. A Spanish expedition sent out in his behalf in 1719, under the direction of Alberoni, was scattered by a tempest, only two frigates reaching the appointed rendezvous in the island of Lewis.

In 1718 James had become affianced to the young princess Maria Clementina Sobieski, grand-daughter of the warrior king of Poland, John Sobieski. The intended marriage was forbidden by the emperor, who in consequence kept the princess and her mother in honourable confinement at Innsbruck in Tirol. An attempt to abduct the princess by means of a ruse contrived by a zealous Jacobite gentleman, Charles Wogan, proved successful; Clementina reached Italy in safety, and she and James were ultimately married at Montefiascone on the 1st of September 1719. James and Clementina were now invited to reside in Rome at the special request of Pope Clement XI., who openly acknowledged their titles of British King and Queen, gave them a papal guard of troops, presented them with a villa at Albano and a palace (the Palazzo Muti in the Piazza dei Santi Apostoli) in the city, and also made them an annual allowance of 12,000 crowns out of the papal treasury. At the Palazzo Muti, which remained the chief centre of Jacobite intriguing, were born James’s two sons, Charles Edward (the Young Pretender) and Henry Benedict Stuart. James’s married life proved turbulent and unhappy, a circumstance that was principally due to the hot temper and jealous nature of Clementina, who soon after Henry’s birth in 1725 left her husband and spent over two years in a Roman convent. At length a reconciliation was effected, which Clementina did not long survive, for she died at the early age of 32 in February 1735. Full regal honours were paid to the Stuart queen at her funeral, and the splendid but tasteless monument by Pietro Bracchi (1700-1773) in St Peter’s was erected to her memory by order of Pope Benedict XIV.

His wife’s death seems to have affected James’s health and spirits greatly, and he now began to grow feeble and indifferent, so that the political adherents of the Stuarts were gradually led to fix their hopes upon the two young princes rather than upon their father. Travellers to Rome at this period note that James appeared seldom in public, and that much of his time was given up to religious exercises; he was dévot à l’excès, so Charles de Brosses, an unprejudiced Frenchman, informs us. It was with great reluctance that James allowed his elder son to leave Italy for France in 1744; nevertheless in the following year, he permitted Henry to follow his brother’s example, but with the news of Culloden he evidently came to regard his cause as definitely lost. The estrangement from his elder and favourite son, which arose over Henry’s adoption of an ecclesiastical career, so embittered his last years that he sank into a moping invalid and rarely left his chamber. With the crushing failure of the 143 “Forty-five” and his quarrel with his heir, the once-dreaded James soon became a mere cipher in British politics, and his death at Rome on the 2nd of January 1766 passed almost unnoticed in London. He was buried with regal pomp in St Peter’s, where Canova’s famous monument, erected by Pius VII. in 1819, commemorates him and his two sons. As to James’s personal character, there is abundant evidence to show that he was grave, high-principled, industrious, abstemious and dignified, and that the unflattering portrait drawn of him by Thackeray in Esmond is utterly at variance with historical facts. Although a fervent Roman Catholic, he was far more reasonable and liberal in his religious views than his father, as many extant letters testify.

JAMES, DAVID (1839-1893), English actor, was born in London, his real name being Belasco. He began his stage career at an early age, and after 1863 gradually made his way in humorous parts. His creation, in 1875, of the part of Perkyn Middlewick in Our Boys made him famous as a comedian, the performance obtaining for the piece a then unprecedented run from the 16th of January 1875 till the 18th of April 1879. In 1885 he had another notable success as Blueskin in Little Jack Sheppard at the Gaiety Theatre, his principal associates being Fred Leslie and Nellie Farren. His song in this burlesque, “Botany Bay,” became widely popular. In the part of John Dory in Wild Oats he again made a great hit at the Criterion Theatre in 1886; and among his other most successful impersonations were Simon Ingot in David Garrick, Tweedie in Tweedie’s Rights, Macclesfield in The Guv’nor, and Eccles in Caste. His unctuous humour and unfailing spirits made him a great favourite with the public. He died on the 2nd of October 1893.

JAMES, GEORGE PAYNE RAINSFORD (1799-1860), English novelist, son of Pinkstan James, physician, was born in George Street, Hanover Square, London, on the 9th of August 1799. He was educated at a private school at Putney, and afterwards in France. He began to write early, and had, according to his own account, composed the stories afterwards published as A String of Pearls before he was seventeen. As a contributor to newspapers and magazines, he came under the notice of Washington Irving, who encouraged him to produce his Life of Edward the Black Prince (1822). Richelieu was finished in 1825, and was well thought of by Sir Walter Scott (who apparently saw it in manuscript), but was not brought out till 1829. Perhaps Irving and Scott, from their natural amiability, were rather dangerous advisers for a writer so inclined by nature to abundant production as James. But he took up historical romance writing at a lucky moment. Scott had firmly established the popularity of the style, and James in England, like Dumas in France, reaped the reward of their master’s labours as well as of their own. For thirty years the author of Richelieu continued to pour out novels of the same kind though of varying merit. His works in prose fiction, verse narrative, and history of an easy kind are said to number over a hundred, most of them being three-volume novels of the usual length. Sixty-seven are catalogued in the British Museum. The best examples of his style are perhaps Richelieu (1829); Philip Augustus (1831); Henry Masterton, probably the best of all (1832); Mary of Burgundy (1833); Darnley (1839); Corse de Léon (1841); The Smuggler (1845). His poetry does not require special mention, nor does his history, though for a short time during the reign of William IV. he held the office of historiographer royal. After writing copiously for about twenty years, James in 1850 went to America as British Consul for Massachusetts. He was consul at Richmond, Virginia, from 1852 to 1856, when he was appointed to a similar post at Venice, where he died on the 9th of June 1860.

James has been compared to Dumas, and the comparison holds good in respect of kind, though by no means in respect of merit. Both had a certain gift of separating from the picturesque parts of history what could without much difficulty be worked up into picturesque fiction, and both were possessed of a ready pen. Here, however, the likeness ends. Of purely literary talent James had little. His plots are poor, his descriptions weak, his dialogue often below even a fair average, and he was deplorably prone to repeat himself. The “two cavaliers” who in one form or another open most of his books have passed into a proverb, and Thackeray’s good-natured but fatal parody of Barbazure is likely to outlast Richelieu and Darnley by many a year. Nevertheless, though James cannot be allowed any very high rank among novelists, he had a genuine narrative gift, and, though his very best books fall far below Les trois mousquetaires and La reine Margot, there is a certain even level of interest to be found in all of them. James never resorted to illegitimate methods to attract readers, and deserves such credit as may be due to a purveyor of amusement who never caters for the less creditable tastes of his guests.

JAMES, HENRY (1843-  ), American author, was born in New York on the 15th of April 1843. His father was Henry James (1811-1882), a theological writer of great originality, from whom both he and his brother Professor William James derived their psychological subtlety and their idiomatic, picturesque English. Most of Henry’s boyhood was spent in Europe, where he studied under tutors in England, France and Switzerland. In 1860 he returned to America, and began reading law at Harvard, only to find speedily that literature, not law, was what he most cared for. His earliest short tale, “The Story of a Year,” appeared in 1865, in the Atlantic Monthly, and frequent stories and sketches followed. In 1869 he again went to Europe, where he subsequently made his home, for the most part living in London, or at Rye in Sussex. Among his specially noteworthy works are the following: Watch and Ward (1871); Roderick Hudson (1875); The American (1877); Daisy Miller (1878); French Poets and Novelists (1878); A Life of Hawthorne (1879); The Portrait of a Lady (1881); Portraits of Places (1884); The Bostonians (1886); Partial Portraits (1888); The Tragic Muse (1890); Essays in London (1893); The Two Magics (1898); The Awkward Age (1898); The Wings of the Dove (1902); The Ambassadors (1903); The Golden Bowl (1904); English Hours (1905); The American Scene (1907); The High Bid (1909); Italian Hours (1909).

As a novelist, Henry James is a modern of the moderns both in subject matter and in method. He is entirely loyal to contemporary life and reverentially exact in his transcription of the phase. His characters are for the most part people of the world who conceive of life as a fine art and have the leisure to carry out their theories. Rarely are they at close quarters with any ugly practical task. They are subtle and complex with the subtlety and the complexity that come from conscious preoccupation with themselves. They are specialists in conduct and past masters in casuistry, and are full of variations and shadows of turning. Moreover, they are finely expressive of milieu; each belongs unmistakably to his class and his race; each is true to inherited moral traditions and delicately illustrative of some social code. To reveal the power and the tragedy of life through so many minutely limiting and apparently artificial conditions, and by means of characters who are somewhat self-conscious and are apt to make of life only a pleasant pastime, might well seem an impossible task. Yet it is precisely in this that Henry James is pre-eminently successful. The essentially human is what he really cares for, however much he may at times seem preoccupied with the technique of his art or with the mask of conventions through which he makes the essentially human reveal itself. Nor has “the vista of the spiritual been denied him.” No more poignant spiritual tragedy has been recounted in recent fiction than the story of Isabel Archer in The Portrait of a Lady. His method, too, is as modern as his subject matter. He early 144 fell in love with the “point of view,” and the good and the bad qualities of his work all follow from this literary passion. He is a very sensitive impressionist, with a technique that can fix the most elusive phase of character and render the most baffling surface. The skill is unending with which he places his characters in such relations and under such lights that they flash out in due succession their continuously varying facets. At times he may seem to forget that a character is something incalculably more than the sum of all its phases; and then his characters tend to have their existence, as Positivists expect to have their immortality, simply and solely in the minds of other people. But when his method is at its best, the delicate phases of character that he transcribes coalesce perfectly into clearly defined and suggestive images of living, acting men and women. Doubtless, there is a certain initiation necessary for the enjoyment of Mr James. He presupposes a cosmopolitan outlook, a certain interest in art and in social artifice, and no little abstract curiosity about the workings of the human mechanism. But for speculative readers, for readers who care for art in life as well as for life in art, and for readers above all who want to encounter and comprehend a great variety of very modern and finely modulated characters, Mr James holds a place of his own, unrivalled as an interpreter of the world of to-day.

JAMES, JOHN ANGELL (1785-1859), English Nonconformist divine, was born at Blandford, Dorsetshire, on the 6th of June 1785. At the close of his seven years’ apprenticeship to a linen-draper at Poole he decided to become a preacher, and in 1802 he went to David Bogue’s training institution at Gosport. A year and a half later, on a visit to Birmingham, his preaching was so highly esteemed by the congregation of Carr’s Lane Independent chapel that they invited him to exercise his ministry amongst them; he settled there in 1805, and was ordained in May 1806. For several years his success as a preacher was comparatively small; but he jumped into popularity about 1814, and began to attract large crowds wherever he officiated. At the same time his religious writings, the best known of which are The Anxious Inquirer and An Earnest Ministry, acquired a wide circulation. James was a typical Congregational preacher of the early 19th century, massive and elaborate rather than original. His preaching displayed little or nothing of Calvinism, the earlier severity of which had been modified in Birmingham by Edward Williams, one of his predecessors. He was one of the founders of the Evangelical Alliance and of the Congregational Union of England and Wales. Municipal interests appealed strongly to him, and he was also for many years chairman of Spring Hill (afterwards Mansfield) College. He died at Birmingham on the 1st of October 1859.

JAMES, THOMAS (c. 1573-1629), English librarian, was born at Newport, Isle of Wight. He was educated at Winchester and New College, Oxford, and became a fellow of New College in 1593. His wide knowledge of books, together with his skill in deciphering manuscripts and detecting literary forgeries, secured him in 1602 the post of librarian to the library founded in that year by Sir Thomas Bodley at Oxford. At the same time he was made rector of St Aldate’s, Oxford. In 1605 he compiled a classified catalogue of the books in the Bodleian Library, but in 1620 substituted for it an alphabetical catalogue. The arrangement in 1610, whereby the Stationers’ Company undertook to supply the Bodleian Library with every book published, was James’s suggestion. Ill health compelled him to resign his post in 1620, and he died at Oxford in August 1629.

JAMES, WILLIAM (d. 1827), English naval historian, author of the Naval History of Great Britain from the Declaration of War by France in 1793 to the Accession of George IV., practised as a proctor in the admiralty court of Jamaica between 1801 and 1813. He was in the United States when the war of 1812 broke out, and was detained as a prisoner, but escaped to Halifax. His literary career began by letters to the Naval Chronicle over the signature of “Boxer.” In 1816 he published An Inquiry into the Merits of the Principal Naval Actions between Great Britain and the United States. In this pamphlet, which James reprinted in 1817, enlarged and with a new title, his object was to prove that the American frigates were stronger than their British opponents nominally of the same class. In 1819 he began his Naval History, which appeared in five volumes (1822-1824), and was reprinted in six volumes (1826). It is a monument of painstaking accuracy in all such matters as dates, names, tonnage, armament and movements of ships, though no attempt is ever made to show the connexion between the various movements. James died on the 28th of May 1827 in London, leaving a widow who received a civil list pension of £100.

JAMES, WILLIAM (1842-1910), American philosopher, son of the Swedenborgian theologian Henry James, and brother of the novelist Henry James, was born on the 11th of January 1842 at New York City. He graduated M.D. at Harvard in 1870. Two years after he was appointed a lecturer at Harvard in anatomy and physiology, and later in psychology and philosophy. Subsequently he became assistant professor of philosophy (1880-1885), professor (1885-1889), professor of psychology (1889-1897) and professor of philosophy (1897-1907). In 1899-1901 he delivered the Gifford lectures on natural religion at the university of Edinburgh, and in 1908 the Hibbert lectures at Manchester College, Oxford. With the appearance of his Principles of Psychology (2 vols., 1890), James at once stepped into the front rank of psychologists as a leader of the physical school, a position which he maintained not only by the brilliance of his analogies but also by the freshness and unconventionality of his style. In metaphysics he upheld the idealist position from the empirical standpoint. Beside the Principles of Psychology, which appeared in a shorter form in 1892 (Psychology), his chief works are: The Will to Believe (1897); Human Immortality (Boston, 1898); Talks to Teachers (1899); The Varieties of Religious Experience (New York, 1902); Pragmatism—a New Name for some Old Ways of Thinking (1907); A Pluralistic Universe (1909; Hibbert lectures), in which, though he still attacked the hypothesis of absolutism, he admitted it as a legitimate alternative. He received honorary degrees from Padua (1893), Princeton (1896), Edinburgh (1902), Harvard (1905). He died on the 27th of August 1910.

JAMES OF HEREFORD, HENRY JAMES, 1st Baron (1828-  ), English lawyer and statesman, son of P. T. James, surgeon, was born at Hereford on the 30th of October 1828, and educated at Cheltenham College. A prizeman of the Inner Temple, he was called to the bar in 1852 and joined the Oxford circuit, where he soon came into prominence. In 1867 he was made “postman” of the court of exchequer, and in 1869 became a Q.C. At the general election of 1868 he obtained a seat in parliament for Taunton as a Liberal, by the unseating of Mr Serjeant Cox on a scrutiny in March 1869, and he kept the seat till 1885, when he was returned for Bury. He attracted attention in parliament by his speeches in 1872 in the debates on the Judicature Act. In 1873 (September) he was made solicitor-general, and in November attorney-general, and knighted; and when Gladstone returned to power in 1880 he resumed his office. He was responsible for carrying the Corrupt Practices Act of 1883. On Gladstone’s conversion to Home Rule, Sir Henry James parted from him and became one of the most influential of the Liberal Unionists: Gladstone had offered him the lord chancellorship in 1886, but he declined it; and the knowledge 145 of the sacrifice he had made in refusing to follow his old chief in his new departure lent great weight to his advocacy of the Unionist cause in the country. He was one of the leading counsel for The Times before the Parnell Commission, and from 1892 to 1895 was attorney-general to the prince of Wales. From 1895 to 1902 he was a member of the Unionist ministry as chancellor for the duchy of Lancaster, and in 1895 he was made a peer as Baron James of Hereford. In later years he was a prominent opponent of the Tariff Reform movement, adhering to the section of Free Trade Unionists.

JAMES, EPISTLE OF, a book of the New Testament. The superscription (Jas. i. 1) ascribes it to that pre-eminent “pillar” (Gal. ii. 9) of the original mother church who later came to be regarded in certain quarters as the “bishop of bishops” (Epist. of James to Clement, ap. Clem. Hom. Superscription). As such he appears in a position to address an encyclical to “the twelve tribes of the dispersion”; for the context (i. 18, v. 7 seq.) and literary relation (cf. 1 Pet. i. 1, 3, 23-25) prove this to be a figure for the entire new people of God, without the distinction of carnal birth, as Paul had described “the Israel of God” (Gal. vi. 16), spiritually begotten, like Isaac, by the word received in faith (Gal. iii. 28 seq., iv. 28; Rom. ix. 6-9, iv. 16-18). This idea of the spiritually begotten Israel becomes current after 1 Pet., as appears in John i. 11-13, iii. 3-8; Barn. iv. 6, xiii. 13; 2 Clem. ii. 2, &c.

The interpretation which takes the expression “the twelve tribes” literally, and conceives the brother of the Lord as sending an epistle written in the Greek language throughout the Christian world, but as addressing Jewish Christians only (so e.g. Sieffert, s.v. “Jacobus im N.T.” in Hauck, Realencykl. ed. 1900, vol. viii.), assumes not only such divisive interference as Paul might justly resent (cf. Gal. ii. 1-10), but involves a strange idea of conditions. Were worldliness, tongue religion, moral indifference, the distinctive marks of the Jewish element? Surely the rebukes of James apply to conditions of the whole Church and not sporadic Jewish-Christian conventicles in the Greek-speaking world, if any such existed.

It is at least an open question whether the superscription (connected with that of Jude) be not a later conjecture prefixed by some compiler of the catholic epistles, but of the late date implied in our interpretation of ver. 1 there should be small dispute. Whatever the currency in classical circles of the epistle as a literary form, it is irrational to put first in the development of Christian literature a general epistle, couched in fluent, even rhetorical, Greek, and afterwards the Pauline letters, which both as to origin and subsequent circulation were a product of urgent conditions. The order consonant with history is (1) Paul’s “letters” to “the churches of” a province (Gal. i. 2; 2 Cor. i. 1); (2) the address to “the elect of the dispersion” in a group of the Pauline provinces (1 Pet. i. 1); (3) the address to “the twelve tribes of the dispersion” everywhere (Jas. i. 1; cf. Rev. vii. 2-4). James, like 1 John, is a homily, even more lacking than 1 John in every epistolary feature, not even supplied with the customary epistolary farewell. The superscription, if original, compels us to treat the whole writing as not only late but pseudonymous. If prefixed by conjecture, to secure recognition and authority for the book, even this was at first a failure. The earliest trace of any recognition of it is in Origen (A.D. 230) who refers to it as “said to be from James” (φερομέγη ἡ Ἰακώβου Ἐπιστολή), seeming thus to regard ver. 1 as superscription rather than part of the text. Eusebius (A.D. 325) classifies it among the disputed books, declaring that it is regarded as spurious, and that not many of the ancients have mentioned it. Even Jerome (A.D. 390), though personally he accepted it, admits that it was “said to have been published by another in the name of James.” The Syrian canon of the Peshitta was the first to admit it.

The date (A.D. 95-120) implied by the literary contacts of James of course precludes authorship by the Lord’s brother, though this does not necessarily prove the superscription later still. The question whether the writing as a whole is pseudonymous, or only the superscription a mistaken conjecture by the scribe of Jude 1 is of secondary importance. A date about 100-120 for the substance of the writing is accepted by the majority of modern scholars and throws real light upon the author’s endeavour. Pfleiderer in pointing out the similarities of James and the Shepherd of Hermas declares it to be “certain that both writings presuppose like historical circumstances, and, from a similar point of view, direct their admonitions to their contemporaries, among whom a lax worldly-mindedness and unfruitful theological wrangling threatened to destroy the religious life.”3 Holtzmann has characterized this as “the right visual angle” for the judgment of the book. Questions as to the obligation of Mosaism and the relations of Jew and Gentile have utterly disappeared below the horizon. Neither the attachment to the religious forms of Judaism, which we are informed was characteristic of James, nor that personal relation to the Lord which gave him his supreme distinction are indicated by so much as a single word. Instead of being written in Aramaic, as it would almost necessarily be if antecedent to the Pauline epistles, or even in the Semitic style characteristic of the older and more Palestinian elements of the New Testament we have a Greek even more fluent than Paul’s and metaphors and allusions (i. 17, iii. 1-12) of a type more like Greek rhetoric than anything else in the New Testament. Were we to judge by the contacts with Hebrews, Clement of Rome and Hermas and the similarity of situation evidenced in the last-named, Rome would seem the most natural place of origin. The history of the epistle’s reception into the canon is not opposed to this; for, once it was attributed to James, Syria would be more likely to take it up, while the West, more sceptical, if not better informed as to its origin, held back; just as happened in the case of Hebrews.

It is the author’s conception of the nature of the gospel which mainly gives us pause in following this pretty general disposition of modern scholarship. With all the phenomena of vocabulary and style which seem to justify such conceptions as von Soden’s that c. iii. and iv. 11-v. 6 represent excerpts respectively from the essay of an Alexandrian scribe, and a triple fragment of Jewish apocalypse, the analysis above given will be found the exponent of a real logical sequence. We might almost admit a resemblance in form to the general literary type which Spitta adduces. The term “wisdom” in particular is used in the special and technical sense of the “wise men” of Hebrew literature (Matt. xxiii. 34), the sense of “the wisdom of the just” of Luke i. 17. True, the mystical sense given to the term in one of the sources of Luke, by Paul and some of the Church fathers, is not present. While the gospel is pre-eminently the divine gift of “wisdom,” “wisdom” is not personified, but conceived primarily as a system of humanitarian ethics, i. 21-25, and only secondarily as a spiritual effluence, imparting the regenerate disposition, the “mind that was in Christ Jesus,” iii. 13-18. And yet for James as well as for Paul Christ is “the wisdom of God.” The difference in conception of the term is similar to that between Ecclesiasticus and the Wisdom of Solomon. Our author, like Paul, expects the hearers of the word to be “a kind of first-fruits to God of his creation.” (i. 18 cf. 1 Pet. i. 23), and bids them depend upon the gift of grace (i. 5, iv. 5 seq.), but for the evils of the world he has no remedy but the patient endurance of the Christian philosopher (i. 2-18). For the faithlessness (διψυχία i. 6-8; cf. Didache and Hermas), worldliness (ii. 1-13) and hollow profession (ii. 14-26) of the church life of his time, with its “theological wrangling” (iii. 1-12), his remedy is again the God-given, peaceable spirit of the Christian philosopher (iii. 13-18), which is the antithesis of the spirit of self-seeking and censoriousness (iv. 1-12), and which appreciates the pettiness of earthly life with its sordid gains and its unjust distribution of wealth (iv. 13-v. 6). This attitude of the Christian stoic will maintain the individual in his patient waiting for the expected “coming of the Lord” (v. 7-11); while the church sustains its official functions of healing and prayer, and reclamation of the erring (v. 13-20).4 For this conception of the gospel and of the officially organized church, our nearest analogy is in Matthew, or rather in the blocks of precepts of the Lord which after subtraction of the Markan narrative framework are found to underlie our first gospel. It may be mere coincidence that the material in Matthew as well as in the Didache seems to be arranged in five divisions, beginning with a commendation of the right way, and ending with warnings of the judgment, while the logical analysis of James yields something similar; but of the affinity of spirit there can be no doubt.

The type of ethical thought exemplified in James has been called Ebionite (Hilgenfeld). It is clearly manifest in the humanitarianism of Luke also. But with the possible exception of the prohibition of oaths there is nothing which ought to suggest the epithet. The strong sense of social wrongs, the impatience with tongue-religion, the utter ignoring of ceremonialism, the reflection on the value and significance of “life,” are distinctive simply of the “wisdom” writers. Like these our author holds himself so far aloof from current debate of ceremonial or doctrine as to escape our principal standards of measurement regarding place and time. Certain general considerations, however, are fairly decisive. The prolonged effort, mainly of English scholarship, to vindicate the superscription, even on the condition of assuming priority to the Pauline epistles, grows only increasingly hopeless with increasing knowledge of conditions, linguistic and other, in that early period. The moralistic conception of the gospel as a “law of liberty,” the very phrase recalling the expression of Barn. ii., “the new law of Christ, which is without the yoke of constraint,” the conception of the church as primarily an ethical society, its functions already officially distributed, suggest the period of the Didache, Barnabas and Clement of Rome. Independently of the literary contacts we should judge the period to be about A.D. 100-120. The connexions with the Pauline epistles are conclusive for a date later than the death of James; those with Clement and Hermas are perhaps sufficient to date it as prior to the former, and suggest Rome as the place of origin. The connexions with wisdom-literature favour somewhat the Hellenistic culture of Syria, as represented for example at Antioch.

JAMESON, ANNA BROWNELL (1794-1860), British writer, was born in Dublin on the 17th of May 1794. Her father, Denis Brownell Murphy (d. 1842), a miniature and enamel painter, removed to England in 1798 with his family, and eventually settled at Hanwell, near London. At sixteen years of age Anna became governess in the family of the marquis of Winchester. In 1821 she was engaged to Robert Jameson. The engagement was broken off, and Anna Murphy accompanied a young pupil to Italy, writing in a fictitious character a narrative of what she saw and did. This diary she gave to a bookseller on condition of receiving a guitar if he secured any profits. Colburn ultimately published it as The Diary of an Ennuyée (1826), which attracted much attention. The author was governess to the children of Mr Littleton, afterwards Lord Hatherton, from 1821 to 1825, when she married Robert Jameson. The marriage proved unhappy; when, in 1829, Jameson was appointed puisne judge in the island of Dominica the couple separated without regret, and Mrs Jameson visited the Continent again with her father.

The first work which displayed her powers of original thought was her Characteristics of Women (1832). These analyses of Shakespeare’s heroines are remarkable for delicacy of critical insight and fineness of literary touch. They are the result of a penetrating but essentially feminine mind, applied to the study of individuals of its own sex, detecting characteristics and defining differences not perceived by the ordinary critic and entirely overlooked by the general reader. German literature and art had aroused much interest in England, and Mrs Jameson paid her first visit to Germany in 1833. The conglomerations of hard lines, cold colours and pedantic subjects which decorated Munich under the patronage of King Louis of Bavaria, were new to the world, and Mrs Jameson’s enthusiasm first gave them an English reputation.

In 1836 Mrs Jameson was summoned to Canada by her husband, who had been appointed chancellor of the province of Toronto. He failed to meet her at New York, and she was left to make her way alone at the worst season of the year to Toronto. After six months’ experiment she felt it useless to prolong a life far from all ties of family happiness and opportunities of usefulness. Before leaving, she undertook a journey to the depths of the Indian settlements in Canada; she explored Lake Huron, and saw much of emigrant and Indian life unknown to travellers, which she afterwards embodied in her Winter Studies and Summer Rambles. She returned to England in 1838. At this period Mrs Jameson began making careful notes of the chief private art collections in and near London. The result appeared in her Companion to the Private Galleries (1842), followed in the same year by the Handbook to the Public Galleries. She edited the Memoirs of the Early Italian Painters in 1845. In the same year she visited her friend Ottilie von Goethe. Her friendship with Lady Byron dates from about this time and lasted for some seven years; it was brought to an end apparently through Lady Byron’s unreasonable temper. A volume of essays published in 1846 contains one of Mrs Jameson’s best pieces of work, The House of Titian. In 1847 she went to Italy with her niece and subsequent biographer (Memoirs, 1878), Geraldine Bate (Mrs Macpherson), to collect materials for the work on which her reputation rests—her series of Sacred and Legendary Art. The time was ripe for such contributions to the traveller’s library. The Acta Sanctorum and the Book of the Golden Legend had had their readers, but no one had ever pointed out the connexion between these tales and the works of Christian art. The way to these studies had been pointed out in the preface to Kugler’s Handbook of Italian Painting by Sir Charles Eastlake, who had intended pursuing the subject himself. Eventually he made over to Mrs Jameson the materials and references he had collected. She recognized the extent of the ground before her as a mingled sphere of poetry, history, devotion and art. She infected her readers with her own enthusiastic admiration; and, in spite of her slight technical and historical equipment, Mrs. Jameson produced a book which thoroughly deserved its great success.

She also took a keen interest in questions affecting the education, occupations and maintenance of her own sex. Her early essay on The Relative Social Position of Mothers and Governesses was the work of one who knew both sides; and in no respect does she more clearly prove the falseness of the position she describes than in the certainty with which she predicts its eventual reform. To her we owe the first popular enunciation of the principle of male and female co-operation in works of mercy and education. In her later years she took up a succession of subjects all bearing on the same principles of active benevolence and the best ways of carrying them into practice. Sisters of charity, hospitals, penitentiaries, prisons and workhouses all claimed her interest—all more or less included under those definitions of “the communion of love and communion of labour” which are inseparably connected with her memory. To the clear and temperate forms in which she brought the results of her convictions before her friends in the shape of private lectures—published as Sisters of Charity (1855) and The Communion of Labour (1856)—may be traced the source whence later reformers and philanthropists took counsel and courage.

Mrs Jameson died on the 17th of March 1860. She left the last of her Sacred and Legendary Art series in preparation. It was completed, under the title of The History of Our Lord in Art, by Lady Eastlake.

JAMESON (or Jamesone), GEORGE (c. 1587-1644), Scottish portrait-painter, was born at Aberdeen, where his father was architect and a member of the guild. After studying painting under Rubens at Antwerp, with Vandyck as a fellow pupil, he returned in 1620 to Aberdeen, where he was married in 1624 and remained at least until 1630, after which he took up his residence in Edinburgh. He was employed by the magistrates of Edinburgh to copy several portraits of the Scottish kings for presentation to Charles I. on his first visit to Scotland in 1633, and the king rewarded him with a diamond ring from his own finger. This circumstance at once established Jameson’s fame, and he soon found constant employment in painting the portraits of the Scottish nobility and gentry. He also painted a portrait of Charles, which he declined to sell to the magistrates of Aberdeen for the price they offered. He died at Edinburgh in 1644.

JAMESON, LEANDER STARR (1853-  ), British colonial statesman, son of R. W. Jameson, a writer to the signet in Edinburgh, was born at Edinburgh in 1853, and was educated for the medical profession at University College Hospital, London (M.R.C.S. 1875; M.D. 1877). After acting as house physician, house surgeon and demonstrator of anatomy, and showing promise of a successful professional career in London, his health broke down from overwork in 1878, and he went out to South Africa and settled down in practice at Kimberley. There he rapidly acquired a great reputation as a medical man, and, besides numbering President Kruger and the Matabele chief Lobengula among his patients, came much into contact with Cecil Rhodes. In 1888 his influence with Lobengula was successfully exerted to induce that chieftain to grant the concessions to the agents of Rhodes which led to the formation of the British South Africa Company; and when the company proceeded to open up Mashonaland, Jameson abandoned his medical practice and joined the pioneer expedition of 1890. From this time his fortunes were bound up with Rhodes’s schemes in the north. Immediately after the pioneer column had occupied Mashonaland, Jameson, with F. C. Selous and A. R. Colquhoun, went east to Manicaland and was instrumental in securing the greater part of that country, to which Portugal was laying claim, for the Chartered Company. In 1891 Jameson succeeded Colquhoun as administrator of Rhodesia. The events connected with his 148 vigorous administration and the wars with the Matabele are narrated under Rhodesia. At the end of 1894 “Dr Jim” (as he was familiarly called) came to England and was fêted on all sides; he was made a C.B., and returned to Africa in the spring of 1895 with enhanced prestige. On the last day of that year the world was startled to learn that Jameson, with a force of 600 men, had made a raid into the Transvaal from Mafeking in support of a projected rising in Johannesburg, which had been connived at by Rhodes at the Cape (see Rhodes and Transvaal). Jameson’s force was compelled to surrender at Doornkop, receiving a guarantee that the lives of all would be spared; he and his officers were sent to Pretoria, and, after a short delay, during which time sections of the Boer populace clamoured for the execution of Jameson, President Kruger on the surrender of Johannesburg (January 7) handed them over to the British government for punishment. They were tried in London under the Foreign Enlistment Act in May 1896, and Dr Jameson was sentenced to fifteen months’ imprisonment at Holloway. He served a year in prison, and was then released on account of ill health. He still retained the affections of the white population of Rhodesia, and subsequently returned there in an unofficial capacity. He was the constant companion of Rhodes on his journeys up to the end of his life, and when Rhodes died in May 1902 Jameson was left one of the executors of his will. In 1903 Jameson came forward as the leader of the Progressive (British) party in Cape Colony; and that party being victorious at the general election in January-February 1904, Jameson formed an administration in which he took the post of prime minister. He had to face a serious economic crisis and strenuously promoted the development of the agricultural and pastoral resources of the colony. He also passed a much needed Redistribution Act, and in the session of 1906 passed an Amnesty Act restoring the rebel voters to the franchise. Jameson, as prime minister of Cape Colony, attended the Colonial conference held in London in 1907. In September of that year the Cape parliament was dissolved, and as the elections for the legislative council went in favour of the Bond, Jameson resigned office, 31st of January 1908 (see Cape Colony: History). In 1908 he was chosen one of the delegates from Cape Colony to the intercolonial convention for the closer union of the South African states, and he took a prominent part in settling the terms on which union was effected in 1909. It was at Jameson’s suggestion that the Orange River Colony was renamed Orange Free State Province.

JAMESON, ROBERT (1774-1854), Scottish naturalist and mineralogist, was born at Leith on the 11th of July 1774. He became assistant to a surgeon in his native town; but, having studied natural history under Dr John Walker in 1792 and 1793, he felt that his true province lay in that science. He went in 1800 to Freiberg to study for nearly two years under Werner, and spent two more in continental travel. In 1804 he succeeded Dr Walker as regius professor of natural history in Edinburgh university, and became perhaps the first eminent exponent in Great Britain of the Wernerian geological system; but when he found that theory untenable, he frankly announced his conversion to the views of Hutton. As a teacher, Jameson was remarkable for his power of imparting enthusiasm to his students, and from his class-room there radiated an influence which gave a marked impetus to the study of geology in Britain. His energy also, by means of government aid, private donation and personal outlay, amassed a great part of the splendid collection which now occupies the natural history department of the Royal Scottish Museum in Edinburgh. In 1819 Jameson, with Sir David Brewster, started the Edinburgh Philosophical Journal, which after the tenth volume remained under his sole conduct till his death, which took place in Edinburgh on the 19th of April 1854. His bust now stands in the hall of the Edinburgh University library.

JAMESTOWN, a city and the county-seat of Stutsman county, North Dakota, U.S.A., on the James River, about 93 m. W. of Fargo. Pop. (1900), 2853, of whom 587 were foreign-born; (1905) 5093; (1910) 4358. Jamestown is served by the Northern Pacific railway, of which it is a division headquarters. At Jamestown is St John’s Academy, a school for girls, conducted by the Sisters of St Joseph. The state hospital for the insane is just beyond the city limits. The city is the commercial centre of a prosperous farming and stock-raising region in the James River valley, and has grain-elevators and flour-mills. Jamestown was first settled in 1873, near Fort Seward, a U.S. military post established in 1872 and abandoned in 1877, and was chartered as a city in 1883.

JAMESTOWN, a city of Chautauqua county, New York, U.S.A., at the S. outlet of Chautauqua Lake, 68 m. S. by W. of Buffalo. Pop. (1900), 22,892, of whom 7270 were foreign-born, mostly Swedish; (1910 census) 31,297. It is served by the Erie and the Jamestown, Chautauqua & Lake Erie railways, by electric lines extending along Lake Chautauqua to Lake Erie on the N. and to Warren, Pennsylvania, on the S., and by summer steamboat lines on Lake Chautauqua. Jamestown is situated among the hills of Chautauqua county, and is a popular summer resort. There is a free public library. A supply of natural gas (from Pennsylvania) and a fine water-power combine to render Jamestown a manufacturing centre of considerable importance. In 1905 the value of its factory products was $10,349,752, an increase of 33.9% since 1900. The city owns and operates its electric-lighting plant and its water-supply system, the water, of exceptional purity, being obtained from artesian wells 4 m. distant. Jamestown was settled in 1810, was incorporated in 1827, and was chartered as a city in 1886. The city was named in honour of James Prendergast, an early settler.

JAMESTOWN, a former village in what is now James City county, Virginia, U.S.A., on Jamestown Island, in the James River, about 40 m. above Norfolk. It was here that the first permanent English settlement in America was founded on the 13th of May 1607, that representative government was inaugurated on the American Continent in 1619, and that negro servitude was introduced into the original thirteen colonies, also in 1619. In Jamestown was the first Anglican church built in America. The settlement was in a low marshy district which proved to be unhealthy; it was accidentally burned in January 1608, was almost completely destroyed by Nathaniel Bacon in September 1676, the state house and other buildings were again burned in 1698, and after the removal of the seat of government of Virginia from Jamestown to the Middle Plantations (now Williamsburg) in 1699 the village fell rapidly into decay. Its population had never been large: it was about 490 in 1609, and 183 in 1623; the mortality was always very heavy. By the middle of the 19th century the peninsula on which Jamestown had been situated had become an island, and by 1900 the James River had worn away the shore but had hardly touched the territory of the “New Towne” (1619), immediately E. of the first settlement; almost the only visible remains, however, were the tower of the brick church and a few gravestones. In 1900 the association for the preservation of Virginia antiquities, to which the site was deeded in 1893, induced the United States government to build a wall to prevent the further encroachment of the river; the foundations of several of the old buildings have since been uncovered, many interesting relics have been found, and in 1907 there were erected a brick church (which is as far as possible a reproduction of the fourth one built in 1639-1647), a marble shaft marking the site of the first settlement, another shaft commemorating the first house of burgesses, a bronze monument to the memory of Captain John Smith, and another monument to the memory of Pocahontas. At the head of 149 Jamestown peninsula Cornwallis, in July 1781, attempted to trick the Americans under Lafayette and General Anthony Wayne by displaying a few men on the peninsula and concealing the principal part of his army on the mainland; but when Wayne discovered the trap he made first a vigorous charge, and then a retreat to Lafayette’s line. Early in the Civil War the Confederates regarded the site (then an island) as of such strategic importance that (near the brick church tower and probably near the site of the first fortifications by the original settlers) they erected heavy earthworks upon it for defence. (For additional details concerning the early history of Jamestown, see Virginia: History.)

The founding at Jamestown of the first permanent English-speaking settlement in America was celebrated in 1907 by the Jamestown tercentennial exposition, held on grounds at Sewell’s Point on the shore of Hampton Roads. About twenty foreign nations, the federal government, and most of the states of the union took part in the exposition.

JĀMĪ (Nūr-ed-din ‘Abd-ur-raḥman Ibn Aḥmad) (1414-1492), Persian poet and mystic, was born at Jām in Khorasan, whence the name by which he is usually known. In his poems he mystically utilizes the connexion of the name with the same word meaning “wine-cup.” He was the last great classic poet of Persia, and a pronounced mystic of the Sūfic philosophy. His three diwans (1479-1401) contain his lyrical poems and odes; among his prose writings the chief is his Bahāristān (“Spring-garden”) (1487); and his collection of romantic poems, Haft Aurang (“Seven Thrones”), contains the Salāmān wa Absāl and his Yūsuf wa Zalīkha (Joseph and Potiphar’s wife).

JAMIESON, JOHN (1759-1838), Scottish lexicographer, son of a minister, was born in Glasgow, on the 3rd of March 1759. He was educated at Glasgow University, and subsequently attended classes in Edinburgh. After six years’ theological study, Jamieson was licensed to preach in 1789 and became pastor of an Anti-burgher congregation in Forfar; and in 1797 he was called to the Anti-burgher church in Nicolson Street, Edinburgh. The union of the Burgher and Anti-burgher sections of the Secession Church in 1820 was largely due to his exertions. He retired from the ministry in 1830 and died in Edinburgh on the 12th of July 1838.

JAMIESON, ROBERT (c. 1780-1844), Scottish antiquary, was born in Morayshire. In 1806 he published a collection of Popular Ballads and Songs from Tradition, Manuscript and Scarce Editions. Two pleasing lyrics of his own were included. Scott, through whose assistance he received a government post at Edinburgh, held Jamieson in high esteem and pointed out his skill in discovering the connexion between Scandinavian and Scottish legends. Jamieson’s work preserved much oral tradition which might otherwise have been lost. He was associated with Henry Weber and Scott in Illustrations of Northern Antiquities (1814). He died on the 24th of September 1844.

JAMKHANDI, a native state of India, in the Deccan division of Bombay, ranking as one of the southern Mahratta Jagirs. Area, 524 sq. m. Pop. (1901), 105,357; estimated revenue, £37,000; tribute, £1300. The chief is a Brahman of the Patwardhan family. Cotton, wheat and millet are produced, and cotton and silk cloth are manufactured, though not exported. The town of Jamkhandi, the capital, is situated 68 m. E. of Kolhapur. Pop. (1901), 13,029.

JAMMU, or Jummoo, the capital of the state of Jammu and Kashmir in Northern India, on the river Tavi (Ta-wi), a tributary of the Chenab. Pop. (1901), 36,130. The town and palace stand upon the right bank of the river; the fort overhangs the left bank at an elevation of 150 ft. above the stream. The lofty whitened walls of the palace and citadel present a striking appearance from the surrounding country. Extensive pleasure grounds and ruins of great size attest the former prosperity of the city when it was the seat of a Rajput dynasty whose dominions extended into the plains and included the modern district of Sialkot. It was afterwards conquered by the Sikhs, and formed part of Ranjit Singh’s dominions. After his death it was acquired by Gulab Singh as the nucleus of his dominions, to which the British added Kashmir in 1846. It is connected with Sialkot in the Punjab by a railway 16 m. long. In 1898 the town was devastated by a fire, which destroyed most of the public offices.

The state of Jammu proper, as opposed to Kashmir, consists of a submontane tract, forming the upper basin of the Chenab. Pop. (1901), 1,521,307, showing an increase of 5% in the decade. A land settlement has recently been introduced under British supervision.

JAMNIA (Ἰαμνία or Ἰαμνεία), the Greek form of the Hebrew name Jabneel—i.e. “God causeth to build” (Josh. xv. 11)—or Jabneh (2 Chron. xxvi. 6), the modern Arabic Yebna, a town of Palestine, on the border between Dan and Judah, situated 13 m. S. of Jaffa, and 4 m. E. of the seashore. The modern village stands on an isolated sandy hillock, surrounded by gardens with olives to the north and sand-dunes to the west. It contains a small crusaders’ church, now a mosque. Jamnia belonged to the Philistines, and Uzziah of Judah is said to have taken it (2 Chron. xxvi. 6). In Maccabean times Joseph and Azarias attacked it unsuccessfully (1 Macc. v. 55-62; 2 Macc. xii. 8 seq. is untrustworthy). Alexander Jannaeus subdued it, and under Pompey it became Roman. It changed hands several times, is mentioned by Strabo (xvi. 2) as being once very populous, and in the Jewish war was taken by Vespasian. The population was mainly Jewish (Philo, Leg. ad Gaium, § 30), and the town is principally famous as having been the seat of the Sanhedrin and the religious centre of Judaism from A.D. 70 to 135. It sent a bishop to Nicaea in 325. In 1144 a crusaders’ fortress was built on the hill, which is often mentioned under the name Ibelin. There was also a Jabneel in Lower Galilee (Josh. xix. 33), called later Caphar Yama, the present village Yemma, 8 m. S. of Tiberias; and another fortress in Upper Galilee was named Jamnia (Josephus, Vita, 37). Attempts have been made to unify these two Galilean sites, but without success.

JAMRUD, a fort and cantonment in India, just beyond the border of Peshawar district, North-West Frontier Province, situated at the mouth of the Khyber Pass, 10½ m. W. of Peshawar city, with which it is connected by a branch railway. It was occupied by Hari Singh, Ranjit Singh’s commander in 1836; but in April 1837 Dost Mahommed sent a body of Afghans to attack it. The Sikhs gained a doubtful victory, with the loss of 150 their general. During the military operations of 1878-79 Jamrud became a place of considerable importance as the frontier outpost on British territory towards Afghanistan, and it was also the base of operations for a portion of the Tirah campaign in 1897-1898. It is the headquarters of the Khyber Rifles, and the collecting station for the Khyber tolls. Pop. (1901), 1848.

JAMS AND JELLIES. In the article Food Preservation it is pointed out that concentrated sugar solution inhibits the growth of organisms and has, therefore, a preservative action. The preparation of jams and jellies is based upon that fact. All fresh and succulent fruit contains a large percentage of water, amounting to at least four-fifths of the whole, and a comparatively small proportion of sugar, not exceeding as a rule from 10 to 15%. Such fruit is naturally liable to decomposition unless the greater proportion of the water is removed or the percentage of sugar is greatly increased. The jams and jellies of commerce are fruit preserves containing so much added sugar that the total amount of sugar forms about two-thirds of the weight of the articles. All ordinary edible fruit can be and is made into jam. The fruit is sometimes pulped and stoned, sometimes used whole and unbroken; oranges are sliced or shredded. For the preparation of jellies only certain fruit is suitable, namely such as contains a peculiar material which on boiling becomes dissolved and on cooling solidifies with the formation of a gelatinous mass. This material, often called pectin, occurs mainly in comparatively acid fruit like gooseberries, currants and apples, and is almost absent from strawberries and raspberries. It is chemically a member of the group of carbohydrates, is closely allied with vegetable gums abundantly formed by certain sea-weeds and mosses (agar-agar and Iceland moss), and is probably a mixture of various pentoses. Pentoses are devoid of food-value, but, like animal gelatine, with which they are in no way related, can form vehicles for food material. Some degree of gelatinization is aimed at also in jams; hence to such fruits as have no gelatinizing power an addition of apple or gooseberry juice, or even of Iceland moss or agar-agar, is made. Animal gelatin is very rarely used.

The art of jam and jelly making was formerly domestic, but has become a very large branch of manufacture. For the production of a thoroughly satisfactory conserve the boiling-down must be carried out very rapidly, so that the natural colour of the fruit shall be little affected. Considerable experience is required to stop at the right point; too short boiling leaves an excess of water, leading to fermentation, while over-concentration promotes crystallization of the sugar. The manufactured product is on that account, as a rule, more uniform and bright than the domestic article. The finish of the boiling is mostly judged by rule of thumb, but in some scientifically conducted factories careful thermometric observation is employed. Formerly jams and jellies consisted of nothing but fruit and sugar; now starch-glucose is frequently used by manufacturers as an ingredient. This permits of the production of a slightly more aqueous and gelatinous product, alleged also to be devoid of crystallizing power, as compared with the homemade article. The addition of starch-glucose is not held to be an adulteration. Aniline colours are very frequently used by manufacturers to enhance the colour, and the effect of an excess of water is sought to be counteracted by the addition of some salicylic acid or other preservative. There has long been, and still exists to some extent, a popular prejudice in favour of sugar obtained from the sugar-cane as compared with that of the sugar-beet. This prejudice is absolutely baseless, and enormous quantities of beet-sugar are used in the boiling of jam. Adulteration in the gross sense, such as a substantial addition of coarse pulp, like that of turnips or mangolds, very rarely occurs; but the pulp of apple and other cheap fruit is often admixed without notice to the purchaser. The use of colouring matters and preservatives is discussed at length in the article Adulteration.

JANESVILLE, a city and the county-seat of Rock County, Wisconsin, U.S.A., situated on both sides of the Rock river, 70 m. S.W. of Milwaukee and 90 m. N.W. of Chicago. Pop. (1900), 13,185, of whom 2409 were foreign-born; (1910 census), 13,894. It is served by the Chicago & North-Western and the Chicago, Milwaukee & St Paul railways, and by electric lines connecting with Madison and Beloit, Wis., and Rockford, Illinois. The Rock river is not commercially navigable at this point, but furnishes valuable water-power for manufacturing purposes. The city is picturesquely situated on bluffs above the river. Janesville is the centre of the tobacco trade of the state, and has various manufactures. The total value of the city’s factory product in 1905 was $3,846,038, an increase of 20.8% since 1900. Its public buildings include a city hall, court house, post office, city hospital and a public library. It is the seat of a school for the blind, opened as a private institution in 1849 and taken over by the state in 1850, the first charitable institution controlled by the state, ranking as one of the most successful of its kind in the United States. The first settlement was made here about 1834. Janesville was named in honour of Henry F. Janes, an early settler, and was chartered as a city in 1853.

JANET, PAUL (1823-1899), French philosophical writer, was born in Paris on the 30th of April 1823. He was professor of moral philosophy at Bourges (1845-1848) and Strassburg (1848-1857), and of logic at the lycée Louis-le-Grand, Paris (1857-1864). In 1864 he was appointed to the chair of philosophy at the Sorbonne, and elected a member of the academy of the moral and political sciences. He wrote a large number of books and articles upon philosophy, politics and ethics, on idealistic lines: La Famille, Histoire de la philosophie dans l’antiquité et dans le temps moderne, Histoire de la science politique, Philosophie de la Révolution Française, &c. They are not characterized by much originality of thought. In philosophy he was a follower of Victor Cousin, and through him of Hegel. His principal work in this line, Théorie de la morale, is little more than a somewhat patronizing reproduction of Kant. He died in October 1899.

JANGIPUR, or Jahangirpur, a town of British India, in Murshidabad district, Bengal, situated on the Bhagirathi. Pop. (1901), 10,921. The town is said to have been founded by the Mogul emperor Jahangir. During the early years of British rule it was an important centre of the silk trade, and the site of one of the East India Company’s commercial residencies. Jangipur is now best known as the toll station for registering all the traffic on the Bhagirathi. The number of boats registered annually is about 10,000.

JANIN, JULES GABRIEL (1804-1874), French critic, was born at St Étienne (Loire) on the 16th of February 1804, and died near Paris on the 19th of June 1874. His father was a lawyer, and he was well educated, first at St Étienne, and then at the lycée Louis-le-Grand in Paris. He betook himself to journalism very early, and worked on the Figaro, the Quotidienne, &c., until in 1830 he became dramatic critic of the Journal des Débats. Long before this, however, he had made a considerable literary reputation, for which indeed his strange novel L’Âne mort et la femme guillotinée (1829) would have sufficed. La Confession (1830), which followed, was less remarkable in substance but even more so in style; and in Barnave (1831) he attacked the Orleans family. From the day, however, when Janin became the theatrical critic of the Débats, though he continued to write books indefatigably, he was to most Frenchmen a dramatic critic and nothing more. He was outrageously inconsistent, and judged things from no general point of view whatsoever, though his judgment was usually good-natured. Few journalists have ever been masters of a more attractive fashion of saying the first thing that came into their heads. After many years of feuilleton writing he collected some of his articles in the work called Histoire de la littérature dramatique en France (1853-1858), which by no means deserves its title. In 1865 he made his first attempt upon the Academy, but was not successful till five years later. Meanwhile he had not been content with his feuilletons, written persistently about all manner of things. No one was more in request with the Paris publishers for prefaces, letterpress to illustrated books and such trifles. He travelled (picking up in 151 one of his journeys a curious windfall, a country house at Lucca, in a lottery), and wrote accounts of his travels; he wrote numerous tales and novels, and composed many other works, of which by far the best is the Fin d’un monde et du neveu de Rameau (1861), in which, under the guise of a sequel to Diderot’s masterpiece, he showed his great familiarity with the late 18th century. He married in 1841; his wife had money, and he was always in easy circumstances. In the early part of his career he had many quarrels, notably one with Félix Pyat (1810-1889), whom he prosecuted successfully for defamation of character. For the most part his work is mere improvisation, and has few elements of vitality except a light and vivid style. His Œuvres choisies (12 vols., 1875-1878) were edited by A. de la Fitzelière.

JANISSARIES (corrupted from Turkish yeni chéri, new troops), an organized military force constituting until 1826 the standing army of the Ottoman empire. At the outset of her history Turkey possessed no standing army. All Moslems capable of bearing arms served as a kind of volunteer yeomanry known as akinjis; they were summoned by public criers, or, if the occasion required it, by secret messengers. It was under Orkhan that a regular paid army was first organized: the soldiers were known as yaya or piyadé. The result was unsatisfactory, as the Turcomans, from whom these troops were recruited, were unaccustomed to fight on foot or to submit to military discipline. Accordingly in 1330, on the advice of Chendéréli Kara Khalil, the system known as devshurmé or forced levy, was adopted, whereby a certain number of Christian youths (at first 1000) were every year taken from their parents and, after undergoing a period of apprenticeship, were enrolled as yeni chéri or new troops. The venerable saint Haji Bektash, founder of the Bektashi dervishes, blessed the corps and promised them victory; he remained ever after the patron saint of the janissaries.

At first the corps was exclusively recruited by the forced levy of Christian children, for which purpose the officer known as tournaji-bashi, or head-keeper of the cranes, made periodical tours in the provinces. The fixed organization of the corps dates only from Mahommed II., and its regulations were subsequently modified by Suleiman I. In early days all Christians were enrolled indiscriminately; later those from Albania, Bosnia and Bulgaria were preferred. The recruits while serving their apprenticeship were instructed in the principles of the faith by khojas, but according to D’Ohsson (vii. 327) they were not obliged to become Moslems.

The entire corps, commanded by the aga of the janissaries, was known as the ojak (hearth); it was divided into ortas or units of varying numbers; the oda (room) was the name given to the barracks in which the janissaries were lodged. There were, after the reorganization of Suleiman I., 196 ortas of three classes, viz. the jemaat, comprising 101 ortas, the beuluk, 61 ortas, and the sekban, or seimen, 34 ortas; to these must be added 34 ortas of ajami or apprentices. The strength of the orta varied greatly, sometimes being as low as 100, sometimes rising considerably beyond its nominal war strength of 500. The distinction between the different classes seems to have been principally in name; in theory the jemaat, or yaya beiler, were specially charged with the duty of frontier-guards; the beuluks had the privilege of serving as the sultan’s guards and of keeping the sacred banner in their custody.

Until the accession of Murad III. (1574) the total effective of the janissaries, including the ajami or apprentices, did not exceed 20,000. In 1582 irregularities in the mode of admission to the ranks began. Soon parents themselves begged to have their children enrolled, so great were the privileges attaching to the corps; later the privilege of enlistment was restricted to the children or relatives of former janissaries; eventually the regulations were much relaxed, and any person was admitted, only negroes being excluded. In 1591 the ojak numbered 48,688 men. Under Ibrahim (1640-1648) it was reduced by Kara Mustafa to 17,000; but it soon rose again, and at the accession of Mahommed IV. (1648), the accession-bakshish was distributed to 50,000 janissaries. During the war of 1683-1698 the rules for admission were suspended, 30,000 recruits being received at one time, and the effective of the corps rising to 70,000; about 1805 it numbered more than 112,000; it went on increasing until the destruction of the janissaries, when it reached 135,000. It would perhaps be more correct to say that these are the numbers figuring on the pay-sheets, and that they doubtless largely exceed the total of the men actually serving in the ranks.

Promotion to the rank of warrant officer was obtained by long or distinguished service; it was by seniority up to the rank of odabashi, but odabashis were promoted to the rank of chorbaji (commander of an orta) solely by selection. Janissaries advanced in their own orta, which they left only to assume the command of another. Ortas remained permanently stationed in the fortress towns in which they were in garrison, being displaced in time of peace only when some violent animosity broke out between two companies. There were usually 12 in garrison at Belgrade, 14 at Khotin, 16 at Widdin, 20 at Bagdad, &c. The commander was frequently changed. A new chorbaji was usually appointed to the command of an orta stationed at a frontier post; he was then transferred elsewhere, so that in course of time he passed through different provinces.

In time of peace the janissary received no pay. At first his war pay was limited to one aspre per diem, but it was eventually raised to a minimum of three aspres, while veterans received as much as 29 aspres, and retired officers from 30 to 120. The aga received 24,000 piastres per annum; the ordinary pay of a commander was 120 aspres per diem. The aga and several of his subordinates received a percentage of the pay and allowance of the troops; they also inherited the property of deceased janissaries. Moreover, the officers profited largely by retaining the names of dead or fictitious janissaries on the pay-rolls. Rations of mutton, bread and candles were furnished by the government, the supply of rice, butter and vegetables being at the charge of the commandant. The rations would have been entirely inadequate if the janissaries had not been allowed, contrary to the regulations, to pursue different callings, such as those of baker, butcher, glazier, boatman, &c. At first the janissaries bore no other distinctive mark save the white felt cap. Soon the red cap with gold embroidery was substituted. Later a uniform was introduced, of which the distinctive mark was less the colour than the cut of the coat and the shape of the head-dress and turban. The only distinction in the costume of commanding officers was in the colour of their boots, those of the beuluks being red while the others were yellow; subordinate officers wore black boots.

The fundamental laws of the janissaries, which were very early infringed, were as follows: implicit obedience to their officers; perfect accord and union among themselves; abstinence from luxury, extravagance and practices unseemly for a soldier and a brave man; observance of the rules of Haji Bektash and of the religious law; exclusion from the ranks of all save those properly levied; special rules for the infliction of the death-penalty; promotion to be by seniority; janissaries to be admonished or punished by their own officers only; the infirm and unfit to be pensioned; janissaries were not to let their beards grow, not to marry, nor to leave their barracks, nor to engage in trade; but were to spend their time in drill and in practising the arts of war.

In time of peace the state supplied no arms, and the janissaries on service in the capital were armed only with clubs; they were forbidden to carry any arm save a cutlass, the only exception being at the frontier-posts. In time of war the janissaries provided their own arms, and these might be any which took their fancy. However, they were induced by rivalry to procure the best obtainable and to keep them in perfect order. The banner of the janissaries was of white silk on which verses from the Koran were embroidered in gold. This banner was planted beside the aga’s tent in camp, with four other flags in red cases, and his three horse-tails. Each orta had its flag, half-red and 152 half-yellow, placed before the tent of its commander. Each orta had two or three great caldrons used for boiling the soup and pilaw; these were under the guard of subordinate officers. A particular superstition attached to them: if they were lost in battle all the officers were disgraced, and the orta was no longer allowed to parade with its caldrons in public ceremonies. The janissaries were stationed in most of the guard-houses of Constantinople and other large towns. No sentries were on duty, but rounds were sent out two or three times a day. It was customary for the sultan or the grand vizier to bestow largess on an orta which they might visit.

The janissaries conducted themselves with extreme violence and brutality towards civilians. They extorted money from them on every possible pretext: thus, it was their duty to sweep the streets in the immediate vicinity of their barracks, but they forced the civilians, especially if rayas, to perform this task or to pay a bribe. They were themselves subject to severe corporal punishments; if these were to take place publicly the ojak was first asked for its consent.

At first a source of strength to Turkey as being the only well-organized and disciplined force in the country, the janissaries soon became its bane, thanks to their lawlessness and exactions. One frequent means of exhibiting their discontent was to set fire to Constantinople; 140 such fires are said to have been caused during the 28 years of Ahmed III.’s reign. The janissaries were at all times distinguished for their want of respect towards the sultans; their outbreaks were never due to a real desire for reforms of abuses or of misgovernment, but were solely caused to obtain the downfall of some obnoxious minister.

The first recorded revolt of the janissaries is in 1443, on the occasion of the second accession of Mahommed II., when they broke into rebellion at Adrianople. A similar revolt happened at his death, when Bayazid II. was forced to yield to their demands and thus the custom of the accession-bakshish was established; at the end of his reign it was the janissaries who forced Bayazid to summon Prince Selim and to hand over the reins of power to him. During the Persian campaign of Selim I. they mutinied more than once. Under Osman II. their disorders reached their greatest height and led to the dethronement and murder of the sultan. It would be tedious to recall all their acts of insubordination. Throughout Turkish history they were made use of as instruments by unscrupulous and ambitious statesmen, and in the 17th century they had become a praetorian guard in the worst sense of the word. Sultan Selim III. in despair endeavoured to organize a properly drilled and disciplined force, under the name of nizam-i-jedid, to take their place; for some time the janissaries regarded this attempt in sullen silence; a curious detail is that Napoleon’s ambassador Sebastiani strongly dissuaded the sultan from taking this step. Again serving as tools, the janissaries dethroned Selim III. and obtained the abolition of the nizam-i-jedid. But after the successful revolution of Bairakdar Pasha of Widdin the new troops were re-established and drilled: the resentment of the janissaries rose to such a height that they attacked the grand vizier’s house, and after destroying it marched against the sultan’s palace. They were repulsed by cannon, losing 600 men in the affair (1806). But such was the excitement and alarm caused at Constantinople that the nizam-i-jedid, or sekbans as they were now called, had to be suppressed. During the next 20 years the misdeeds and turbulence of the janissaries knew no bounds. Sultan Mahmud II., powerfully impressed by their violence and lawlessness at his accession, and with the example of Mehemet Ali’s method of suppressing the Mamlukes before his eyes, determined to rid the state of this scourge; long biding his time, in 1825 he decided to form a corps of regular drilled troops known as eshkenjis. A fetva was obtained from the Sheikh-ul-Islam to the effect that it was the duty of Moslems to acquire military science. The imperial decree announcing the formation of the new troops was promulgated at a grand council, and the high dignitaries present (including certain of the principal officers of the janissaries who concurred) undertook to comply with its provisions. But the janissaries rose in revolt, and on the 10th of June 1826, began to collect on the Et Meidan square at Constantinople; at midnight they attacked the house of the aga of janissaries, and, finding he had made good his escape, proceeded to overturn the caldrons of as many ortas as they could find, thus forcing the troops of those ortas to join the insurrection. Then they pillaged and robbed throughout the town. Meanwhile the government was collecting its forces; the ulema, consulted by the sultan, gave the following fetva: “If unjust and violent men attack their brethren, fight against the aggressors and send them before their natural judge!” On this the sacred standard of the prophet was unfurled, and war was formally declared against these disturbers of order. Cannon were brought against the Et Meidan, which was surrounded by troops. Ibrahim Aga, known as Kara Jehennum, the commander of the artillery, made a last appeal to the janissaries to surrender; they refused, and fire was opened upon them. Such as escaped were shot down as they fled; the barracks where many found refuge were burnt; those who were taken prisoner were brought before the grand vizier and hanged. Before many days were over the corps had ceased to exist, and the janissaries, the glory of Turkey’s early days and the scourge of the country for the last two centuries, had passed for ever from the page of her history.

JANIUAY, a town of the province of Iloilo, Panay, Philippine Islands, on the Suague river, about 20 m. W.N.W. of Iloilo, the capital. Pop. (1903), 27,399, including Lambúnao (6661) annexed to Janiuay in 1903. The town commands delightful views of mountain and valley scenery. An excellent road connects it with Pototan, about 10 m. E. The surrounding country is hilly but fertile and well cultivated, producing rice, sugar, tobacco, vegetables (for the Iloilo market), hemp and Indian corn. The women weave and sell beautiful fabrics of pina, silk, cotton and abaca. The language is Panay-Visayan. Janiuay was founded in 1578; it was first established in the mountains and was subsequently removed to its present site.

JANJIRA, a native state of India, in the Konkan division of Bombay, situated along the coast among the spurs of the Western Ghats, 40 m. S. of Bombay city. Area, 324 sq. m. Pop. (1901), 85,414, showing an increase of 4% in the decade. The estimated revenue is about £37,000; there is no tribute. The chief, whose title is Nawab Sahib, is by descent a Sidi or Abyssinian Mahommedan; and his ancestors were for many generations admirals of the Mahommedan rulers of the Deccan. The state, popularly known as Habsan (= Abyssinian), did not come under direct subordination to the British until 1870. It supplies sailors and fishermen, and also fire-wood, to Bombay, with which it is in regular communication by steamer.

The Nawab of Janjira is also chief of the state of Jafarabad (q.v.).

JAN MAYEN, an arctic island between Greenland and the north of Norway, about 71° N. 8° W. It is 34 m. long and 9 in greatest breadth, and is divided into two parts by a narrow isthmus. The island is of volcanic formation and mountainous, the highest summit being Beerenberg in the north (8350 ft.). Volcanic eruptions have been observed. Glaciers are fully developed. Henry Hudson discovered the island in 1607 and called it Hudson’s Tutches or Touches. Thereafter it was several times observed by navigators who successively claimed its discovery and renamed it. Thus, in 1611 or the following year whalers from Hull named it Trinity Island; in 1612 Jean Vrolicq, a French whaler, called it Île de Richelieu; and in 1614 Joris Carolus named one of its promontories Jan Meys Hoek after the captain of one of his ships. The present name of the island is derived from this, the claim of its discovery by a Dutch navigator, Jan Mayen, in 1611, being unsupportable. The island is not permanently inhabited, but has been frequently visited by explorers, sealers and whalers; and an Austrian station for scientific observations was maintained here for a year in 1882-1883. During this period a mean temperature of 27.8° F. was recorded.

153

JANSEN, CORNELIUS (1585-1638), bishop of Ypres, and father of the religious revival known as Jansenism, was born of humble Catholic parentage at Accoy in the province of Utrecht on the 28th of October 1585. In 1602 he entered the university of Louvain, then in the throes of a violent conflict between the Jesuit, or scholastic, party and the followers of Michael Baius, who swore by St Augustine. Jansen ended by attaching himself strongly to the latter party, and presently made a momentous friendship with a like-minded fellow-student, Du Vergier de Hauranne, afterwards abbot of Saint Cyran. After taking his degree he went to Paris, partly to recruit his health by a change of scene, partly to study Greek. Eventually he joined Du Vergier at his country home near Bayonne, and spent some years teaching at the bishop’s college. All his spare time was spent in studying the early Fathers with Du Vergier, and laying plans for a reformation of the Church. In 1616 he returned to Louvain, to take charge of the college of St Pulcheria, a hostel for Dutch students of theology. Pupils found him a somewhat choleric and exacting master and academic society a great recluse. However, he took an active part in the university’s resistance to the Jesuits; for these had established a theological school of their own in Louvain, which was proving a formidable rival to the official faculty of divinity. In the hope of repressing their encroachments, Jansen was sent twice to Madrid, in 1624 and 1626; the second time he narrowly escaped the Inquisition. He warmly supported the Catholic missionary bishop of Holland, Rovenius, in his contests with the Jesuits, who were trying to evangelize that country without regard to the bishop’s wishes. He also crossed swords more than once with the Dutch Presbyterian champion, Voetius, still remembered for his attacks on Descartes. Antipathy to the Jesuits brought Jansen no nearer Protestantism; on the contrary, he yearned to beat these by their own weapons, chiefly by showing them that Catholics could interpret the Bible in a manner quite as mystical and pietistic as theirs. This became the great object of his lectures, when he was appointed regius professor of scriptural interpretation at Louvain in 1630. Still more was it the object of his Augustinus, a bulky treatise on the theology of St Augustine, barely finished at the time of his death. Preparing it had been his chief occupation ever since he went back to Louvain. But Jansen, as he said, did not mean to be a school-pedant all his life; and there were moments when he dreamed political dreams. He looked forward to a time when Belgium should throw off the Spanish yoke and become an independent Catholic republic on the model of Protestant Holland. These ideas became known to his Spanish rulers, and to assuage them he wrote a philippic called the Mars gallicus (1635), a violent attack on French ambitions generally, and on Richelieu’s indifference to international Catholic interests in particular. The Mars gallicus did not do much to help Jansen’s friends in France, but it more than appeased the wrath of Madrid with Jansen himself; in 1636 he was appointed bishop of Ypres. Within two years he was cut off by a sudden illness on the 6th of May 1638; the Augustinus, the book of his life, was published posthumously in 1640.

JANSENISM, the religious principles laid down by Cornelius Jansen in his Augustinus. This was simply a digest of the teaching of St Augustine, drawn up with a special eye to the needs of the 17th century. In Jansen’s opinion the church was suffering from three evils. The official scholastic theology was anything but evangelical. Having set out to embody the mysteries of faith in human language, it had fallen a victim to the excellence of its own methods; language proved too strong for mystery. Theology sank into a branch of dialectic; whatever would not fit in with a logical formula was cast aside as useless. But average human nature does not take kindly to a syllogism, and theology had ceased to have any appreciable influence on popular religion. Simple souls found their spiritual pasture in little mincing “devotions”; while robuster minds built up for themselves a natural moralistic religion, quite as close to Epictetus as to Christianity. All these three evils were attacked by Jansen. As against the theologians, he urged that in a spiritual religion experience, not reason, must be our guide. As against the stoical self-sufficiency of the moralists, he dwelt on the helplessness of man and his dependence on his maker. As against the ceremonialists, he maintained that no amount of church-going will save a man, unless the love of God is in him. But this capacity for love no one can give himself. If he is born without the religious instinct, he can only receive it by going through a process of “conversion.” And whether God converts this man or that depends on his good pleasure. Thus Jansen’s theories of conversion melt into predestination; although, in doing so, they somewhat modify its grimness. Even for the worst miscreant there is hope—for who can say but that God may yet think fit to convert him? Jansen’s thoughts went back every moment to his two spiritual heroes, St Augustine and St Paul, each of whom had been “the chief of sinners.”

Such doctrines have a marked analogy to those of Calvin; but in many ways Jansen differed widely from the Protestants. He vehemently rejected their doctrine of justification by faith; conversion might be instantaneous, but it was only the beginning of a long and gradual process of justification. Secondly, although the one thing necessary in religion was a personal relation of the human soul to its maker, Jansen held that that relation was only possible in and through the Roman Church. Herein he was following Augustine, who had managed to couple together a high theory of church authority and sacramental grace with a strongly personal religion. But the circumstances of the 17th century were not those of the 5th; and Jansen landed his followers in an inextricable confusion. What were they to do, when the outward church said one thing, and the inward voice said another? Some time went by, however, before the two authorities came into open conflict. Jansen’s ideas were popularized in France by his friend Du Vergier, abbot of St Cyran; and he dwelt mainly on the practical side of the matter—on the necessity of conversion and love of God, as the basis of the religious life. This brought him into conflict with the Jesuits, whom he accused of giving absolution much too easily, without any serious inquiry into the dispositions of their penitent. His views are expounded at length by his disciple, Antoine Arnauld, in a book on Frequent Communion (1643). This book was the first manifestation of Jansenism to the general public in France, and raised a violent storm. But many divines supported Arnauld; and no official action was taken against his party till 1649. In that year the Paris University condemned five propositions from Jansen’s Augustinus, all relative to predestination. This censure, backed by the signatures of eighty-five bishops, was sent up to Rome for endorsement; and in 1653 Pope Innocent X. declared all five propositions heretical.

This decree placed the Jansenists between two fires; for although the five propositions only represented one side of Jansen’s teaching, it was recognized by both parties that the whole question was to be fought out on this issue. Under the leadership of Arnauld, who came of a great family of lawyers, the Jansenists accordingly took refuge in a series of legal tactics. Firstly, they denied that Jansen had meant the propositions in the sense condemned. Alexander VII. replied (1656) that his predecessor had condemned them in the sense intended by their author. Arnauld retorted that the church might be infallible in abstract questions of theology; but as to what was passing through an author’s mind it knew no more than any one else. However, the French government supported the pope. In 1656 Arnauld was deprived of his degree, in spite of Pascal’s Provincial Letters (1656-1657), begun in an attempt to save him (see Pascal; Casuistry). In 1661 a formulary, or solemn renunciation of Jansen, was imposed on all his suspected followers; those who would not sign it went into hiding, or to the Bastille. Peace was only restored under Clement IX. in 1669.

This peace was treated by Jansenist writers as a triumph; really it was the beginning of their downfall. They had set out 154 to reform the Church of Rome; they ended by having to fight hard for a doubtful foothold within it. Even that foothold soon gave way. Louis XIV. was a fanatic for uniformity, civil and religious; the last thing he was likely to tolerate was a handful of eccentric recluses, who believed themselves to be in special touch with Heaven, and therefore might at any moment set their conscience up against the law. During the lifetime of his cousin, Madame de Longueville, the great protectress of the Jansenists, Louis stayed his hand; on her death (1679) the reign of severity began. That summer Arnauld, who had spent the greater part of his life in hiding, was forced to leave France for good.

Six years later he was joined in exile by Pasquier Quesnel who succeeded him as leader of the party. Long before his flight from France Quesnel had published a devotional commentary—Réflexions morales sur le Nouveau Testament—which had gone through many editions without exciting official suspicion. But in 1695 Louis Antoine de Noailles, bishop of Châlons, was made archbishop of Paris. He was known to be very hostile to the Jesuits, and at Châlons had more than once expressed official approval of Quesnel’s Réflexions. So the Jesuit party determined to wreck archbishop and book at the same time. The Jansenists played into their hands by suddenly raising (1701) in the Paris divinity school the question whether it was necessary to accept the condemnation of Jansen with interior assent, or whether a “respectful silence” was enough. Very soon ecclesiastical France was in a blaze. In 1703 Louis XIV. wrote to Pope Clement XI., proposing that they should take joint action to make an end of Jansenism for ever. Clement replied in 1705 with a bull condemning respectful silence. This measure only whetted Louis’s appetite. He was growing old and increasingly superstitious; the affairs of his realm were going from bad to worse; he became frenziedly anxious to propitiate the wrath of his maker by making war on the enemies of the Church. In 1711 he asked the pope for a second, and still stronger bull, that would tear up Jansenism by the roots. The pope’s choice of a book to condemn fell on Quesnel’s Réflexions; in 1713 appeared the bull Unigenitus, anathematizing no less than one-hundred-and-one of its propositions. Indeed, in his zeal against the Jansenists the pope condemned various practices in no way peculiar to their party; thus, for instance, many orthodox Catholics were exasperated at the heavy blow he dealt at popular Bible reading. Hence the bull met with much opposition from Archbishop de Noailles and others who did not call themselves Jansenists. In the midst of the conflict Louis XIV. died (September 1715); but the freethinking duke of Orleans, who succeeded him as regent, continued after some wavering to support the bull. Thereupon four bishops appealed against it to a general council; and the country became divided into “appellants” and “acceptants” (1717). The regent’s disreputable minister, Cardinal Dubois, patched up an abortive truce in 1720, but the appellants promptly “re-appealed” against it. During the next ten years, however, they were slowly crushed, and in 1730 the Unigenitus was proclaimed part and parcel of the law of France. This led to a great quarrel with the judges, who were intensely Gallican in spirit (see Gallicanism), and had always regarded the Unigenitus as a triumph of ultramontanism. The quarrel dragged indefinitely on through the 18th century, though the questions at issue were really constitutional and political rather than religious.

Meanwhile the most ardent Jansenists had followed Quesnel to Holland. Here they met with a warm welcome from the Dutch Catholic body, which had always been in close sympathy with Jansenism, although without regarding itself as formally pledged to the Augustinus. But it had broken loose from Rome in 1702, and was now organizing itself into an independent church (see Utrecht). The Jansenists who remained in France had meanwhile fallen on evil days. Persecution usually begets hysteria in its victims; and the more extravagant members of the party were far advanced on the road which leads to apocalyptic prophecy and “speaking with tongues.” About 1728 the “miracles of St Médard” became the talk of Paris. This was the cemetery where was buried François de Pâris, a young Jansenist deacon of singularly holy life, and a perfervid opponent of the Unigenitus. All sorts of miraculous cures were believed to have been worked at his tomb, until the government closed the cemetery in 1732. This gave rise to the famous epigram:

On the miracles soon followed the rise of the so-called Convulsionaries. These worked themselves up, mainly by the use of frightful self-tortures, into a state of frenzy, in which they prophesied and cured diseases. They were eventually disowned by the more reputable Jansenists, and were severely repressed by the police. But in 1772 they were still important enough for Diderot to enter the field against them. Meanwhile genuine Jansenism survived in many country parsonages and convents, and led to frequent quarrels with the authorities. Only one of its latter-day disciples, however, rose to real eminence; this was the Abbé Henri Grégoire, who played a considerable part in the French Revolution. A few small Jansenist congregations still survive in France; and others have been started in connexion with the Old Catholic Church in Holland.

JANSSEN, or Jansen (sometimes Johnson), CORNELIUS (1593-1664), Flemish painter, was apparently born in London, and baptized on the 14th of October 1593. There seems no reason to suppose, as was formerly stated, that he was born at Amsterdam. He worked in England from 1618 to 1643, and afterwards retired to Holland, working at Middelburg, Amsterdam, The Hague and Utrecht, and dying at one of the last two places about 1664. In England he was patronized by James I. and the court, and under Charles I. he continued to paint the numerous portraits which adorn many English mansions and collections. Janssen’s pictures, chiefly portraits, are distinguished by clear colouring, delicate touch, good taste and careful finish. He generally painted upon panel, and often worked on a small scale, sometimes producing replicas of his larger works. A characteristic of his style is the very dark background, which throws the carnations of his portraits into rounded relief. In all probability his earliest portrait (1618) was that of John Milton as a boy of ten.

JANSSEN, JOHANNES (1820-1891), German historian, was born at Xanten on the 10th of April 1829, and was educated as a Roman Catholic at Münster, Louvain, Bonn and Berlin, afterwards becoming a teacher of history at Frankfort-on-the-Main. He was ordained priest in 1860; became a member of the Prussian Chamber of Deputies in 1875; and in 1880 was made domestic prelate to the pope and apostolic pronotary. He died at Frankfort on the 24th of December 1891. Janssen was a stout champion of the Ultramontane party in the Roman Catholic Church. His great work is his Geschichte des deutschen Volkes seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters (8 vols., Freiburg, 1878-1894). In this book he shows himself very hostile to the Reformation, and attempts to prove that the Protestants were responsible for the general unrest in Germany during the 16th and 17th centuries. The author’s partisanship led to some controversy, and Janssen wrote An meine Kritiker (Freiburg, 1882) and Ein zweites Wort an meine Kritiker (Freiburg, 1883) in reply to the Janssens Geschichte des deutschen Volkes (Munich, 1883) of M. Lenz, and other criticisms.

JANSSEN, PIERRE JULES CÉSAR (1824-1907), French astronomer, was born in Paris on the 22nd of February 1824, and studied mathematics and physics at the faculty of sciences. He taught at the lycée Charlemagne in 1853, and in the school of architecture 1865-1871, but his energies were mainly devoted to various scientific missions entrusted to him. Thus in 1857 he went to Peru in order to determine the magnetic equator; in 1861-1862 and 1864, he studied telluric absorption in the solar spectrum in Italy and Switzerland; in 1867 he carried out optical and magnetic experiments at the Azores; he successfully observed both transits of Venus, that of 1874 in Japan, that of 1882 at Oran in Algeria; and he took part in a long series of solar eclipse-expeditions, e.g. to Trani (1867), Guntoor (1868), Algiers (1870), Siam (1875), the Caroline Islands (1883), and to Alcosebre in Spain (1905). To see the eclipse of 1870 he escaped from besieged Paris in a balloon. At the great Indian eclipse of 1868 he demonstrated the gaseous nature of the red prominences, and devised a method of observing them under ordinary daylight conditions. One main purpose of his spectroscopic inquiries was to answer the question whether the sun contains oxygen or not. An indispensable preliminary was the virtual elimination of oxygen-absorption in the earth’s atmosphere, and his bold project of establishing an observatory on the top of Mont Blanc was prompted by a perception of the advantages to be gained by reducing the thickness of air through which observations have to be made. This observatory, the foundations of which were fixed in the snow that appears to cover the summit to a depth of ten metres, was built in September 1893, and Janssen, in spite of his sixty-nine years, made the ascent and spent four days taking observations. In 1875 he was appointed director of the new astrophysical observatory established by the French government at Meudon, and set on foot there in 1876 the remarkable series of solar photographs collected in his great Atlas de photographies solaires (1904). The first volume of the Annales de l’observatoire de Meudon was published by him in 1896. He died at Paris on the 23rd of December 1907.

JANSSENS (or Jansens), VICTOR HONORIUS (1664-1739), Flemish painter, was born at Brussels. After seven years in the studio of an obscure painter named Volders, he spent four years in the household of the duke of Holstein. The next eleven years Janssens passed in Rome, where he took eager advantage of all the aids to artistic study, and formed an intimacy with Tempesta, in whose landscapes he frequently inserted figures. Rising into popularity, he painted a large number of cabinet historical scenes; but, on his return to Brussels, the claims of his increasing family restricted him almost entirely to the larger and more lucrative size of picture, of which very many of the churches and palaces of the Netherlands contain examples. In 1718 Janssens was invited to Vienna, where he stayed three years, and was made painter to the emperor. The statement that he visited England is based only upon the fact that certain fashionable interiors of the time in that country have been attributed to him. Janssen’s colouring was good, his touch delicate and his taste refined.

JANSSENS (or Jansens) VAN NUYSSEN, ABRAHAM (1567-1632), Flemish painter, was born at Antwerp in 1567. He studied under Jan Snellinck, was a “master” in 1602, and in 1607 was dean of the master-painters. Till the appearance of Rubens he was considered perhaps the best historical painter of his time. The styles of the two artists are not unlike. In correctness of drawing Janssens excelled his great contemporary; in bold composition and in treatment of the nude he equalled him; but in faculty of colour and in general freedom of disposition and touch he fell far short. A master of chiaroscuro, he gratified his taste for strong contrasts of light and shade in his torchlights and similar effects. Good examples of this master are to be seen in the Antwerp museum and the Vienna gallery. The stories of his jealousy of Rubens and of his dissolute life are quite unfounded. He died at Antwerp in 1632.

JANUARIUS, ST, or San Gennaro, the patron saint of Naples. According to the legend, he was bishop of Benevento, and flourished towards the close of the 3rd century. On the outbreak of the persecution by Diocletian and Maximian, he was taken to Nola and brought before Timotheus, governor of Campania, on account of his profession of the Christian religion. After various assaults upon his constancy, he was sentenced to be cast into the fiery furnace, through which he passed wholly unharmed. On the following day, along with a number of fellow martyrs, he was exposed to the fury of wild beasts, which, however, laid themselves down in tame submission at his feet. Timotheus, again pronouncing sentence of death, was struck with blindness, but immediately healed by the powerful intercession of the saint, a miracle which converted nearly five thousand men on the spot. The ungrateful judge, only roused to further fury by these occurrences, caused the execution of Januarius by the sword to be forthwith carried out. The body was ultimately removed by the inhabitants of Naples to that city, where the relic became very famous for its miracles, especially in counteracting the more dangerous eruptions of Vesuvius. Whatever the difficulties raised by his Acta, the cult of St Januarius, bishop and martyr, is attested historically at Naples as early as the 5th century (Biblioth. hagiog. latina, No. 6558). Two phials preserved in the cathedral are believed to contain the blood of the martyr. The relic is shown twice a year—in May and September. On these occasions the substance contained in the phial liquefies, and the Neapolitans see in this phenomenon a supernatural manifestation. The “miracle of St Januarius” did not occur before the middle of the 15th century.

A great number of saints of the name of Januarius are mentioned in the martyrologies. The best-known are the Roman martyr (festival, the 10th of July), whose epitaph was written by Pope Damasus (De Rossi, Bullettino, p. 17, 1863), and the martyr of Cordova, who forms along with Faustus and Martialis the group designated by Prudentius (Peristephanon, iv. 20) by the name of tres coronae. The festival of these martyrs is celebrated on the 13th of October.

JANUARY, the first month in the modern calendar, consisting of thirty-one days. The name (Lat. Januarius) is derived from the two-faced Roman god Janus, to whom the month was dedicated. As doorkeeper of heaven, as looking both into the past and the future, and as being essentially the deity who busied himself with the beginnings of all enterprises, he was appropriately made guardian of the fortunes of the new year. The consecration of the month took place by an offering of meal, salt, frankincense and wine, each of which was new. The Anglo-Saxons called January Wulfmonath, in allusion to the fact that hunger then made the wolves bold enough to come into the villages. The principal festivals of the month are: New Year’s Day; Feast of the Circumcision; Epiphany; Twelfth-Day; and Conversion of St Paul (see Calendar).

JANUS, in Roman mythology one of the principal Italian deities. The name is generally explained as the masculine form of Diana (Jana), and Janus as originally a god of light and day, who gradually became the god of the beginning and origin of all things. According to some, however, he is simply the god 156 of doorways (januae) and in this connexion is the patron of all entrances and beginnings. According to Mommsen, he was “the spirit of opening,” and the double-head was connected with the gate that opened both ways. Others, attributing to him an Etruscan origin, regard him as the god of the vault of heaven, which the Etruscan arch is supposed to resemble. The rationalists explained him as an old king of Latium, who built a citadel for himself on the Janiculum. It was believed that his worship, which was said to have existed as a local cult before the foundation of Rome, was introduced there by Romulus, and that a temple was dedicated to him by Numa. This temple, in reality only an arch or gateway (Janus geminus) facing east and west, stood at the north-east end of the forum. It was open during war and closed during peace (Livy i. 19); it was shut only four times before the Christian era. A possible explanation is, that it was considered a bad omen to shut the city gates while the citizens were outside fighting for the state; it was necessary that they should have free access to the city, whether they returned victorious or defeated. Similarly, the door of a private house was kept open while the members of the family were away, but when all were at home it was closed to keep out intruders. There was also a temple of Janus near the theatre of Marcellus, in the forum olitorium, erected by Gaius Duilius (Tacitus, Ann. ii. 49), if not earlier.

The beginning of the day (hence his epithet Matutinus), of the month, and of the year (January) was sacred to Janus; on the 9th of January the festival called Agonia was celebrated in his honour. He was invoked before any other god at the beginning of any important undertaking; his priest was the Rex Sacrorum, the representative of the ancient king in his capacity as religious head of the state. All gateways, housedoors and entrances generally, were under his protection; he was the inventor of agriculture (hence Consivius, “he who sows or plants”), of civil laws, of the coining of money and of religious worship. He was worshipped on the Janiculum as the protector of trade and shipping; his head is found on the as, together with the prow of a ship. He is usually represented on the earliest coins with two bearded faces, looking in opposite directions; in the time of Hadrian the number of faces is increased to four. In his capacity as porter or doorkeeper he holds a staff in his right hand, and a key (or keys) in his left; as such he is called Patulcius (opener) and Clusius (closer). His titles Curiatius, Patricius, Quirinus originate in his worship in the gentes, the curiae and the state, and have no reference to any special functions or characteristics. In late times, he is both bearded and unbearded; in place of the staff and keys, the fingers of his right hand show the number 300 (CCC.), those of his left the number of the remaining days of the year (LXV.). According to A. B. Cook (Classical Review, xviii. 367), Janus is only another form of Jupiter, the name under which he was worshipped by the pre-Latin (aboriginal) inhabitants of Rome; after their conquest by the Italians, Janus and Jana took their place as independent divinities by the side of the Italian Jupiter and Juno. He considers it probable that the three-headed Janus was a triple oak-god worshipped in the form of two vertical beams and a cross-bar (such as the tigillum sororium, for which see Horatii); hence also the door, consisting of two lintels and side-posts, was sacred to Janus. The three-headed type may have been the original, from which the two-headed and four-headed types were developed. J. G. Frazer (The Early History of the Kingship, pp. 214, 285), who also identifies Janus with Jupiter, is of opinion that Janus was not originally a doorkeeper, but that the door was called after him, not vice versa. Janua may be an adjective, janua foris meaning a door with a symbol of Janus close by the chief entrance, to serve as a protection for the house; then janua alone came to mean a door generally, with or without the symbol of Janus. The double head may have been due to the desire to make the god look both ways for greater protection. By J. Rhys (Hibbert Lectures, 1886, pp. 82, 94) Janus is identified with the three-faced (sometimes three-headed) Celtic god Cernunnus, a chthonian divinity, compared by Rhys with the Teutonic Heimdal, the warder of the gods of the under-world; like Janus, Cernunnus and Heimdal were considered to be the fons et origo of all things.

JAORA, a native state of Central India, in the Malwa agency. It consists of two isolated tracts, between Ratlam and Neemuch Area, with the dependencies of Piplauda and Pant Piplauda, 568 sq. m. Pop. (1901), 84,202. The estimated revenue is £57,000; tribute, £9000. The chief, whose title is nawab, is a Mahommedan of Afghan descent. The state was confirmed by the British government in 1818 by the Treaty of Mandsaur. Nawab Mahommed Ismail, who died in 1895, was an honorary major in the British army. His son, Iftikhar Ali Khan, a minor at his accession, was educated in the Daly College at Indore, with a British officer for his tutor, and received powers of administration in 1906. The chief crops are millets, cotton, maize and poppy. The last supplies a large part of the Malwa opium of commerce. The town of Jaora is on the Rajputana-Malwa railway, 20 m. N. of Ratlam. Pop. (1901), 23,854. It is well laid out, with many good modern buildings, and has a high school and dispensary. To celebrate Queen Victoria’s Diamond Jubilee, the Victoria Institute and a zenana dispensary were opened in 1898.

JAPAN, an empire of eastern Asia, and one of the great powers of the world. The following article is divided for convenience into ten sections:—I. Geography; II. The People; III. Language and Literature; IV. Art; V. Economic Conditions; VI. Government and Administration; VII. Religion; VIII. Foreign Intercourse; IX. Domestic History; X. The Claim of Japan.

I.—Geography

The continent of Asia stretches two arms into the Pacific Ocean, Kamchatka in the north and Malacca in the south, between which lies a long cluster of islands constituting the Japanese empire, which covers Position and Extent. 37° 14′ of longitude and 29° 11′ of latitude. On the extreme north are the Kuriles (called by the Japanese Chishima, or the “myriad isles”), which extend to 156° 32′ E. and to 50° 56′ N.; on the extreme south is Formosa (called by the Japanese Taiwan), which extends to 122° 6′ E., and to 21° 45′ N. There are six large islands, namely Sakhalin (called by the Japanese Karafuto); Yezo or Ezo (which with the Kuriles is designated Hokkaidō, or the north-sea district); Nippon (the “origin of the sun”), which is the main island; Shikoku (the “four provinces”), which lies on the east of Nippon; Kiūshiū or Kyushu (the “nine provinces”), which lies on the south of Nippon, and Formosa, which forms the most southerly link of the chain. Formosa and the Pescadores were ceded to Japan by China after the war of 1894-1895, and the southern half of Sakhalin—the part south of 50° N.—was added to Japan by cession from Russia in 1905. Korea, annexed in August 1910, is separately noticed.

II.—The People

Population.—The population was as follows on the 31st of December 1907:—

The following table shows the rate of increase in the four quadrennial periods between 1891 and 1907 in Japan proper:—

The population of Formosa (Taiwan) during the ten-year period 1898-1907 grew as follows:—

Physical Characteristics.—The best authorities are agreed that the Japanese people do not differ physically from their Korean and Chinese neighbours as much as the inhabitants of northern Europe differ from those of southern Europe. It is true that the Japanese are shorter in stature than either the Chinese or the Koreans. Thus the average height of the Japanese male is only 5 ft. 3½ in., and that of the female 4 ft. 10½ in., whereas in the case of the Koreans and the northern Chinese the corresponding figures for males are 5 ft. 5¾ in. and 5 ft. 7 in. respectively. Yet in other physical characteristics the Japanese, the Koreans 165 and the Chinese resemble each other so closely that, under similar conditions as to costume and coiffure, no appreciable difference is apparent. Thus since it has become the fashion for Chinese students to flock to the schools and colleges of Japan, there adopting, as do their Japanese fellow-students, Occidental garments and methods of hairdressing, the distinction of nationality ceases to be perceptible. The most exhaustive anthropological study of the Japanese has been made by Dr E. Baelz (emeritus professor of medicine in the Imperial University of Tōkyō), who enumerates the following sub-divisions of the race inhabiting the Japanese islands. The first and most important is the Manchu-Korean type; that is to say, the type which prevails in north China and in Korea. This is seen specially among the upper classes in Japan. Its characteristics are exceptional tallness combined with slenderness and elegance of figure; a face somewhat long, without any special prominence of the cheekbones but having more or less oblique eyes; an aquiline nose; a slightly receding chin; largish upper teeth; a long neck; a narrow chest; a long trunk, and delicately shaped, small hands with long, slender fingers. The most plausible hypothesis is that men of this type are descendants of Korean colonists who, in prehistoric times, settled in the province of Izumo, on the west coast of Japan, having made their way thither from the Korean peninsula by the island of Oki, being carried by the cold current which flows along the eastern coast of Korea. The second type is the Mongol. It is not very frequently found in Japan, perhaps because, under favourable social conditions, it tends to pass into the Manchu-Korean type. Its representative has a broad face, with prominent cheekbones, oblique eyes, a nose more or less flat and a wide mouth. The figure is strongly and squarely built, but this last characteristic can scarcely be called typical. There is no satisfactory theory as to the route by which the Mongols reached Japan, but it is scarcely possible to doubt that they found their way thither at one time. More important than either of these types as an element of the Japanese nation is the Malay. Small in stature, with a well-knit frame, the cheekbones prominent, the face generally round, the nose and neck short, a marked tendency to prognathism, the chest broad and well developed, the trunk long, the hands small and delicate—this Malay type is found in nearly all the islands along the east coast of the Asiatic continent as well as in southern China and in the extreme south-west of Korean peninsula. Carried northward by the warm current known as the Kuro Shiwo, the Malays seem to have landed in Kiūshiū—the most southerly of the main Japanese islands—whence they ultimately pushed northward and conquered their Manchu-Korean predecessors, the Izumo colonists. None of the above three, however, can be regarded as the earliest settlers in Japan. Before them all was a tribe of immigrants who appear to have crossed from north-eastern Asia at an epoch when the sea had not yet dug broad channels between the continent and the adjacent islands. These people—the Ainu—are usually spoken of as the aborigines of Japan. They once occupied the whole country, but were gradually driven northward by the Manchu-Koreans and the Malays, until only a mere handful of them survived in the northern island of Yezo. Like the Malay and the Mongol types they are short and thickly built, but unlike either they have prominent brows, bushy locks, round deep-set eyes, long divergent lashes, straight noses and much hair on the face and the body. In short, the Ainu suggest much closer affinity with Europeans than does any other of the types that go to make up the population of Japan. It is not to be supposed, however, that these traces of different elements indicate any lack of homogeneity in the Japanese race. Amalgamation has been completely effected in the course of long centuries, and even the Ainu, though the small surviving remnant of them now live apart, have left a trace upon their conquerors.

The typical Japanese of the present day has certain marked physical peculiarities. In the first place, the ratio of the height of his head to the length of his body is greater than it is in Europeans. The Englishman’s head is often one-eighth of the length of his body or even less, and in continental Europeans, as a rule, the ratio does not amount to one-seventh; but in the Japanese it exceeds the latter figure. In all nations men of short stature have relatively large heads, but in the case of the Japanese there appears to be some racial reason for the phenomenon. Another striking feature is shortness of legs relatively to length of trunk. In northern Europeans the leg is usually much more than one-half of the body’s length, but in Japanese the ratio is one-half or even less; so that whereas the Japanese, when seated, looks almost as tall as a European, there may be a great difference between their statures when both are standing. This special feature has been attributed to the Japanese habit of kneeling instead of sitting, but investigation shows that it is equally marked in the working classes who pass most of their time standing. In Europe the same physical traits—relative length of head and shortness of legs—distinguish the central race (Alpine) from the Teutonic, and seem to indicate an affinity between the former and the Mongols. It is in the face, however, that we find specially distinctive traits, namely, in the eyes, the eye-lashes, the cheekbones and the beard. Not that the eyeball itself differs from that of an Occidental. The difference consists in the fact that “the socket of the eye is comparatively small and shallow, and the osseous ridges at the brows being little marked, the eye is less deeply set than in the European. In fact, seen in profile, forehead and upper lip often form an unbroken line.” Then, again, the shape of the eye, as modelled by the lids, shows a striking peculiarity. For whereas the open eye is almost invariably horizontal in the European, it is often oblique in the Japanese on account of the higher level of the upper corner. “But even apart from obliqueness, the shape of the corners is peculiar in the Mongolian eye. The inner corner is partly or entirely covered by a fold of the upper lid continuing more or less into the lower lid. This fold often covers also the whole free rim of the upper lid, so that the insertion of the eye-lashes is hidden” and the opening between the lids is so narrowed as to disappear altogether at the moment of laughter. As for the eye-lashes, not only are they comparatively short and sparse, but also they converge instead of diverging, so that whereas in a European the free ends of the lashes are further distant from each other than their roots, in a Japanese they are nearer together. Prominence of cheekbones is another special feature, but it is much commoner in the lower than in the upper classes, where elongated faces may almost be said to be the rule. Finally, there is marked paucity of hair on the face of the average Japanese—apart from the Ainu—and what hair there is is nearly always straight. It is not to be supposed, however, that because the Japanese is short of stature and often finely moulded, he lacks either strength or endurance. On the contrary, he possesses both in a marked degree, and his deftness of finger is not less remarkable than the suppleness and activity of his body.

Moral Characteristics.—The most prominent trait of Japanese disposition is gaiety of heart. Emphatically of a laughter-loving nature, the Japanese passes through the world with a smile on his lips. The petty ills of life do not disturb his equanimity. He takes them as part of the day’s work, and though he sometimes grumbles, rarely, if ever, does he repine. Exceptional to this general rule, however, is a mood of pessimism which sometimes overtakes youths on the threshold of manhood. Finding the problem of life insolvable, they abandon the attempt to solve it and take refuge in the grave. It seems as though there were always a number of young men hovering on the brink of such suicidal despair. An example alone is needed finally to destroy the equilibrium. Some one throws himself over a cataract or leaps into the crater of a volcano, and immediately a score or two follow. Apparently the more picturesquely awful the manner of the demise, the greater its attractive force. The thing is not a product of insanity, as the term is usually interpreted; letters always left behind by the victims prove them to have been in full possession of their reasoning faculties up to the last moment. Some observers lay the blame at the door of Buddhism, a creed which promotes pessimism by begetting the anchorite, the ascetic and the shuddering believer in seven hells. But Buddhism did not formerly produce such 166 incidents, and, for the rest, the faith of Shaka has little sway over the student mind in Japan. The phenomenon is modern: it is not an outcome of Japanese nature nor yet of Buddhist teaching, but is due to the stress of endeavouring to reach the standards of Western acquirement with grievously inadequate equipment, opportunities and resources. In order to support himself and pay his academic fees many a Japanese has to fall into the ranks of the physical labourer during a part of each day or night. Ill-nourished, over-worked and, it may be, disappointed, he finds the struggle intolerable and so passes out into the darkness. But he is not a normal type. The normal type is light-hearted and buoyant. One naturally expects to find, and one does find, that this moral sunshine is associated with good temper. The Japanese is exceptionally serene. Irascibility is regarded as permissible in sickly children only: grown people are supposed to be superior to displays of impatience. But there is a limit of imperturbability, and when that limit is reached, the subsequent passion is desperately vehement. It has been said that these traits go to make the Japanese soldier what he is. The hardships of a campaign cause him little suffering since he never frets over them, but the hour of combat finds him forgetful of everything save victory. In the case of the military class—and prior to the Restoration of 1867 the term “military class” was synonymous with “educated class”—this spirit of stoicism was built up by precept on a solid basis of heredity. The samurai (soldier) learned that his first characteristic must be to suppress all outward displays of emotion. Pain, pleasure, passion and peril must all find him unperturbed. The supreme test, satisfied so frequently as to be commonplace, was a shocking form of suicide performed with a placid mien. This capacity, coupled with readiness to sacrifice life at any moment on the altar of country, fief or honour, made a remarkably heroic character. On the other hand, some observers hold that the education of this stoicism was effected at the cost of the feelings it sought to conceal. In support of that theory it is pointed out that the average Japanese, man or woman, will recount a death or some other calamity in his own family with a perfectly calm, if not a smiling, face. Probably there is a measure of truth in the criticism. Feelings cannot be habitually hidden without being more or less blunted. But here another Japanese trait presents itself—politeness. There is no more polite nation in the world than the Japanese. Whether in real courtesy of heart they excel Occidentals may be open to doubt, but in all the forms of comity they are unrivalled. Now one of the cardinal rules of politeness is to avoid burdening a stranger with the weight of one’s own woes. Therefore a mother, passing from the chamber which has just witnessed her paroxysms of grief, will describe calmly to a stranger—especially a foreigner—the death of her only child. The same suppression of emotional display in public is observed in all the affairs of life. Youths and maidens maintain towards each other a demeanour of reserve and even indifference, from which it has been confidently affirmed that love does not exist in Japan. The truth is that in no other country do so many dual suicides occur—suicides of a man and woman who, unable to be united in this world, go to a union beyond the grave. It is true, nevertheless, that love as a prelude to marriage finds only a small place in Japanese ethics. Marriages in the great majority of cases are arranged with little reference to the feelings of the parties concerned. It might be supposed that conjugal fidelity must suffer from such a custom. It does suffer seriously in the case of the husband, but emphatically not in the case of the wife. Even though she be cognisant—as she often is—of her husband’s extra-marital relations, she abates nothing of the duty which she has been taught to regard as the first canon of female ethics. From many points of view, indeed, there is no more beautiful type of character than that of the Japanese woman. She is entirely unselfish; exquisitely modest without being anything of a prude; abounding in intelligence which is never obscured by egoism; patient in the hour of suffering; strong in time of affliction; a faithful wife; a loving mother; a good daughter; and capable, as history shows, of heroism rivalling that of the stronger sex. As to the question of sexual virtue and morality in Japan, grounds for a conclusive verdict are hard to find. In the interests of hygiene prostitution is licensed, and that fact is by many critics construed as proof of tolerance. But licensing is associated with strict segregation, and it results that the great cities are conspicuously free from evidences of vice, and that the streets may be traversed by women at all hours of the day and night with perfect impunity and without fear of encountering offensive spectacles. The ratio of marriages is approximately 8.46 per thousand units of the population, and the ratio of divorces is 1.36 per thousand. There are thus about 16 divorces for every hundred marriages. Divorces take place chiefly among the lower orders, who frequently treat marriage merely as a test of a couple’s suitability to be helpmates in the struggles of life. If experience develops incompatibility of temper or some other mutually repellent characteristic, separation follows as a matter of course. On the other hand, divorces among persons of the upper classes are comparatively rare, and divorces on account of a wife’s unfaithfulness are almost unknown.

Concerning the virtues of truth and probity, extremely conflicting opinions have been expressed. The Japanese samurai always prided himself on having “no second word.” He never drew his sword without using it; he never gave his word without keeping it. Yet it may be doubted whether the value attached in Japan to the abstract quality, truth, is as high as the value attached to it in England, or whether the consciousness of having told a falsehood weighs as heavily on the heart. Much depends upon the motive. Whatever may be said of the upper class, it is probably true that the average Japanese will not sacrifice expediency on the altar of truth. He will be veracious only so long as the consequences are not seriously injurious. Perhaps no more can be affirmed of any nation. The “white lie” of the Anglo-Saxon and the hōben no uso of the Japanese are twins. In the matter of probity, however, it is possible to speak with more assurance. There is undoubtedly in the lower ranks of Japanese tradesmen a comparatively large fringe of persons whose standard of commercial morality is defective. They are descendants of feudal days when the mercantile element, being counted as the dregs of the population, lost its self-respect. Against this blemish—which is in process of gradual correction—the fact has to be set that the better class of merchants, the whole of the artisans and the labouring classes in general, obey canons of probity fully on a level with the best to be found elsewhere. For the rest, frugality, industry and patience characterize all the bread-winners; courage and burning patriotism are attributes of the whole nation.

There are five qualities possessed by the Japanese in a marked degree. The first is frugality. From time immemorial the great mass of the people have lived in absolute ignorance of luxury in any form and in the perpetual presence of a necessity to economize. Amid these circumstances there has emerged capacity to make a little go a long way and to be content with the most meagre fare. The second quality is endurance. It is born of causes cognate with those which have begotten frugality. The average Japanese may be said to live without artificial heat; his paper doors admit the light but do not exclude the cold. His brazier barely suffices to warm his hands and his face. Equally is he a stranger to methods of artificial cooling. He takes the frost that winter inflicts and the fever that summer brings as unavoidable visitors. The third quality is obedience; the offspring of eight centuries passed under the shadow of military autocracy. Whatever he is authoritatively bidden to do, that the Japanese will do. The fourth quality is altruism. In the upper classes the welfare of the family has been set above the interests of each member. The fifth quality is a genius for detail. Probably this is the outcome of an extraordinarily elaborate system of social etiquette. Each generation has added something to the canons of its predecessor, and for every ten points preserved not more than one has been discarded. An instinctive respect for minutiae has thus been inculcated, and has gradually extended to all the affairs of life. That this accuracy may sometimes degenerate into triviality, and that such absorption in trifles may occasionally hide the broad horizon, is conceivable. 167 But the only hitherto apparent evidence of such defects is an excessive clinging to the letter of the law; a marked reluctance to exercise discretion; and that, perhaps, is attributable rather to the habit of obedience. Certainly the Japanese have proved themselves capable of great things, and their achievements seem to have been helped rather than retarded by their attention to detail.

III.—Language and Literature

Language.—Since the year 1820, when Klaproth concluded that the Japanese language had sprung from the Ural-Altaic stock, philologists have busied themselves in tracing its affinities. If the theories hitherto held with regard to the origin of the Japanese people be correct, close relationship should exist between the Japanese and the Korean tongues, and possibly between the Japanese and the Chinese. Aston devoted much study to the former question, but although he proved that in construction the two have a striking similarity, he could not find any corresponding likeness in their vocabularies. As far back as the beginning of the Christian era the Japanese and the Koreans could not hold intercourse without the aid of interpreters. If then the languages of Korea and Japan had a common stock, they must have branched off from it at a date exceedingly remote. As for the languages of Japan and China, they have remained essentially different throughout some twenty centuries in spite of the fact that Japan adopted Chinese calligraphy and assimilated Chinese literature. Mr K. Hirai has done much to establish his theory that Japanese and Aryan had a common parent. But nothing has yet been substantiated. Meanwhile an inquirer is confronted by the strange fact that of three neighbouring countries between which frequent communication existed, one (China) never deviated from an ideographic script; another (Korea) invented an alphabet, and the third (Japan) devised a syllabary. Antiquaries have sought to show that Japan possessed some form of script before her first contact with either Korea or China. But such traces of prehistoric letters as are supposed to have been found seem to be corruptions of the Korean alphabet rather than independent symbols. It is commonly believed that the two Japanese syllabaries—which, though distinct in form, have identical sounds—were invented by Kukai (790) and Kibi Daijin (760) respectively. But the evidence of old documents seems to show that these syllabaries had a gradual evolution and that neither was the outcome of a single scholar’s inventive genius.

Literature.—From the neighbouring continent the Japanese derived the art of transmitting ideas to paper. But as to the date of that acquisition there is doubt. An authenticated work compiled A.D. 720 speaks of historiographers having been appointed to collect local records for the first time in 403, from which it is to be inferred that such officials had already existed at the court. There is also a tradition that some kind of general history was compiled in 620 but destroyed by fire in 645. At all events, the earliest book now extant dates from 712. Its origin is described in its preface. When the emperor Temmu (673-686) ascended the throne, he found that there did not exist any revised collection of the fragmentary annals of the chief families. He therefore caused these annals to be collated. There happened to be among the court ladies one Hiyeda no Are, who was gifted with an extraordinary memory. Measures were taken to instruct her in the genuine traditions and the old language of former ages, the intention being to have the whole ultimately dictated to a competent scribe. But the emperor died before the project could be consummated, and for twenty-five years Are’s memory remained the sole depository of the collected annals. Then, under the auspices of the empress Gemmyō, the original plan was carried out in 712, Yasumaro being the scribe. The work that resulted is known as the Kojiki (Record of Ancient Matters). It has been accurately translated by Professor B. H. Chamberlain (Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan, vol. x.), who, in a preface justly regarded by students of Japan as an exegetical classic, makes the pertinent comment: “Taking the word Altaïc in its usual acceptation, viz. as the generic name of all the languages belonging to the Manchu, Mongolian, Turkish and Finnish groups, not only the archaic, but the classical, literature of Japan carries us back several centuries beyond the earliest extant documents of any other Altaïc tongue.” By the term “archaic” is to be understood the pure Japanese language of earliest times, and by the term “classical” the quasi-Chinese language which came into use for literary purposes when Japan appropriated the civilization of her great neighbours. The Kojiki is written in the archaic form: that is to say, the language is the language of old Japan, the script, although ideographic, is used phonetically only, and the case-indicators are represented by Chinese characters having the same sounds. It is a species of saga, setting forth not only the heavenly beginnings of the Japanese race, but also the story of creation, the succession of the various sovereigns and the salient events of their reigns, the whole interspersed with songs, many of which may be attributed to the 6th century, while some doubtless date from the fourth or even the third. This Kojiki marks the parting of the ways. Already by the time of its compilation the influence of Chinese civilization and Chinese literature had prevailed so greatly in Japan that the next authentic work, composed only eight years later, was completely Chinese in style and embodied Chinese traditions and Chinese philosophical doctrines, not distinguishing them from their Japanese context. This volume was called the Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan). It may be said to have wholly supplanted its predecessor in popular favour, for the classic style—that is to say, the Chinese—had now come to be regarded as the only erudite script. The Chronicles re-traversed much of the ground already gone over by the Record, preserving many of the songs in occasionally changed form, omitting some portions, supplementing others, and imparting to the whole such an exotic character as almost to disqualify the work for a place in Japanese literature. Yet this was the style which thenceforth prevailed among the litterati of Japan. “Standard Chinese soon became easier to understand than archaic Japanese, as the former alone was taught in the schools, and the native language changed rapidly during the century or two that followed the diffusion of the foreign tongue and civilization” (Chamberlain). The neglect into which the Kojiki fell lasted until the 17th century. Almost simultaneously with its appearance in type (1644) and its consequent accessibility, there arose a galaxy of scholars under whose influence the archaic style and the ancient Japanese traditions entered a period of renaissance. The story of this period and of its products has been admirably told by Sir Ernest Satow (“Revival of Pure Shintō,” Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Japan, vol. iii.), whose essay, together with Professor Chamberlain’s Kojiki, the same author’s introduction to The Classical Poetry of the Japanese, and Mr W. G. Aston’s Nihongi, are essential to every student of Japanese literature. To understand this 17th century renaissance, knowledge of one fact is necessary, namely, that about the year A. D. 810, a celebrated Buddhist priest, Kūkai, who had spent several years studying in China, compounded out of Buddhism, Confucianism and Shintō a system of doctrine called Ryōbu Shintō (Dual Shintō), the prominent tenet of which was that the Shintō deities were merely transmigrations of Buddhist divinities. By this device Japanese conservatism was effectually conciliated, and Buddhism became in fact the creed of the nation, its positive and practical precepts entirely eclipsing the agnostic intuitionalism of Shintō. Against this hybrid faith several Japanese scholars arrayed themselves in the 17th and 18th centuries, the greatest of them being Mabuchi and Motoori. The latter’s magnum opus, Kojikiden (Exposition of the Record of Ancient Matters), declared by Chamberlain to be “perhaps the most admirable work of which Japanese erudition can boast,” consists of 44 large volumes, devoted to elucidating the Kojiki and resuscitating the Shintō cult as it existed in the earliest days. This great work of reconstruction was only one feature of the literary activity which marked the 17th and 18th centuries, when, under Tokugawa rule, the blessing of long-unknown peace came to the nation. Iyeyasu himself devoted the last years of his life to collecting ancient manuscripts. In his country retreat at Shizuoka he formed one of the richest libraries ever brought together in Japan, and by will he bequeathed the Japanese section of it to his eighth son, the feudal chief of Owari, and the Chinese section to his ninth son, the prince of Kishū, with the result that under the former feudatory’s auspices two works of considerable merit were produced treating of ancient ceremonials and supplementing the Nihongi. Much more memorable, however, was a library formed by Iyeyasu’s grandson the feudal chief of Mito (1662-1700), who not only collected a vast quantity of books hitherto scattered among Shintō and Buddhist monasteries and private houses, but also employed a number of scholars to compile a history unprecedented in magnitude, the Dai-Nihon-shi. It consisted of 240 volumes, and it became at once the standard in its own branch of literature. Still more comprehensive was a book emanating from the same source and treating of court ceremonials. It ran to more than 500 volumes, and the emperor honoured the work by bestowing on it the title Reigi Ruiten (Rules of Ceremonials). These compilations together with the Nihon Gwaishi (History of Japan Outside the Court), written by Rai Sanyo and published in 1827, constituted the chief sources of historical knowledge before the Meiji era. Rai Sanyo devoted twenty years to the preparation of his 22 volumes and took his materials from 259 Japanese and Chinese works. But neither he nor his predecessors recognized in history anything more than a vehicle for recording the mere sequence of events and their relations, together with some account of the personages concerned. Their volumes make profoundly dry reading. Vicarious interest, however, attaches to the productions of the Mito School on account of the political influence they exercised in rehabilitating the nation’s respect for the throne by unveiling the picture of an epoch prior to the usurpations of military feudalism. The struggles of the great rival clans, replete with episodes of the most tragic and stirring character, inspired quasi-historical narrations of a more popular character, which often took the form of illuminated scrolls. But it was not until the Meiji era that history, in the modern sense of the term, began to be written. During recent times many students have turned their attention to this branch of literature. Works of wide scope and clear insight have been produced, and the Historiographers’ section in the Imperial University of Tōkyō 169 has been for several years engaged in collecting and collating materials for a history which will probably rank with anything of the kind in existence.

IV.—Japanese Art

Painting and Engraving.—In Japanese art the impressionist element is predominant. Pictures, as the term is understood in Europe, can scarcely be said to have existed at any time in Japan. The artist did not depict Pictorial Art. emotion: he depicted the subjects that produce emotion. Therefore he took his motives from nature rather than from history; or, if he borrowed from the latter, what he selected was a scene, not the pains or the passions of its actors. Moreover, he never exhausted his subject, but was always careful to leave a wide margin for the imagination of the spectator. This latter consideration sometimes impelled him to represent things which, to European eyes, seem trivial or insignificant, but which really convey hints of deep significance. In short, Japanese pictures are like Japanese poetry: they do not supply thought but only awaken it. Often their methods show conventionalism, but it is conventionalism so perfect and free in its allurements that nature seems to suggest both the motive and the treatment. Thus though neither botanically nor ornithologically correct, their flowers and their birds show a truth to nature, and a habit of minute observation in the artist, which cannot be too much admired. Every blade of grass, each leaf and feather, has been the object of loving and patient study.

It has been rashly assumed by some writers that the Japanese do not study from nature. All their work is an emphatic protest against this supposition. It can in fact be shown conclusively that the Japanese have derived all their fundamental ideas of symmetry, so different from ours, from a close study of nature and her processes in the attainment of endless variety. A special feature of their art is that, while often closely and minutely imitating natural objects, such as birds, flowers and fishes, the especial objects of their predilection and study, they frequently combine the facts of external nature with a conventional mode of treatment better suited to their purpose. During the long apprenticeship that educated Japanese serve to acquire the power of writing with the brush the complicated characters borrowed from Chinese, they unconsciously cultivate the habit of minute observation and the power of accurate imitation, and with these the delicacy of touch and freedom of hand which only long practice can give. A hair’s-breadth deviation in a line is fatal to good calligraphy, both among the Chinese and the Japanese. When they come to use the pencil in drawing, they already possess accuracy of eye and free command of the brush. Whether a Japanese art-worker sets himself to copy what he sees before him or to give play to his fancy in combining what he has seen with some ideal in his mind, the result shows perfect facility of execution and easy grace in all the lines.

The beauties of the human form never appealed to the Japanese artist. Associating the nude solely with the performance of menial tasks, he deemed it worse than a solecism to transfer such subjects to his canvas, and thus a wide field of motive was closed to him. On the other hand, the draped figure received admirable treatment from his brush, and the naturalistic school of the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries reached a high level of skill in depicting men, women and children in motion. Nor has there ever been a Japanese Landseer. Sosen’s monkeys and badgers constitute the one possible exception, but the horses, oxen, deer, tigers, dogs, bears, foxes and even cats of the best Japanese artists were ill drawn and badly modelled. In the field of landscape the Japanese painter fully reached the eminence on which his great Chinese masters stood. He did not obey the laws of linear perspective as they are formulated in the Occident, nor did he show cast shadows, but his aerial perspective and his foreshortening left nothing to be desired. It has been suggested that he deliberately eschewed chiaroscuro because his pictures, destined invariably to hang in an alcove, were required to be equally effective from every aspect and had also to form part of a decorative scheme. But the more credible explanation is that he merely followed Chinese example in this matter, as he did also in linear perspective, accepting without question the curious canon that lines converge as they approach the spectator.

It is in the realm of decorative art that the world has chiefly benefited by contact with Japan. Her influence is second only to that of Greece. Most Japanese decorative designs consist of natural objects, treated sometimes in a more Decorative Art. or less conventional manner, but always distinguished by delicacy of touch, graceful freedom of conception and delightfully harmonized tints. Perhaps the admiration which the Japanese artist has won in this field is due not more to his wealth of fancy and skilful adaptation of natural forms, than to his individuality of character in treating his subjects. There is complete absence of uniformity and monotony. Repetition without any variation is abhorrent to every Japanese. He will not tolerate the stagnation and tedium of a dull uniformity by mechanical reproduction. His temperament will not let him endure the labour of always producing the same pattern. Hence the repetition of two articles exactly like each other, and, generally, the division of any space into equal parts are instinctively avoided, as nature avoids the production of any two plants, or even any two leaves of the same tree, which in all points shall be exactly alike.

Plate I.

PAINTING

(These illustrations are reproduced by permission of the Kokka Company, Tokyo, Japan.)

Plate II.

PAINTING

The application of this principle in the same free spirit is the secret of much of the originality and the excellence of the decorative art of Japan. Her artists and artisans alike aim at symmetry, not by an equal division of parts, as we do, but rather by a certain balance of corresponding parts, each different from the other, and not numerically even, with an effect of variety and freedom from formality. They seek it, in fact, as nature attains the same end. If we take for instance the skins of animals that 173 are striped or spotted, we have the best possible illustration of nature’s methods in this direction. Examining the tiger or the leopard, in all the beauty of their symmetrical adornment, we do not see in any one example an exact repetition of the same stripes or spots on each side of the mesial line. They seem to be alike, and yet are all different. The line of division along the spine, it will be observed, is not perfectly continuous or defined, but in part suggested; and each radiating stripe on either side is full of variety in size, direction, and to some extent in colour and depth of shade. Thus nature works, and so, following in her footsteps, works the Japanese artist. The same law prevailing in all nature’s creation, in the plumage of birds, the painting of butterflies’ wings, the marking of shells, and in all the infinite variety and beauty of the floral kingdom, the lesson is constantly renewed to the observant eye. Among flowers the orchids, with all their fantastic extravagance and mimic imitations of birds and insects, are especially prolific in examples of symmetrical effects without any repetition of similar parts or divisions into even numbers.

The orchids may be taken as offering fair types of the Japanese artist’s ideal in all art work. And thus, close student of nature’s processes, methods, and effects as the Japanese art workman is, he ever seeks to produce humble replicas from his only art master. Thus he proceeds in all his decorative work, avoiding studiously the exact repetition of any lines and spaces, and all diametrical divisions, or, if these be forced upon him by the shape of the object, exercising the utmost ingenuity to disguise the fact, and train away the eye from observing the weak point, as nature does in like circumstances. Thus if a lacquer box in the form of a parallelogram is the object, Japanese artists will not divide it in two equal parts by a perpendicular line, but by a diagonal, as offering a more pleasing line and division. If the box be round, they will seek to lead the eye away from the naked regularity of the circle by a pattern distracting attention, as, for example, by a zigzag breaking the circular outline, and supported by other ornaments. A similar feeling is shown by them as colourists, and, though sometimes eccentric and daring in their contrasts, they never produce discords in their chromatic scale. They have undoubtedly a fine sense of colour, and a similarly delicate and subtle feeling for harmonious blending of brilliant and sober hues. As a rule they prefer a quiet and refined style, using full but low-toned colours. They know the value of bright colours, however, and how best to utilize them, both supporting and contrasting them with their secondaries and complementaries.

The development of Japanese painting may be divided into the following six periods, each signalized by a wave of progress. (1) From the middle of the 6th to the middle of the 9th century: the naturalization of Chinese and Chino-Buddhist Division into Periods. art. (2) From the middle of the 9th to the middle of the 15th century: the establishment of great native schools under Kosé no Kanaoka and his descendants and followers, the pure Chinese school gradually falling into neglect. (3) From the middle of the 15th to the latter part of the 17th century: the revival of the Chinese style. (4) From the latter part of the 17th to the latter part of the 18th century: the establishment of a popular school. (5) From the latter part of the 18th to the latter part of the 19th century: the foundation of a naturalistic school, and the first introduction of European influence into Japanese painting; the acme and decline of the popular school. (6) From about 1875 to the present time: a period of transition.

Tradition refers to the advent of a Chinese artist named Nanriu, invited to Japan in the 5th century as a painter of the Imperial banners, but of the labours and influence of this man and of his descendants we have no record. First Period. The real beginnings of the study of painting and sculpture in their higher branches must be dated from the introduction of Buddhism from China in the middle of the 6th century, and for three centuries after this event there is evidence that the practice of the arts was carried on mainly by or under the instruction of Korean and Chinese immigrants.

The native artist who crested the first great wave of Japanese painting was a court noble named Kosé no Kanaoka, living under the patronage of the emperor Seiwa (850-859) and his successors down to about the end of Second Period. the 9th century, in the midst of a period of peace and culture. Of his own work few, if any, examples have reached us; and those attributed with more or less probability to his hand are all representations of Buddhist divinities, showing a somewhat formal and conventional design, with a masterly calligraphic touch and perfect harmony of colouring. Tradition credits him with an especial genius for the delineation of animals and landscape, and commemorates his skill by a curious anecdote of a painted horse which left its frame to ravage the fields, and was reduced to pictorial stability only by the sacrifice of its eyes. He left a line of descendants extending far into the 15th century, all famous for Buddhist pictures, and some engaged in establishing a native style, the Wa-gwa-ryū.

At the end of the 9th century there were two exotic styles of painting, Chinese and Buddhist, and the beginning of a native style founded upon these. All three were practised by the same artists, and it was not until a later period that each became the badge of a school.

Towards the close of the Ashikaga shōgunate painting entered on a new phase. Talented representatives of the Kose, Takuma and Tosa lines maintained the reputation of the native and Buddhist schools, and the long-neglected Third Period. Chinese school was destined to undergo a vigorous revival. The initiation of the new movement is attributed to a priest named Jôsetsu, who lived in the early part of the 15th century, and of whom little else is known. It is not even certain whether he was of Chinese or Japanese birth; he is, however, believed by some authorities to have been the teacher of three great artists—Shūbun, Sesshū and Kano Masanobu—who became the leaders of three schools: Shūbun, that of the pure Chinese art of the Sung and Yuan dynasties (10th and 13th centuries); Sesshū, that of a modified school bearing his name; and Masanobu, of the great Kano school, which has reached to the present day. The qualities of the new Chinese schools were essentially those of the older dynasties: breadth, simplicity, a daringly calligraphic play of brush that strongly recalled the accomplishments of the famous scribes, and a colouring that varied between sparing washes of flat local tints and a strength and brilliancy of decorative effort that rivalled even that of the Buddhist pictures. The motives remained almost identical with those of the Chinese masters, and so imbued with the foreign spirit were many of the Japanese disciples that it is said they found it difficult to avoid introducing Chinese accessories even into pictures of native scenery.

A new era in art began in the latter half of the 17th century with the establishment of a popular school under an embroiderer’s draughtsman named Hishigawa Moronobu (c. 1646-1713). Perhaps no great change is ever entirely a Fourth Period: Popular School. novelty. The old painters of the Yamato-Tosa line had frequently shown something of the daily life around them, and one of the later scions of the school, named Iwasa Matahei, had even made a specialty of this class of motive; but so little is known of Matahei and his work that even his period is a matter of dispute, and the few pictures attributed to his pencil are open to question on grounds of authenticity. He probably worked some two generations before the time of Moronobu, but there is no reason to believe that his labours had any material share in determining the creation and trend of the new school.

The fifth period was introduced by a movement as momentous as that which stamped its predecessor—the foundation of a naturalistic school under a group of men outside the orthodox academical circles. The naturalistic principle Fifth Period: Naturalistic School. was by no means a new one; some of the old Chinese masters were naturalistic in a broad and noble manner, and their Japanese followers could be admirably and minutely accurate when they pleased; but too many of the latter were content to construct their pictures out of fragmentary reminiscences of ancient Chinese masterpieces, not presuming to see a rock, a tree, an ox, or a human figure, except through Chinese spectacles. It was a farmer’s son named Okyō, trained in his youth to paint in the Chinese manner, who was first bold enough to adopt as a canon what his predecessors had only admitted under rare exceptions, the principle of an exact imitation of nature. Unfortunately, even he had not all the courage of his creed, and while he would paint a bird or a fish with perfect realism, he no more dared to trust his eyes in larger motives than did the most devout follower of Shūbun or Motonobu. He was essentially a painter of the classical schools, with the speciality of elaborate reproduction of detail in certain sections of animal life, but fortunately this partial concession to truth, emphasized as it was by a rare sense of beauty, did large service.

It remains only to allude to the European school, if school it can be called, founded by Kokan and Denkichi, two contemporaries of Okyō. These artists, at first educated in one of the native schools, obtained from a Hollander European School. in Nagasaki some training in the methods and principles of European painting, and left a few oil paintings in which the laws of light and shade and perspective were correctly observed. They were not, however, of sufficient capacity to render the adopted manner more than a subject of curiosity, except to a few followers who have reached down to the present generation. It is possible that the essays in perspective found in the pictures of Hokusai, Hiroshige, and some of the popular artists of the 19th century, were suggested by Kokan’s drawings and writings.

The sixth period began about 1875, when an Italian artist was engaged by the government as a professor of painting in the Engineering College at Tōkyō. Since that time some distinguished European artists have visited Japan, Sixth Period. and several Japanese students have made a pilgrimage to Europe to see for themselves what lessons may be gained from Western art. These students, confronted by a strong reaction in favour of pure Japanese art, have fought manfully to win public sympathy, and though their success is not yet crowned, it is not impossible that an Occidental school may ultimately be established. Thus far the great obstacle has been that pictures painted in accordance with Western canons are not suited to Japanese interiors and do not appeal to the taste of the most renowned Japanese connoisseurs. Somewhat more successful has been an attempt—inaugurated by Hashimoto Gahō and Kawabata Gyokusho—to combine the art of the West with that of Japan by adding to the latter the chiaroscuro and the linear perspective of the former. If the disciples of this school could shake off the Sesshū tradition of strong outlines and adopt the Kano Motonobu revelation of modelling by mass only, their work would stand on a high place. But they, too, receive little encouragement. The tendency of the time is conservative in art matters.

Although a little engraving on copper has been practised in Japan of late years, it is of no artistic value, and the only branch of the art which calls for recognition is the Engraving. cutting of wood-blocks for use either with colours or without. This, however, is of supreme importance, and as its technique differs in most respects from the European practice, it demands a somewhat detailed description.

The origins of this method of colour-printing are obscure. It has been practised to some extent in China and Korea, but there is no evidence of its antiquity in these countries. It appears to be one of the few indigenous arts of Japan. But before accepting this conclusion as final, one must not lose sight of the fact that the so-called chiaroscuro engraving was at the height of its use in Italy at the same time that embassies from the Christians in Japan visited Rome, and that it is thus possible 176 that the suggestion at least may have been derived from Europe. The fact that no traces of it have been discovered in Japan would be easily accounted for, when it is remembered that the examples taken home would almost certainly have been religious pictures, would have been preserved in well-known and accessible places, and would thus have been entirely destroyed in the terrible and minute extermination of Christianity by Hideyoshi at the beginning of the 17th century. Japanese tradition ascribes the invention of colour-printing to Idzumiya Gonshirō, who, about the end of the 17th century, first made use of a second block to apply a tint of red (beni) to his prints. Sir Ernest Satow states more definitely that “Sakakibara attributes its origin to the year 1695, when portraits of the actor Ichikawa Danjiuro, coloured by this process, were sold in the streets of Yedo for five cash apiece.” The credit of the invention is also given to Torii Kiyonobu, who worked at about this time, and, indeed, is said to have made the prints above mentioned. But authentic examples of his work now remaining, printed in three colours, seem to show a technique too complete for an origin quite so recent. However, he is the first artist of importance to have produced the broadsheets—for many years chiefly portraits of notable actors, historical characters and famous courtesans—which are the leading and characteristic use to which the art was applied. Pupils, the chief of whom were Kiyomasa, Kiyotsume, Kiyomitsu, Kiyonaga and Kiyomine, carried on his tradition until the end of the 18th century, the three earlier using but few colours, while the works of the two last named show a technical mastery of all the capabilities of the process.

The history of the illustrated book in Japan may be said to begin with the Ise monogatari, a romance first published in the 10th century, of which an edition adorned with woodcuts appeared in 1608. In the course of the 17th century many other Book Illustration. works of the same nature were issued, including some in which the cuts were roughly coloured by hand; but the execution of these is not as good as contemporary European work. The date of the first use of colour-printing in Japanese book illustration is uncertain. In 1667 a collection of designs for kimono (garments) appeared, in which inks of several colours were made use of; but these were only employed in turn for single printings, and in no case were two of them used on the same print. It is certain, however, that the mere use of coloured inks must soon have suggested the combination of two or more of them, and it is probable that examples of this will be discovered much earlier in date than those known at present.

Plate III.

PAINTING

Plate IV.

PAINTING

Sculpture and Carving.—Sculpture in wood and metal is of 177 ancient date in Japan. Its antiquity is not, indeed, comparable to that of ancient Egypt or Greece, but no country besides Japan can boast a living and highly developed art that has Historical Sketch. numbered upwards of twelve centuries of unbroken and brilliant productiveness. Setting aside rude prehistoric essays in stone and metal, which have special interest for the antiquary, we have examples of sculpture in wood and metal, magnificent in conception and technique, dating from the earliest periods of what we may term historical Japan; that is, from near the beginning of the great Buddhist propaganda under the emperor Kimmei (540-571) and the princely hierarch, Shōtoku Taishi (573-621). Stone has never been in favour in Japan as a material for the higher expression of the sculptor’s art.

The first historical period of glyptic art in Japan reaches from the end of the 6th to the end of the 12th century, culminating First Period. in the work of the great Nara sculptors, Unkei and his pupil Kwaikei. Happily, there are still preserved in the great temples of Japan, chiefly in the ancient capital of Nara, many noble relics of this period.

The second period in Japanese glyptic art extends from the beginning of the 13th to the early part of the 17th century. The great struggle between the Taira and Minamoto clans had ended, but the militant spirit was still strong, and brought Second Period. work for the artists who made and ornamented arms and armour. The Miyōchins, a line that claimed ancestry from the 7th century, were at the head of their calling, and their work in iron breastplates and helmets, chiefly in repoussé, is still unrivalled. It was not until the latter half of the 15th century that there came into vogue the elaborate decoration of the sword, a fashion that was to last four hundred years.

The third period includes the 17th, 18th and the greater part of the 19th centuries. It was the era of the artisan artist. The makers of Buddhist images and of sword ornaments carried on their work with undiminished industry Third Period. and success, and some famous schools of the latter arose during this period. The Buddhist sculptors, however, tended to grow more conventional and the metal-workers more naturalistic as the 18th century began to wane. It was in connexion with architecture that the great artisan movement began. The initiator was Hidari Jingoro (1594-1652), at first a simple carpenter, afterwards one of the most famous sculptors in the land of great artists. The gorgeous decoration of the mausoleum of Iyeyasu at Nikkō, and of the gateway of the Nishi Hongwan temple at Kiōto, are the most striking instances of his handiwork or direction.

A little later arose another art industry, also emanating from the masses. The use of tobacco, which became prevalent in the 17th century, necessitated the pouch. In order to suspend this from the girdle there was employed a kind of button or toggle—the netsuke. The metallic bowl and mouthpiece of the pipe offered a tempting surface for embellishment, as well as the clasp of the pouch; and the netsuke, being made of wood, ivory or other material susceptible of carving, also gave occasion for art and ingenuity.

The present generation is more systematically commercial in its glyptic produce than any previous age. Millions of commercial articles in metal-work, wood and ivory flood the European markets, and may be bought in any street in Europe at a small price, but they offer a variety of design and an excellence of workmanship which place them almost beyond Western competition. Above all this, however, the Japanese sculptor is a force in art. He is nearly as thorough as his forefathers, and maintains the same love of all things beautiful; and if he cannot show any epoch-making novelty, he is at any rate doing his best to support unsurpassed the decorative traditions of the past.

History has been eminently careful to preserve the names and records of the men who chiselled sword furniture. The sword being regarded as the soul of the samurai, every one who contributed to its manufacture, Sword-making Families. whether as forger of the blade or sculptor of the furniture, was held in high repute. The Gotō family worked steadily during 14 generations, and its 19th century representative—Gotō Ichijō—will always be remembered as one of the family’s greatest experts. But there were many others whose productions fully equalled and often excelled the best efforts of the Gotō. The following list gives the names and periods of the most renowned families:—

There is a radical difference between the points of view of the Japanese and the Western connoisseur in estimating the merits of sculpture in metal. The quality of the chiselling is the first feature to which the Japanese Japanese Point of View. directs his attention; the decorative design is the prime object of the Occidental’s attention. With very rare exceptions, the decorative motives of Japanese sword furniture were always supplied by painters. Hence it is that the Japanese connoisseur draws a clear distinction between the decorative design and its technical execution, crediting the former to the pictorial artist and the latter to the sculptor. He detects in the stroke of a chisel and the lines of a graving tool subjective beauties which appear to be hidden from the great majority of Western dilettanti. He estimates the rank of a specimen by the quality of the chisel-work. The Japanese kinzoku-shi (metal sculptor) uses thirty-six principal classes of chisel, each with its distinctive name, and as most of these classes comprise from five to ten sub-varieties, his cutting and graving tools aggregate about two hundred and fifty.

Scarcely less important in Japanese eyes than the chiselling of the decorative design itself is the preparation of the field to which it is applied. There used to be a strict canon The Field for Sculptured Decoration. with reference to this in former times. Namako (fish-roe) grounds were essential for the mountings of swords worn on ceremonial occasions, the ishime (stone-pitting) or jimigaki (polished) styles being considered less aristocratic.

It has been frequently asserted by Western critics that the year (1876) which witnessed the abolition of sword-wearing in Japan, witnessed also the end of her artistic metal-work. That is a great mistake. The art has merely Modern and Ancient Skill. developed new phases in modern times. Not only are its masters as skilled now as they were in the days of the Gotō, the Nara, the Yokoya and the Yanagawa celebrities, but also their productions must be called greater in many respects and more interesting than those of their renowned predecessors. They no longer devote themselves to the manufacture of sword ornaments, but work rather at vases, censers, statuettes, plaques, boxes and other objects of a serviceable or ornamental nature. All the processes described above are practised by them with full success, and they have added others quite as remarkable.

Bronze is called by the Japanese kara-kane, a term signifying “Chinese metal” and showing clearly the source from which knowledge of the alloy was obtained. It is a copper-lead-tin compound, the proportions of its constituents Bronze Casting. varying from 72 to 88% of copper, from 4 to 20% of lead and from 2 to 8% of tin. There are also present small quantities of arsenic and antimony, and zinc is found generally as a mere trace, but sometimes reaching to 6%. Gold is supposed to have found a place in ancient bronzes, but its presence has never been detected by analysis, and of silver not more than 2% seems to have been admitted at any time. Mr W. Gowland has shown that, whatever may have been the practice of Japanese bronze makers in ancient and medieval eras, their successors in later days deliberately introduced arsenic and antimony into the compound in order to harden the bronze without impairing its fusibility, so that it might take a sharper impression of the mould. Japanese bronze is well suited for castings, not only because of its low melting-point, great fluidity and capacity for taking sharp impressions, but also because it has a particularly smooth surface and readily develops a fine patina. One variety deserves special mention. It is a golden yellow bronze, called sentoku—this being the Japanese pronunciation of Suen-tē, the era of the Ming dynasty of China when this compound was invented. Copper, tin, lead and zinc, mixed in various proportions by different experts, are the ingredients, and the beautiful golden hues and glossy texture of the surface are obtained by patina-producing processes, in which branch of metal-work the Japanese show altogether unique skill.

Among the artists of early times it is often difficult to distinguish between the carver of wood and the caster of bronze. The latter sometimes made his own models in wax, sometimes chiselled them in wood, and sometimes had Carving in Wood and Ivory. recourse to a specialist in wood-carving. The group of splendid sculptors in wood that graced the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries left names never to be forgotten, but undoubtedly many other artists of scarcely less force regarded bronze-casting as their principal business. Thus the story of wood-carving is very difficult to trace. Even in the field of architectural 181 decoration for interiors, tradition tells us scarcely anything about the masters who carved such magnificent works as those seen in the Kiōto temples, the Tokugawa mausolea, and some of the old castles. There are, however, no modern developments of such work to be noted. The ability of former times exists and is exercised in the old way, though the field for its employment has been greatly narrowed.

Plate V.